Joe Root vs Ravichandran Ashwin : The importance of this battle in the England vs India series

[Mamoon]

As long as Root is scoring runs, it doesn't matter how many times Ashwin dismisses him.

Ashwin and other Indian bowlers can be deemed successful against him only if they get him out cheaply, and 53 is not a big score but it is not a cheap score either.

So far Ashwin has not been able to nullify him and if Root scores another hundred in this series, or 3-4 fifties, one can safely say that he got the better of Ashwin even if he gets out to him in every innings.

7 innings left in this series. Let's see how many 50+ scores he can get, which will determine if Root won the battle or Ashwin.

So far, Root is ahead because he has a hundred and a fifty in three innings.

 

[sensible-indian-fan]

As long as Root is scoring runs, it doesn't matter how many times Ashwin dismisses him.

Ashwin and other Indian bowlers can be deemed successful against him only if they get him out cheaply, and 53 is not a big score but it is not a cheap score either.

So far Ashwin has not been able to nullify him and if Root scores another hundred in this series, or 3-4 fifties, one can safely say that he got the better of Ashwin even if he gets out to him in every innings.

7 innings left in this series. Let's see how many 50+ scores he can get, which will determine if Root won the battle or Ashwin.

So far, Root is ahead because he has a hundred and a fifty in three innings.

You are making a good point but using it in a completely wrong context.

Ashwin dismissed Cook 4 times in 4 tests in 2012 yet Cook destroyed Ashwin.

Why? Cos he scored big and scored against Ashwin too.

That's not the situation here.

Root in this innings was on 22 before Ashwin was introduced in the attack. He scored off others later on too (was shaky against Jaddu and then against Ashwin later on) before falling to Ashwin.

He scored 9 runs off Ashwin which included an almost bowled and a lucky escape bat pad catch.

Player battle is different from team battle.

Sometimes if a bowler is unable to stop a batsman from scoring (even if he defends against him and scores off others, then you can say he won the battle).

But this is not such a case.

Jaddu could have had him much before too.

 

[Buffet]

It was probably one of the best 5-fers of Ahswin. Hardly any turn. He got wickets due to drift, flight, angle, keeping it tight etc...

 

[sensible-indian-fan]

It was probably one of the best 5-fers of Ahswin. Hardly any turn. He got wickets due to drift, flight, angle, keeping it tight etc...

Yesterday there was a bit more help for Indian bowlers.

Today the track was settled which the commies were mentioning.

 

[Mamoon]

You are making a good point but using it in a completely wrong context.

Ashwin dismissed Cook 4 times in 4 tests in 2012 yet Cook destroyed Ashwin.

Why? Cos he scored big and scored against Ashwin too.

That's not the situation here.

Root in this innings was on 22 before Ashwin was introduced in the attack. He scored off others later on too (was shaky against Jaddu and then against Ashwin later on) before falling to Ashwin.

He scored 9 runs off Ashwin which included an almost bowled and a lucky escape bat pad catch.

Player battle is different from team battle.

Sometimes if a bowler is unable to stop a batsman from scoring (even if he defends against him and scores off others, then you can say he won the battle).

But this is not such a case.

Jaddu could have had him much before too.

Root doesn't dictate how many deliveries he faces off Ashwin. As long as he doesn't get out to him cheaply, the amount of deliveries and runs per dismissal etc. are inconsequential.

 

[Rotoman]

Also Root's job is not to score runs against Ashwin but against India. There's no shame in him letting Ashwin bowl out a few maiden overs and be on his way. However, it is Ashwin's job to get Root's wicket.

So far I don't think that Ashwin has had much of Root tbh. However he did comprehensively have the better of Kane Williamson.

On the same note though, Root is yet to play on a turner. Both of these matches are played on fairly flat pitches when compared to the ones KW played on. The one's SA played on were the extreme.

 

[sensible-indian-fan]

Root doesn't dictate how many deliveries he faces off Ashwin. As long as he doesn't get out to him cheaply, the amount of deliveries and runs per dismissal etc. are inconsequential.

It goes both ways.

Ashwin doesn't dictate when he will bowl or how Root will play against other bowlers. He can only bowl when he is asked to bowl and if he troubles him and takes him out soon enough, that's a simple win (for that round).

From a battle point of view, I don't see anyone with a upper hand. Root smashed an off colour Ashwin on a flat track while Ashwin got Root out on a somewhat helpful surface (before Root created an impact in that innings).

 

[sensible-indian-fan]

Forget Ashwin...Root really has to get better at playing spin. Like Williamson.

His backfoot camping is gonna do him no favours.

The prev generation of Younis, Sanga and Amla were true giants when it came to playing spin.

ABD though not comfortable can play proper spin and score.

 

[Buffet]

Root was very uncomfortable against Ashwin in both innings in this test. Needs to play better to give Eng chance in this series.

 

[cric_fanatic]

Ashwin has clearly troubled Joe Root in this test. Got him out in the first innings as well. And this was not even a proper turning track. I'd imagine it would get more difficult to face him in the next 3 venues.

 

[Mamoon]

It goes both ways.

Ashwin doesn't dictate when he will bowl or how Root will play against other bowlers. He can only bowl when he is asked to bowl and if he troubles him and takes him out soon enough, that's a simple win (for that round).

From a battle point of view, I don't see anyone with a upper hand. Root smashed an off colour Ashwin on a flat track while Ashwin got Root out on a somewhat helpful surface (before Root created an impact in that innings).

That is why I find 1v1 battles in cricket, especially Test cricket, very inconsequential.

Hypothetically, If Ashwin bowls India to victory, it doesn't matter if he got hammered by Root. His job is to take wickets and not just Root's wicket.

Similarly, Root's job is to score runs. If he does that, it won't matter if Ashwin got him in the end every time.

So far, both have had a good series. Ashwin hasn't exactly met the expectations so far barring the first innings of this Test, but if Root can manage another hundred in the remaining three matches, it will be a very successful tour for him and if not wrong, the most successful tour of India for an overseas batsman since Cook in 2012.

Same goes for Cook, who has been excellent so far. Let's see if he can get another hundred.

At the end of the day, if Ashwin ends up the leading wicket-taker or if Root ends up 2 hundreds + some fifties, the individual Root vs Ashwin battle will be quite meaningless.

 

[sensible-indian-fan]

That is why I find 1v1 battles in cricket, especially Test cricket, very inconsequential.

Hypothetically, If Ashwin bowls India to victory, it doesn't matter if he got hammered by Root. His job is to take wickets and not just Root's wicket.

