Role of the toss in the last few Tests in India and New Zealand

[Buffet]

NZ won the first toss and won the first game comfortably. Many fans thought that Pakistan can win if they win the toss in next game. Pakistan won the toss next time, but failed to do well in either bowling or batting and lost the 2nd test as well.

India won the toss in 2nd test and Cook's reaction was poor to be honest. After losing the toss Cook said, we have nothing to lose now. He seemed to give up as soon as toss was lost. Eng lost the test by a huge margin. Subsequently, Eng won the toss in 3rd test and still lost the 3rd test by a huge margin.

Question for PPers : Are we giving too much importance to toss or opposition was simply not good enough to make the toss relevant?

Win the toss and win/compete may work at times, but it was surprising to see a captain saying that we have nothing to lose after losing the toss. You can't simply give up.

 

[soso_killer]

A toss can be crucial in the subcontinent.
You don't want to be batting last on a crumbling pitch.
Whereas a green pitch tends to ease up.
The most important thing is to not get shot out under 100 type of totals when batting first else you'd be struggling to got hold of the game.

A toss is crucial, but so is application. Can't expect the pitch to do everything.

 

[Justcrazy]

If you win the toss , it can be advantage , but you need players to drive the average home.

Pakistan fast bowling did not have right bowlers , and failed to exploit conditions.

 

[Buffet]

A toss can be crucial in the subcontinent.
You don't want to be batting last on a crumbling pitch.
Whereas a green pitch tends to ease up.
The most important thing is to not get shot out under 100 type of totals when batting first else you'd be struggling to got hold of the game.

A toss is crucial, but so is application. Can't expect the pitch to do everything.

Eng has faced pretty much flat pitches in all 3 tests in India so far. I was bit surprised to hear Cook say that we have nothing to lose after he lost the toss in 2nd test.

In crumbling pitches, toss will make a huge difference for sure. No one wants to bat last. I think sometime fans and players focus too much on toss rather than focus on teams actually playing well. I am guilty of this as well so not accusing others.

 

[Sin Nombre]

Agreed.

Toss is a crutch used by poor teams. Only scenario where it really matters is one of those NZ pitches where it is impossible to bat in the first couple of sessions but even then, a good team should be able to draw the match.

 

[Tusker]

NZ won the first toss and won the first game comfortably. Many fans thought that Pakistan can win if they win the toss in next game. Pakistan won the toss next time, but failed to do well in either bowling or batting and lost the 2nd test as well.

India won the toss in 2nd test and Cook's reaction was poor to be honest. After losing the toss Cook said, we have nothing to lose now. He seemed to give up as soon as toss was lost. Eng lost the test by a huge margin. Subsequently, Eng won the toss in 3rd test and still lost the 3rd test by a huge margin.

Question for PPers. Are we giving too much importance to toss or opposition was simply not good enough to make the toss relevant? Win the toss and win/compete may work at times, but it was surprising to see a captain saying that we have nothing to lose after losing the toss. You can't simply give up.

Cricket has a huge problem of Sterotypes and Perceptions. There are too many facets of the game that suffer from this malaise. Toss is one of them. Other popular ones are Asian pitches = flat, Only real batsmen can play on uncovered pitches every body else is just useless. Umpiring blunders even out etc etc

 

[Chrish]

Win toss win match theory trashed?

So is it fair to say all the rubbish of toss being a lottery in India is buried inside the coffin?

 

[Suleiman]

It got thrashed when India won 5-0 vs Aussies when IIRC Aussies won every single toss.

 

[Chrish]

It got thrashed when India won 5-0 vs Aussies when IIRC Aussies won every single toss.

Still some of the Cricket pundits here weren't convinced

 

[Buffet]

Well, Eng can still win this test

 

[Chrish]

Well, Eng can still win this test

even if they do, that doesn't change much

 

[Buffet]

even if they do, that doesn't change much

Toss being a lottery to win matches kind of comments comes due to ignorance.

India lost 24 tosses in the last 10 years at home. India lost only 1 test after losing the toss.


India won 24 tosses in the last 10 years at home. India lost 3 tests after winning the toss.


It seems , visiting teams may be better off by losing the toss

Jokes asides, Win the toss and win the match has no basis in India. I think this theory may hold true for some other venues more than India.

 

[Bilal7]

The theory was based on India putting out rank-turners out in this series and so far, we haven't seen anything close to that. It's been normal, Indian tracks where only good spinners succeed and not the lottery pitches that were given to South Africa where Elgar was running through the Indians and Mishra looked like Warne.

 

[Chrish]

Toss being a lottery to win matches kind of comments comes due to ignorance.

India lost 24 tosses in the last 10 years at home. India lost only 1 test after losing the toss.


India won 24 tosses in the last 10 years at home. India lost 3 tests after winning the toss.


It seems , visiting teams may be better off by losing the toss

Jokes asides, Win the toss and win the match has no basis in India. I think this theory may hold true for some other venues more than India.