Similarly, Root's job is to score runs. If he does that, it won't matter if Ashwin got him in the end every time.

So far, both have had a good series. Ashwin hasn't exactly met the expectations so far barring the first innings of this Test, but if Root can manage another hundred in the remaining three matches, it will be a very successful tour for him and if not wrong, the most successful tour of India for an overseas batsman since Cook in 2012.

Same goes for Cook, who has been excellent so far. Let's see if he can get another hundred.

At the end of the day, if Ashwin ends up the leading wicket-taker or if Root ends up 2 hundreds + some fifties, the individual Root vs Ashwin battle will be quite meaningless.

Some of your quotes:

That is why I find 1v1 battles in cricket, especially Test cricket, very inconsequential.

At the end of the day, if Ashwin ends up the leading wicket-taker or if Root ends up 2 hundreds + some fifties, the individual Root vs Ashwin battle will be quite meaningless.

Yes but that's not the point we are discussing in this thread. I agree with it.

But player battles have its place. That's what makes cricket what it is.

SRT vs McGrath...Lara vs McGrath....Donald vs SRT.....SRT vs Warne.....Lara vs Murali.....Viv vs Lillee....etc

If batsman looks comfortable or bowler looks comfortable, they win that battle. However if their team loses, they lose the war.

Ashwin hasn't exactly met the expectations so far barring the first innings of this Test

Huh?

Did you even watch what happened today?

Ashwin was all over England today and any other day, would have gone home with a 5fer (Duckett, Root, Moeen, Ansari and Hameed).

Root was dropped by Kohli of Ashwin's bowling very early and survived half a dozen close opportunities of caught behind. Moeen survived a very very very lucky lbw that would be out any other day. Jayant ran through the tail thus preventing another 5fer for Ashwin.

 

[sensible-indian-fan]

Cook's lbw off Ash (impact umpire's call) was very lucky too.

---

Speaking of Cook, he is a class act.

 

[Mamoon]

Ashwin was rubbish in the first Test when the pitch wasn't tailor-made for him and he was good today but not as good you are claiming. Clearly below his usual standard in India.

He was brilliant in the first innings though. One of his best 5-fers in a long time.

Overall, he has been good but I would argue that he hasn't lived up to the expectations. He probably will get better in the remaining 3 Tests because India knows that they aren't good enough to take 20 wickets on Rajkot type pitches.

1v1 battles are sure exciting but what I'm trying to say is that there is no point in over-analyzing it, because in terms of significance, it is not even primary or secondary, it is tertiary. It is well down the list in terms of priorities.

India wants to win the series and so does England, and they would want their best players including Ashwin and Root to perform because it maximizes their chances of winning. As long as Root, Cook, Kohli, Pujara etc. are scoring runs and Ashwin, Anderson, Jadeja, Shami, Broad etc. are taking wickets, how they fare in 1v1 battles hardly matters, because they are doing well for their respective teams.

I can understand you and others taking keen interest in 1v1 battles but in my opinion, they hardly mean anything.

A series between two teams is rarely decided by the individual battle of two players. All these buzzwords of war and battle etc. do not have a place in cricket because they do not decide the outcome. Rarely has a team won a series due to a 1v1 affair.

I personally find this 1v1 talk way too dramatic and basically a disservice to the other good players playing in this series.

 

[sensible-indian-fan]

Ashwin was rubbish in the first Test when the pitch wasn't tailor-made for him and he was good today but not as good you are claiming. Clearly below his usual standard in India.

He was brilliant in the first innings though. One of his best 5-fers in a long time.

Overall, he has been good but I would argue that he hasn't lived up to the expectations. He probably will get better in the remaining 3 Tests because India knows that they aren't good enough to take 20 wickets on Rajkot type pitches.

1v1 battles are sure exciting but what I'm trying to say is that there is no point in over-analyzing it, because in terms of significance, it is not even primary or secondary, it is tertiary. It is well down the list in terms of priorities.

India wants to win the series and so does England, and they would want their best players including Ashwin and Root to perform because it maximizes their chances of winning. As long as Root, Cook, Kohli, Pujara etc. are scoring runs and Ashwin, Anderson, Jadeja, Shami, Broad etc. are taking wickets, how they fare in 1v1 battles hardly matters, because they are doing well for their respective teams.

I can understand you and others taking keen interest in 1v1 battles but in my opinion, they hardly mean anything.

A series between two teams is rarely decided by the individual battle of two players. All these buzzwords of war and battle etc. do not have a place in cricket because they do not decide the outcome. Rarely has a team won a series due to a 1v1 affair.

I personally find this 1v1 talk way too dramatic and basically a disservice to the other good players playing in this series.

Ok here we go...

Ashwin was rubbish in the first Test when the pitch wasn't tailor-made for him and he was good today but not as good you are claiming.

So Vizag was tailor made for Ashwin this time?

If so, then any Indian pitch other than a hopeless day 1 flat track is a tailor made pitch for Ashwin?

Too bad he averaged 15 on this track with not so special performance.

Clearly below his usual standard in India.

He was brilliant in the first innings though. One of his best 5-fers in a long time.

Overall, he has been good but I would argue that he hasn't lived up to the expectations. He probably will get better in the remaining 3 Tests because India knows that they aren't good enough to take 20 wickets on Rajkot type pitches.

I have watched Ashwin a lot (due to being Indian watching Indian games). He was just in good rhythm and motoring along in both innings. He bowled nothing truly magical (like at his best or anything) and even that was too much for England.

If he got a 5fer in 2nd (which he would have any other day), it was WITHOUT DOUBT the better performance in the match.

Do explain how this is a clearly below par performance compared to his usual standards?

Just cos pitch doesn't turn means performance is below par?

India knows that they aren't good enough to take 20 wickets on Rajkot type pitches

This is a borderline ridiculous argument Mamoon. Surprised to see a guy of your stature getting down to this.

Not being able to take 20 wickets on a flat wicket with your main spinner having an off game means India doesn't have ability to take 20 wickets on proper Indian tracks?

Cos you seem to imply Rajkot is a fair proper Indian track. Its an outlier. Not the regular pitch.

England didn't take 20 wickets in a normal Oval track against Pakistan. Took just 10 wickets. I guess they must not be good enough to take 20 wickets in such wickets. See how absurd the logic sounds?

In this case, its even more absurd as Rajkot is worse than Oval in every comparable way.

1v1 battles are sure exciting but what I'm trying to say is that there is no point in over-analyzing it, because in terms of significance, it is not even primary or secondary, it is tertiary. It is well down the list in terms of priorities.

No one said its the be all and end all.

Just cos its not the be all and end all doesn't mean there is no point discussing something.

Cricket battles form an important topic in discussions. You have been in PP for long enough to know it.

India wants to win the series and so does England, and they would want their best players including Ashwin and Root to perform because it maximizes their chances of winning. As long as Root, Cook, Kohli, Pujara etc. are scoring runs and Ashwin, Anderson, Jadeja, Shami, Broad etc. are taking wickets, how they fare in 1v1 battles hardly matters, because they are doing well for their respective teams.

Why this generic statement that has no relevance to this thread?

I can understand you and others taking keen interest in 1v1 battles but in my opinion, they hardly mean anything.

A series between two teams is rarely decided by the individual battle of two players. All these buzzwords of war and battle etc. do not have a place in cricket because they do not decide the outcome. Rarely has a team won a series due to a 1v1 affair.

A series between two teams is rarely decided by the individual battle of two players. All these buzzwords of war and battle etc. do not have a place in cricket because they do not decide the outcome. Rarely has a team won a series due to a 1v1 affair. I personally find this 1v1 talk way too dramatic and basically a disservice to the other good players playing in this series.

Are you convincing me or convincing yourself?

So I am supposed to believe that in a Younis Khan vs Anderson thread, you will make these points?

Say "guys we shouldn't do these player comparison...what matters is that Younis scored 200 in Oval defying Anderson, Broad and drew the series which is what matters. And also English bowlers can't take wickets unless there is assitance from pitch or they have a big scoreboard pressure and they have been EXPOSED in Oval."

Right?

--

Sorry bro. Very disappointed with your post.

Its one thing to have your favourites and another to let it cloud your judgement.

When Ash flopped against England, he copped a lot of flak from his own fans.

When Root flops on THIS pitch, we are not supposed to say anything.

Anyhoo....

 

[Ab Fan]

Root has been lucky not to get the pitches that were served for Amla and AB or else he would have been walking wicket all series against the likes of Ashwin and co.

 

[Mamoon]

Ok here we go...



So Vizag was tailor made for Ashwin this time?

If so, then any Indian pitch other than a hopeless day 1 flat track is a tailor made pitch for Ashwin?

Too bad he averaged 15 on this track with not so special performance.

Any pitch with considerable turn is tailor-made for Ashwin. He is a quality bowler who is unplayable when conditions suit him but when he got a flat track in Rajkot he was found wanting.

I am not interested in how much he averaged in this game. To me he looked below his best level.

I have watched Ashwin a lot (due to being Indian watching Indian games). He was just in good rhythm and motoring along in both innings. He bowled nothing truly magical (like at his best or anything) and even that was too much for England.

If he got a 5fer in 2nd (which he would have any other day), it was WITHOUT DOUBT the better performance in the match.

Do explain how this is a clearly below par performance compared to his usual standards?

You wrote: 'He bowled nothing truly magical (like at his best or anything) and even that was too much for England.'

So you agree that he was not at his best, and that is what I'm saying. You had issues with me saying that Ashwin was not at his best level in this match (I didn't say he was bad; I praised his 5-fer in the first innings), but you proceeded to say the same 2 minutes later.

Just cos pitch doesn't turn means performance is below par?



This is a borderline ridiculous argument Mamoon. Surprised to see a guy of your stature getting down to this.

Not being able to take 20 wickets on a flat wicket with your main spinner having an off game means India doesn't have ability to take 20 wickets on proper Indian tracks?

Anyone can have an off-game, but look at the timing of Ashwin's off-game. He has been running over teams in India like a bulldozer since the Australian series in 2013 but as soon as he got his first proper flat wicket in years, he was found wanting.

What does that tell you?

Cos you seem to imply Rajkot is a fair proper Indian track. Its an outlier. Not the regular pitch.

Where did I imply this? I said 'Rajkot type pitches', meaning flat wickets. I didn't say flat wickets are the norm in India these days because they are not. India produces turners these days because it is how they can take 20 wickets.

What is my stature? I will call it as I see it regardless of how others perceive it because that is their prerogative. I saw Ashwin getting exposed on the first proper flat Indian pitch he has been served in a long time and I also feel that like Pakistan, India has become far too reliant on its spinners which is never a good thing on pitches that don't turn. It is like England and Australia struggling to take 20 wickets in Asia because of their over-reliance on pacers.

England didn't take 20 wickets in a normal Oval track against Pakistan. Took just 10 wickets. I guess they must not be good enough to take 20 wickets in such wickets. See how absurd the logic sounds?

In this case, its even more absurd as Rajkot is worse than Oval in every comparable way.

Even though Anderson was below his best because of injury, England's bowling did get exposed in the Test series vs Pakistan because they struggled on the two wickets that aided spin - Lord's and The Oval.

That also explains why they struggle to take 20 wickets in Asia. Their pacers lack the pace to force things on such pitches and they don't have the spinners either.

SA are favorites next summer in England, because their pace attack is superior and can outperform England's on such wickets. It will be a challenge for the English batsmen to negate them, but it will be a thrilling series no doubt because of England's ridiculous depth.

No one said its the be all and end all.

Just cos its not the be all and end all doesn't mean there is no point discussing something.

Cricket battles form an important topic in discussions. You have been in PP for long enough to know it.

Why this generic statement that has no relevance to this thread?

Are you convincing me or convincing yourself?

It is not a generic or an invalid statement. It is a fact that there is no purpose in over-emphasizing on 1v1 battles, because Test matches are rarely decided by 1v1 battles.

I have no issues with people enjoying it, but its importance is clearly being overrated in this thread. What matters is their individual performance, not how they perform against each other.

So far, Root has had a better series than Ashwin. Both have had a good performance and a decent performance, but Root hasn't had a rubbish performance yet like Ashwin and the odds are stacked against him as well. Still early days however, still 3 Tests to go.

So I am supposed to believe that in a Younis Khan vs Anderson thread, you will make these points?

Say "guys we shouldn't do these player comparison...what matters is that Younis scored 200 in Oval defying Anderson, Broad and drew the series which is what matters. And also English bowlers can't take wickets unless there is assitance from pitch or they have a big scoreboard pressure and they have been EXPOSED in Oval."

Right?

Why not? What is the point in having a Younis vs Anderson thread?

It is common knowledge that Younis is a failure against lateral movement; he has never scored against prodigious swing. His individual performance vs Anderson does not matter as long as he is scoring runs/not scoring runs.

How many times did Anderson dismiss him in the recent series? I don't recall any dismissal, but still he had a pathetic series barring one knock on favorable pitch.