Wickets do become difficult to bat on as game progresses in India but having skill more so than luck determines the final outcome of the game.

 

[Buffet]

Wickets do become difficult to bat on as game progresses in India but having skill more so than luck determines the final outcome of the game.

That should be obvious after seeing the last 10 years of record in India. Having said that most will still prefer to bat first in India, but that true for most venues.

 

[Swaraj!!]

Actually I have always felt that the best innings to bat big (when in India) was the 2nd innings, not the first. I mean, assuming that it is a regular pitch and both teams are not mismatched.

In general, Seamers usually can come in only in the 1st innings. The rest of the innings they can at max provide a holding role. Spinners are dominant in the 3rd innings onwards. Thus, in the 2nd innings, you have the best of both worlds.

Idea would be to bat big and bat once if you lose the toss. Again, assuming you are capable of doing so.

 

[Asim2Good]

England is playing in India just like Pakistan played in ODIs in England recently.
thinking 240-260 score in ODIs is good enough in England .
england are doing same here, thinking 400 is enough in India in test matches. it's clearly not. Asian pitches are clearly min 500-600 to put any pressure on home teams if you don't do that, you dont have chance.

 

[Nikhil_cric]

It doesn't matter whether we win the toss or not. You need to be damn good to beat India in India. Which is why we have only dropped 3 series in the last 30 years.

 

[JaDed]

The theory was based on India putting out rank-turners out in this series and so far, we haven't seen anything close to that. It's been normal, Indian tracks where only good spinners succeed and not the lottery pitches that were given to South Africa where Elgar was running through the Indians and Mishra looked like Warne.

The Mumbai test had sharp turn,not our fault Rashid and Moen have been average and stop changing your "scenarios" and give credit where its due ,an innings defeat inspite of winning the toss and scoring 400 runs in first innings is shameful to say the least.

 

[Bilal7]

The Mumbai test had sharp turn,not our fault Rashid and Moen have been average and stop changing your "scenarios" and give credit where its due ,an innings defeat inspite of winning the toss and scoring 400 runs in first innings is shameful to say the least.

It wasn't a rank-turner. England wouldn't have scored 400 against India's spinners on a rank turner and the Indians wouldn't have scored 600 on a rank turner either.

Regular, subcontinent spin is negotiable and teams are not screwed if they lose the toss on such pitches. On a rank turner though, winning the toss is imperative.

 

[JaDed]

It wasn't a rank-turner. England wouldn't have scored 400 against India's spinners on a rank turner and the Indians wouldn't have scored 600 on a rank turner either.

Regular, subcontinent spin is negotiable and teams are not screwed if they lose the toss on such pitches. On a rank turner though, winning the toss is imperative.

So you want India to dish our "rank turners"(which you defn will criticize) and then lose the toss and then win to prove England has been a shabby touring team among all the visitors and that India has improved?

You like to have your cake and eat it as well,in your logic NOW Ash must be a great spinner considering inspite of rank turners he has been running through English batsmen?

 

[LastManstanding]

It wasn't a rank-turner. England wouldn't have scored 400 against India's spinners on a rank turner and the Indians wouldn't have scored 600 on a rank turner either.

Regular, subcontinent spin is negotiable and teams are not screwed if they lose the toss on such pitches. On a rank turner though, winning the toss is imperative.

On the contrary, rank turners take the toss out of equation. On pitches like we see in UAE and in this series, winning toss is a huge advantage.

 

[Bilal7]

So you want India to dish our "rank turners"(which you defn will criticize) and then lose the toss and then win to prove England has been a shabby touring team among all the visitors and that India has improved?

You like to have your cake and eat it as well,in your logic NOW Ash must be a great spinner considering inspite of rank turners he has been running through English batsmen?

Because yes, all it takes to be an ATG spinners is to wreak foreign teams in India. Not like every Indian spinner ever has been doing that, regardless of whether or not they were given rank turners.

On the contrary, rank turners take the toss out of equation. On pitches like we see in UAE and in this series, winning toss is a huge advantage.

I disagree. The 50-odd runs that batting in the first innings of a match played on a rank turner are invaluable. We saw this clearly in the series against South Africa.

 

[Aman]

Because yes, all it takes to be an ATG spinners is to wreak foreign teams in India. Not like every Indian spinner ever has been doing that, regardless of whether or not they were given rank turners.



I disagree. The 50-odd runs that batting in the first innings of a match played on a rank turner are invaluable. We saw this clearly in the series against South Africa.

A rank turner turns sharply from day 1...

I wish India had prepared rank turners as it would have taken the toss out of the equation.

 

[LastManstanding]

Because yes, all it takes to be an ATG spinners is to wreak foreign teams in India. Not like every Indian spinner ever has been doing that, regardless of whether or not they were given rank turners.



I disagree. The 50-odd runs that batting in the first innings of a match played on a rank turner are invaluable. We saw this clearly in the series against South Africa.

Batting last on a pitch which starts crumbling from day 4 or so is a bigger disadvantage.