You have been on this forum long enough to know that I don't give importance to 1v1 battles. For me, its the failure or success of a batsman/bowler against a batting lineup/bowling lineup.

You should recall that I continuously downplayed Wahab's spell vs Watson and called people to get over it. He had Watson on the ropes, but other batsmen were playing him with ease and his spell didn't do anything for Pakistan, so what's the purpose on magnifying on an inconsequential 1v1 battle?

Sorry bro. Very disappointed with your post.

Its one thing to have your favourites and another to let it cloud your judgement.

When Ash flopped against England, he copped a lot of flak from his own fans.

When Root flops on THIS pitch, we are not supposed to say anything.

Anyhoo....

Well I'm sorry to disappoint you by not ignoring Ashwin's failure in the first Test on a proper flat pitch and not focusing on the individual battle between Root and Ashwin because I prefer overall performance, but this is how it is.

I am not prepared to pass off Ashwin's flop performance in the first Test 'because it happens' and I will question his skill and ability because he failed on the first highway that he was served in India in a long time.

Finally, Ashwin failed badly in England. He had zero influence and impact.

Root has not failed in India at all; he did well on his debut and he has had a very good series so far. Most people would have laughed at the thought of him scoring a hundred and a fifty in the first two Tests.

That's the difference.

You should also recall that I actually like both Ashwin and Root and have said it on multiple occasions that Ashwin is a better bowler than Yasir Shah, so it will be wrong if you accuse me of being biased against Ashwin.

 

[street cricketer]

[MENTION=131701]Mamoon[/MENTION], in all fairness Rajkot was a complete patta so much so that Boycott was criticising it after 4 days and Atherton remarked after the match that "forget this England attack, I can see many other English attacks in the past struggling to pick wickets here".

He likes of Broad, Woakes and Stokes were useless there and Anderson wouldn't have made a difference had he played too. There aren't many bowlers in the world who could be potent on complete flat tracks. Rabada maybe..Then again, he had a very poor series in India. Steyn is probably the only guy who comes to my mind.

 

[sensible-indian-fan]

Any pitch with considerable turn is tailor-made for Ashwin. He is a quality bowler who is unplayable when conditions suit him but when he got a flat track in Rajkot he was found wanting.

I am not interested in how much he averaged in this game. To me he looked below his best level.




You wrote: 'He bowled nothing truly magical (like at his best or anything) and even that was too much for England.'

So you agree that he was not at his best, and that is what I'm saying. You had issues with me saying that Ashwin was not at his best level in this match (I didn't say he was bad; I praised his 5-fer in the first innings), but you proceeded to say the same 2 minutes later.


Anyone can have an off-game, but look at the timing of Ashwin's off-game. He has been running over teams in India like a bulldozer since the Australian series in 2013 but as soon as he got his first proper flat wicket in years, he was found wanting.

What does that tell you?


Where did I imply this? I said 'Rajkot type pitches', meaning flat wickets. I didn't say flat wickets are the norm in India these days because they are not. India produces turners these days because it is how they can take 20 wickets.

What is my stature? I will call it as I see it regardless of how others perceive it because that is their prerogative. I saw Ashwin getting exposed on the first proper flat Indian pitch he has been served in a long time and I also feel that like Pakistan, India has become far too reliant on its spinners which is never a good thing on pitches that don't turn. It is like England and Australia struggling to take 20 wickets in Asia because of their over-reliance on pacers.

Even though Anderson was below his best because of injury, England's bowling did get exposed in the Test series vs Pakistan because they struggled on the two wickets that aided spin - Lord's and The Oval.

That also explains why they struggle to take 20 wickets in Asia. Their pacers lack the pace to force things on such pitches and they don't have the spinners either.

SA are favorites next summer in England, because their pace attack is superior and can outperform England's on such wickets. It will be a challenge for the English batsmen to negate them, but it will be a thrilling series no doubt because of England's ridiculous depth.



It is not a generic or an invalid statement. It is a fact that there is no purpose in over-emphasizing on 1v1 battles, because Test matches are rarely decided by 1v1 battles.

I have no issues with people enjoying it, but its importance is clearly being overrated in this thread. What matters is their individual performance, not how they perform against each other.

So far, Root has had a better series than Ashwin. Both have had a good performance and a decent performance, but Root hasn't had a rubbish performance yet like Ashwin and the odds are stacked against him as well. Still early days however, still 3 Tests to go.



Why not? What is the point in having a Younis vs Anderson thread?

It is common knowledge that Younis is a failure against lateral movement; he has never scored against prodigious swing. His individual performance vs Anderson does not matter as long as he is scoring runs/not scoring runs.

How many times did Anderson dismiss him in the recent series? I don't recall any dismissal, but still he had a pathetic series barring one knock on favorable pitch.

You have been on this forum long enough to know that I don't give importance to 1v1 battles. For me, its the failure or success of a batsman/bowler against a batting lineup/bowling lineup.

You should recall that I continuously downplayed Wahab's spell vs Watson and called people to get over it. He had Watson on the ropes, but other batsmen were playing him with ease and his spell didn't do anything for Pakistan, so what's the purpose on magnifying on an inconsequential 1v1 battle?


Well I'm sorry to disappoint you by not ignoring Ashwin's failure in the first Test on a proper flat pitch and not focusing on the individual battle between Root and Ashwin because I prefer overall performance, but this is how it is.

I am not prepared to pass off Ashwin's flop performance in the first Test 'because it happens' and I will question his skill and ability because he failed on the first highway that he was served in India in a long time.

Finally, Ashwin failed badly in England. He had zero influence and impact.

Root has not failed in India at all; he did well on his debut and he has had a very good series so far. Most people would have laughed at the thought of him scoring a hundred and a fifty in the first two Tests.

That's the difference.

You should also recall that I actually like both Ashwin and Root and have said it on multiple occasions that Ashwin is a better bowler than Yasir Shah, so it will be wrong if you accuse me of being biased against Ashwin.

Any pitch with considerable turn is tailor-made for Ashwin. He is a quality bowler who is unplayable when conditions suit him but when he got a flat track in Rajkot he was found wanting.

I am not interested in how much he averaged in this game. To me he looked below his best level.




You wrote: 'He bowled nothing truly magical (like at his best or anything) and even that was too much for England.'

So you agree that he was not at his best, and that is what I'm saying. You had issues with me saying that Ashwin was not at his best level in this match (I didn't say he was bad; I praised his 5-fer in the first innings), but you proceeded to say the same 2 minutes later.


Anyone can have an off-game, but look at the timing of Ashwin's off-game. He has been running over teams in India like a bulldozer since the Australian series in 2013 but as soon as he got his first proper flat wicket in years, he was found wanting.

What does that tell you?


Where did I imply this? I said 'Rajkot type pitches', meaning flat wickets. I didn't say flat wickets are the norm in India these days because they are not. India produces turners these days because it is how they can take 20 wickets.

What is my stature? I will call it as I see it regardless of how others perceive it because that is their prerogative. I saw Ashwin getting exposed on the first proper flat Indian pitch he has been served in a long time and I also feel that like Pakistan, India has become far too reliant on its spinners which is never a good thing on pitches that don't turn. It is like England and Australia struggling to take 20 wickets in Asia because of their over-reliance on pacers.

Even though Anderson was below his best because of injury, England's bowling did get exposed in the Test series vs Pakistan because they struggled on the two wickets that aided spin - Lord's and The Oval.

That also explains why they struggle to take 20 wickets in Asia. Their pacers lack the pace to force things on such pitches and they don't have the spinners either.

SA are favorites next summer in England, because their pace attack is superior and can outperform England's on such wickets. It will be a challenge for the English batsmen to negate them, but it will be a thrilling series no doubt because of England's ridiculous depth.



It is not a generic or an invalid statement. It is a fact that there is no purpose in over-emphasizing on 1v1 battles, because Test matches are rarely decided by 1v1 battles.

I have no issues with people enjoying it, but its importance is clearly being overrated in this thread. What matters is their individual performance, not how they perform against each other.

So far, Root has had a better series than Ashwin. Both have had a good performance and a decent performance, but Root hasn't had a rubbish performance yet like Ashwin and the odds are stacked against him as well. Still early days however, still 3 Tests to go.



Why not? What is the point in having a Younis vs Anderson thread?

It is common knowledge that Younis is a failure against lateral movement; he has never scored against prodigious swing. His individual performance vs Anderson does not matter as long as he is scoring runs/not scoring runs.

How many times did Anderson dismiss him in the recent series? I don't recall any dismissal, but still he had a pathetic series barring one knock on favorable pitch.

You have been on this forum long enough to know that I don't give importance to 1v1 battles. For me, its the failure or success of a batsman/bowler against a batting lineup/bowling lineup.

You should recall that I continuously downplayed Wahab's spell vs Watson and called people to get over it. He had Watson on the ropes, but other batsmen were playing him with ease and his spell didn't do anything for Pakistan, so what's the purpose on magnifying on an inconsequential 1v1 battle?


Well I'm sorry to disappoint you by not ignoring Ashwin's failure in the first Test on a proper flat pitch and not focusing on the individual battle between Root and Ashwin because I prefer overall performance, but this is how it is.

I am not prepared to pass off Ashwin's flop performance in the first Test 'because it happens' and I will question his skill and ability because he failed on the first highway that he was served in India in a long time.

Finally, Ashwin failed badly in England. He had zero influence and impact.

Root has not failed in India at all; he did well on his debut and he has had a very good series so far. Most people would have laughed at the thought of him scoring a hundred and a fifty in the first two Tests.

That's the difference.

You should also recall that I actually like both Ashwin and Root and have said it on multiple occasions that Ashwin is a better bowler than Yasir Shah, so it will be wrong if you accuse me of being biased against Ashwin.

Chalo let's look at this again...

Any pitch with considerable turn is tailor-made for Ashwin. He is a quality bowler who is unplayable when conditions suit him but when he got a flat track in Rajkot he was found wanting.

Wrong bro.

This pitch did not have considerable turn.

And tailor made pitch means pitches designed to suit a bowler perfectly. Like a green track or rank turner.

This wasn't even a normal turner let alone a tailor made pitch.

So that's factual wrong mate.

You wrote: 'He bowled nothing truly magical (like at his best or anything) and even that was too much for England.' So you agree that he was not at his best, and that is what I'm saying. You had issues with me saying that Ashwin was not at his best level in this match (I didn't say he was bad; I praised his 5-fer in the first innings), but you proceeded to say the same 2 minutes later.

You have twisted my statement big time and misunderstood it.

Just because a bowler does not bowl magically DOES NOT mean he is below his usual standards. No bowler is at his magical best all time.

I said Ashwin was motoring along fine just like he has been doing recently. If there was more turn, he would have destroyed England.

Anyone can have an off-game, but look at the timing of Ashwin's off-game. He has been running over teams in India like a bulldozer since the Australian series in 2013 but as soon as he got his first proper flat wicket in years, he was found wanting. What does that tell you?

Anyone can have an off day but the timing of Root's failure is surprising too.

Has been batting like dream but couldn't perform in 4 innings in Bangladesh (rank turners). The equivalent would be Ashwin failing in WI.

Then again, got 124 on a Rajkot flat track....got 53 in first innings here (scored against pacers, streaky against Jaddu) where he was out almost 4 times before actually getting out. Second innings, should have been out on 9. Was out on 22 odd finally.

We can play this game all day long bro.

When Mohali test comes and England wins the toss, expect Root to get a 100 and then when pitches turn, the same "timing" can come into play.

Where did I imply this? I said 'Rajkot type pitches', meaning flat wickets. I didn't say flat wickets are the norm in India these days because they are not. India produces turners these days because it is how they can take 20 wickets.

You said this and I quote

"He probably will get better in the remaining 3 Tests because India knows that they aren't good enough to take 20 wickets on Rajkot type pitches."

What does this mean?

India knows its not good enough to take 20 wickets in Rajkot? As if this is a normal or regular track and India knows it can't take wickets on this track so the tracks will get better.

The topic of not being good enough to take 20 wickets on an OUTLIER track shouldn't even arise.

Every team in the world will have matches where it cannot take 20 wickets some tracks. Was Aus good enough to take 20 Indian wickets on 2 of its track? That means nothing.

If I say "Anderson will probably get better in the 2014 series because England knows it cannot take 20 wickets in Trent Bridge track", then what would people assume?

What is my stature? I will call it as I see it regardless of how others perceive it because that is their prerogative. I saw Ashwin getting exposed on the first proper flat Indian pitch he has been served in a long time and I also feel that like Pakistan, India has become far too reliant on its spinners which is never a good thing on pitches that don't turn. It is like England and Australia struggling to take 20 wickets in Asia because of their over-reliance on pacers.

You have used the word "expose" for Ashwin like so many times when the same issues for Root.....I haven't heard a word.

You can call it as you feel. I don't mind you calling ash exposed on that pitch. He really was. I don't even mind you giving excuses for Root. That's your call.

But I will mention about your double standards in this case.

You can choose to accept my view or not. That's your call. But what's there is what's there.

Not being rude. Just being honest.

Even though Anderson was below his best because of injury, England's bowling did get exposed in the Test series vs Pakistan because they struggled on the two wickets that aided spin - Lord's and The Oval.

The difference is that you have mention India (and Ashwin) getting exposed or struggling in the Rajkot track atleast 3-5 times in the last few days (bringing it in many arguments) while you DEFENDED Anderson and co for their failures....not in zone...not in flow...etc.

Root flopped in Bangladesh for 2 tests in Bangladesh and neither you or I bring it up. Ashwin flopped in 1 test and that gets brought up so many times.

You never mentioned Root was exposed even once but for Ash, its been mentioned (in other thread) several times even though failure of Root was for more innings.

Please note, I am not defending Ashwin. He deserves to be criticized for his screw ups. But talking about the particular point here.

Same failure.

2 different reactions.

And you know what I am talking about bro.

So far, Root has had a better series than Ashwin. Both have had a good performance and a decent performance, but Root hasn't had a rubbish performance yet like Ashwin and the odds are stacked against him as well. Still early days however, still 3 Tests to go.

Of course,

Root got a flat track (equivalent of a rank turner for Ashwin).

If it was a rank turner in Rajkot and this exact track in Vizag, the situation would look way different.

On a semi decent pitch where playing spin was EASY, Root was nowhere good. Sure he can improve but as of now, saying Root has done better than Ashwin in a general sense is like saying Ashwin has better average that Yasir Shah in Asia (without taking into account the conditions where they play the home games).

Context matters.

I have no issues with people enjoying it, but its importance is clearly being overrated in this thread. What matters is their individual performance, not how they perform against each other.

Barring an odd post, no one said its importance is crucial.

If you notice, there is hardly any activity in this thread. Even when Ash got owned...even when Root got owned.

Why not? What is the point in having a Younis vs Anderson thread?

It is common knowledge that Younis is a failure against lateral movement; he has never scored against prodigious swing. His individual performance vs Anderson does not matter as long as he is scoring runs/not scoring runs.

How many times did Anderson dismiss him in the recent series? I don't recall any dismissal, but still he had a pathetic series barring one knock on favorable pitch.

If there was a PP poll about what you would have said had this been a Younis vs Anderson thread would see 100-0 in favour of one view.

You sure as hell wouldn't have made this point:

"guys we shouldn't do these player comparison...what matters is that Younis scored 200 in Oval defying Anderson, Broad and drew the series which is what matters. And also English bowlers can't take wickets unless there is assitance from pitch or they have a big scoreboard pressure and they have been EXPOSED in Oval."

What Younis did is what Root is doing. OK Root hasn't gone missing in the first few matches but talking in general. Scoring in the easier pitches while looking out of sorts in even slightly tougher conditions.

Root has time to rectify it but I am talking about what's happened as of now.

You should recall that I continuously downplayed Wahab's spell vs Watson and called people to get over it. He had Watson on the ropes, but other batsmen were playing him with ease and his spell didn't do anything for Pakistan, so what's the purpose on magnifying on an inconsequential 1v1 battle?

I never accused you of saying you give 1v1 battles as supreme.

I said when it comes to certain players, you wouldn't downplay the whole thing. Younis vs Anderson topics weren't part of a main thread but they were discussed in several threads and you have made your views clear about them.

Well I'm sorry to disappoint you by not ignoring Ashwin's failure in the first Test on a proper flat pitch and not focusing on the individual battle between Root and Ashwin because I prefer overall performance, but this is how it is.

Your opinion on Ashwin doesn't make me happy or disappoint me. You are entitled to it.

You can choose not to ignore Ashwin's failure but when you ignore Root's failure and harp on Ashwin, that's clear bias (not against Ashwin but for Root).

A poster of your stature should know better. I know you can say you don't give a damn what I think (which is fair) but facts are facts.

I am not prepared to pass off Ashwin's flop performance in the first Test 'because it happens' and I will question his skill and ability because he failed on the first highway that he was served in India in a long time.

But you are prepared to pass off Root's lullooing in Bangladesh as "it happens".

You may now say you don't think like that your actions speak otherwise mate. When you harp on 1 players failure and not focus on others' failure when he has had WAY MORE screw ups, it makes things clear.

Finally, Ashwin failed badly in England. He had zero influence and impact.

Again incorrect.

Your post may be technically right but contextually its way far from the truth.

Ashwin bowled in only 2 innings in England.

Old Trafford - 14 overs. 28 runs. 0 wickets. India innings defeated. Pacers took English wickets.
Oval - 25 odd overs. 72 runs. 3 wickets. India innings defeated. He bowled with a sub par total and still did reasonably well. Never even got to bowl in 2nd innings in Oval.

Did he have much impact? No.

But is it right to use it when he didn't even get a chance? Absolutely not.

I think you have been misled by the hype about Ashwin's failure in England. He never failed. He just didn't get a chance and whatever chance he got, he did sufficiently well.

Root has not failed in India at all; he did well on his debut and he has had a very good series so far. Most people would have laughed at the thought of him scoring a hundred and a fifty in the first two Tests.

Again context is important which you seem to ignore here.

Root played 1 test in India. It was Nagpur patta in 2012. He scored a brilliant 70 odd taking England out of trouble. So yes, it was a good knock. But no, it was not a knock he played in a proper spin track like KP and Cook did. Now in Rajkot, another flat track. 124. When conditions got tougher, he went missing.

Yes, that's NOT his fault. I don't accuse Root of being a lulloo.

But your portrayal about Root being good in India while Ashwin being bad in England is 100% factually wrong bereft of any meaningful context.

Do you see what's ACTUALLY going on?

Most people would have laughed at the thought of him scoring a hundred and a fifty in the first two Tests.

Cos no one thought we would give such easy pitches to England.

ABD, Amla, Williamson ALL would have piled on runs here. Atleast in Rajkot.

Again, not demeaning Root's achievements in India but keeping things in perspective.

You should also recall that I actually like both Ashwin and Root and have said it on multiple occasions that Ashwin is a better bowler than Yasir Shah, so it will be wrong if you accuse me of being biased against Ashwin.

I know you like both Ashwin and Root.

But you like Root more (which is fair enough). But I would expect you to not use that to make such unfair arguments against Ashwin while not focusing on Root's issue.

As I mentioned in the other thread:

Batsman and pacers are DIFFERENT from spinners. A batsman can always get those easy tracks to pile on tracks in any pitch. The quality and level of his game is dependent on how he does when its hard.

Spinners are mostly support roles in most pitches. In some pitches, they come to life.

That's why we have a dozen ATG batsmen and just 2 ATG spinners.

In reality, GOAT level of batsmen (SRT, Lara, Sobers) is like ATG level of spinners (Warne, Murali). There are many great spinners like Underwood, Bedi, Lance Gibbs, Swann, Kumble who don't get the ATG tag but are a notch below Warne and Murali.

Different yardsticks really.

But anyways, that's deviating from the topic.

Ashwin is a better bowler than Yasir Shah, so it will be wrong if you accuse me of being biased against Ashwin.

Yasir is an excellent bowler just like Ashwin. Many rate Yasir to be better. You rate Ash more. That's your call and fair enough. Just cos you rate Ash more doesn't mean your comments on Ash vs Root issues make it right.

-----

Closing thoughts:

1. Root may very well do well from now on. Or he may flop. Don't know. But my points are based on what happened till now.

2. You can yourself see how you have reacted for the same situation for 2 different players. I wouldn't even have got into this debate until you mentioned about Rajkot again (for the umpteenth time) and implied stuff which is easy to see.

That is why I was disappointed with your post.

Read my reply closely to see how many things you took out of context reg this debate. If you still can't see that, then its ok. You write your reply and I will give a point by point explanation again.

 

[Mamoon]

Chalo let's look at this again...



Wrong bro.

This pitch did not have considerable turn.

And tailor made pitch means pitches designed to suit a bowler perfectly. Like a green track or rank turner.

This wasn't even a normal turner let alone a tailor made pitch.

So that's factual wrong mate.



You have twisted my statement big time and misunderstood it.

Just because a bowler does not bowl magically DOES NOT mean he is below his usual standards. No bowler is at his magical best all time.

I said Ashwin was motoring along fine just like he has been doing recently. If there was more turn, he would have destroyed England.



Anyone can have an off day but the timing of Root's failure is surprising too.

Has been batting like dream but couldn't perform in 4 innings in Bangladesh (rank turners). The equivalent would be Ashwin failing in WI.

Then again, got 124 on a Rajkot flat track....got 53 in first innings here (scored against pacers, streaky against Jaddu) where he was out almost 4 times before actually getting out. Second innings, should have been out on 9. Was out on 22 odd finally.

We can play this game all day long bro.

When Mohali test comes and England wins the toss, expect Root to get a 100 and then when pitches turn, the same "timing" can come into play.



You said this and I quote

"He probably will get better in the remaining 3 Tests because India knows that they aren't good enough to take 20 wickets on Rajkot type pitches."

What does this mean?

India knows its not good enough to take 20 wickets in Rajkot? As if this is a normal or regular track and India knows it can't take wickets on this track so the tracks will get better.

The topic of not being good enough to take 20 wickets on an OUTLIER track shouldn't even arise.

Every team in the world will have matches where it cannot take 20 wickets some tracks. Was Aus good enough to take 20 Indian wickets on 2 of its track? That means nothing.

If I say "Anderson will probably get better in the 2014 series because England knows it cannot take 20 wickets in Trent Bridge track", then what would people assume?



You have used the word "expose" for Ashwin like so many times when the same issues for Root.....I haven't heard a word.

You can call it as you feel. I don't mind you calling ash exposed on that pitch. He really was. I don't even mind you giving excuses for Root. That's your call.

But I will mention about your double standards in this case.

You can choose to accept my view or not. That's your call. But what's there is what's there.

Not being rude. Just being honest.



The difference is that you have mention India (and Ashwin) getting exposed or struggling in the Rajkot track atleast 3-5 times in the last few days (bringing it in many arguments) while you DEFENDED Anderson and co for their failures....not in zone...not in flow...etc.

Root flopped in Bangladesh for 2 tests in Bangladesh and neither you or I bring it up. Ashwin flopped in 1 test and that gets brought up so many times.

You never mentioned Root was exposed even once but for Ash, its been mentioned (in other thread) several times even though failure of Root was for more innings.

Please note, I am not defending Ashwin. He deserves to be criticized for his screw ups. But talking about the particular point here.

Same failure.

2 different reactions.

And you know what I am talking about bro.



Of course,

Root got a flat track (equivalent of a rank turner for Ashwin).

If it was a rank turner in Rajkot and this exact track in Vizag, the situation would look way different.

On a semi decent pitch where playing spin was EASY, Root was nowhere good. Sure he can improve but as of now, saying Root has done better than Ashwin in a general sense is like saying Ashwin has better average that Yasir Shah in Asia (without taking into account the conditions where they play the home games).

Context matters.



Barring an odd post, no one said its importance is crucial.

If you notice, there is hardly any activity in this thread. Even when Ash got owned...even when Root got owned.



If there was a PP poll about what you would have said had this been a Younis vs Anderson thread would see 100-0 in favour of one view.

You sure as hell wouldn't have made this point:



What Younis did is what Root is doing. OK Root hasn't gone missing in the first few matches but talking in general. Scoring in the easier pitches while looking out of sorts in even slightly tougher conditions.

Root has time to rectify it but I am talking about what's happened as of now.



I never accused you of saying you give 1v1 battles as supreme.

I said when it comes to certain players, you wouldn't downplay the whole thing. Younis vs Anderson topics weren't part of a main thread but they were discussed in several threads and you have made your views clear about them.



Your opinion on Ashwin doesn't make me happy or disappoint me. You are entitled to it.

You can choose not to ignore Ashwin's failure but when you ignore Root's failure and harp on Ashwin, that's clear bias (not against Ashwin but for Root).

A poster of your stature should know better. I know you can say you don't give a damn what I think (which is fair) but facts are facts.



But you are prepared to pass off Root's lullooing in Bangladesh as "it happens".

You may now say you don't think like that your actions speak otherwise mate. When you harp on 1 players failure and not focus on others' failure when he has had WAY MORE screw ups, it makes things clear.



Again incorrect.

Your post may be technically right but contextually its way far from the truth.

Ashwin bowled in only 2 innings in England.

Old Trafford - 14 overs. 28 runs. 0 wickets. India innings defeated. Pacers took English wickets.
Oval - 25 odd overs. 72 runs. 3 wickets. India innings defeated. He bowled with a sub par total and still did reasonably well. Never even got to bowl in 2nd innings in Oval.

Did he have much impact? No.

But is it right to use it when he didn't even get a chance? Absolutely not.

I think you have been misled by the hype about Ashwin's failure in England. He never failed. He just didn't get a chance and whatever chance he got, he did sufficiently well.



Again context is important which you seem to ignore here.

Root played 1 test in India. It was Nagpur patta in 2012. He scored a brilliant 70 odd taking England out of trouble. So yes, it was a good knock. But no, it was not a knock he played in a proper spin track like KP and Cook did. Now in Rajkot, another flat track. 124. When conditions got tougher, he went missing.

Yes, that's NOT his fault. I don't accuse Root of being a lulloo.

But your portrayal about Root being good in India while Ashwin being bad in England is 100% factually wrong bereft of any meaningful context.

Do you see what's ACTUALLY going on?



Cos no one thought we would give such easy pitches to England.

ABD, Amla, Williamson ALL would have piled on runs here. Atleast in Rajkot.

Again, not demeaning Root's achievements in India but keeping things in perspective.



I know you like both Ashwin and Root.

But you like Root more (which is fair enough). But I would expect you to not use that to make such unfair arguments against Ashwin while not focusing on Root's issue.

As I mentioned in the other thread:

Batsman and pacers are DIFFERENT from spinners. A batsman can always get those easy tracks to pile on tracks in any pitch. The quality and level of his game is dependent on how he does when its hard.

Spinners are mostly support roles in most pitches. In some pitches, they come to life.

That's why we have a dozen ATG batsmen and just 2 ATG spinners.

In reality, GOAT level of batsmen (SRT, Lara, Sobers) is like ATG level of spinners (Warne, Murali). There are many great spinners like Underwood, Bedi, Lance Gibbs, Swann, Kumble who don't get the ATG tag but are a notch below Warne and Murali.

Different yardsticks really.

But anyways, that's deviating from the topic.



Yasir is an excellent bowler just like Ashwin. Many rate Yasir to be better. You rate Ash more. That's your call and fair enough. Just cos you rate Ash more doesn't mean your comments on Ash vs Root issues make it right.

-----

Closing thoughts:

1. Root may very well do well from now on. Or he may flop. Don't know. But my points are based on what happened till now.

2. You can yourself see how you have reacted for the same situation for 2 different players. I wouldn't even have got into this debate until you mentioned about Rajkot again (for the umpteenth time) and implied stuff which is easy to see.

That is why I was disappointed with your post.

Read my reply closely to see how many things you took out of context reg this debate. If you still can't see that, then its ok. You write your reply and I will give a point by point explanation again.

My reply to this will not be dissimilar to my last post. We should agree to disagree on this topic because we have been going in circles for the last 4-5 posts.

I get the gist of your argument and I hope you get the gist of mine. Don't want to discuss this topic further.

 

[sensible-indian-fan]

My reply to this will not be dissimilar to my last post. We should agree to disagree on this topic because we have been going in circles for the last 4-5 posts.

I get the gist of your argument and I hope you get the gist of mine. Don't want to discuss this topic further.

Ok Mamoon.

Yes, I got your gist and I do agree with your core point (as I have mentioned before). Also Root is someone I rate big time and frankly speaking, we both know that the odds of him ending as a greater player is much higher. Yes we are having disagreements about certain issues in this topic which is unfortunate but happens.

Anyways, to close it off, just want to say while I tend to argue hard, I forget it once its done. Used to have arguments with Stallion too (who is another poster I immensely respect). I hope there is no hard feelings. If there is any, I apologize.

 

[Tusker]

Any pitch with considerable turn is tailor-made for Ashwin. He is a quality bowler who is unplayable when conditions suit him but when he got a flat track in Rajkot he was found wanting. I am not interested in how much he averaged in this game. To me he looked below his best level

[MENTION=131701]Mamoon[/MENTION]

Both pitches at Rajkot and Vizag were good batting surfaces (By and large). Otherwise Totals of 400+ are not possible. Yet he still has bagged 11 wkts in those 2 tests while not being at his best. This is why he is rated very highly.

 

[Slog]

[MENTION=131701]Mamoon[/MENTION]

Both pitches at Rajkot and Vizag were good batting surfaces (By and large). Otherwise Totals of 400+ are not possible. Yet he still has bagged 11 wkts in those 2 tests while not being at his best. This is why he is rated very highly.

Pitches have been such raging turners in India for the past few years that it seems some of our neighbors have totally forgotten what normal services was 3/4 years ago.

Spin pitches have always been historically pitches where there is some minimal turn for the first couple of days and it keeps deteriorating to become turners by day 4 and 5. The pitches we have seen in the series so far are very atypical of the pitches which Bhajji and Kumble played most of their careers on and these pitches are what are considered turners all over the world and were so even in India pre 2010.

The doctors square turners where the pitch is spinning venom on Day 1 second session were never really what were considered genuine turners. They were just bad pitches. Some folks here have lost all sense of context

 

[sensible-indian-fan]

The opposite also happens.

Just cos Ashwin benefited from rank turners, his regular performances on normal tracks even get called big turners cos he makes it seem so.

To give you examples:

Kolkata pitch - Perfect pacer track that went flat on day 5 (no uneven bounce for some strange reason) with Indians getting a touch concerned. Ashwin did all the hard work and broke through NZ BEFORE the pitch started spinning or getting any reverse. Kohli took him off the attack after a long spell where he took a 3fer and let other bowlers feast on the NZ lower order (who had lost all hope by then) when the ball started doing more. Understandable reason but it happened.

Indore pitch - India scored 550-5. Ashwin takes a 13fer. That's a normal track.

Vizag - Didn't even spin properly on day 5 barring the rough or odd deliveries. Ashwin took 8fer in that game. In fact, there was very little difference between his 3fer and 7fer in last innings (if anyone wants an explanation for it with factual references of how Ashwin usually gets his 5fers and 7fers and what actually happened in that Vizag game, I will provide it).

 

[sensible-indian-fan]

There were some truly woeful tracks in 00s where Kumble and Bhajji played in. Not talking about those. Ash would struggle in them too. But the other tracks in 00s still gradually spun as the game went on.

90s tracks I heard were more friendly by and large.

The only difference is that our ATG batting lineup made everything look way too easy.

India scored like 406-4 in Chennai track 3rd innings in 1998 against Warne after which Aus were bowled out for 168. That would be certified a rank turner (it wasn't but was a good spin track towards the end) if Ashwin got to bowl out some lulloo side in it.

http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/current/match/63794.html

 

[sensible-indian-fan]

Someone like Venkatapathi Raju destroyed the ATG Aus lineup in that track.

Make of that what you will.