SA tour of India, Sept 29-Dec 7

[backfootpunch]

The fact that Ind scored 215 in first innings and then SA made 185 batting last tells you that the pitch was not a disgrace.

When ind play away from home and struggle to score and occasionally get blown away by quality seamers on pitches that favour them, the riposte is always that the other side managed to score runs - so i don't really accept any of the criticism about pitches in India.

As for the matches being over in 3 days - I would much rather that than have flat wickets that end in draws. I think pitches in ind should turn throughout the test and that also diminishes the advantage of the toss. if SA had batted vaguely reasonably in their first innings this match would have gone into the 4th day.

Ind should use home advantage and over the next 18 months of home tests we should be keeping the same approach A side with quality spinners like Pak may cause us some serious problems and require a rethink - we had that problem with Swann and Mont before, but other than that this approach should be fine.

No doubt when we play away from home again, we'll get battered on seam friendly wickets and no-one will say anything about the pitch. We need to remember to build a seam attack for those series as well - there should be some hard work going into Umesh, Aaron, Ishant, Shami, Bhuvi etc to make sure they are ready and able to take the responsibility when we play away - and are working on their batting too so that we don't have a stupidly long tail that gets blown away in every innings.

The only people who prefer bore draws over 3 days of intense exciting cricket are the money men who miss out on two days of revenue

[Dr Cricket]

http://www.espncricinfo.com/india-v-sou ... 45243.html

Shastri talking some sense.

[backfootpunch]

http://www.espncricinfo.com/india-v-south-africa-2015-16/content/story/945243.html

Shastri talking some sense.

that is the reason tests these days are either 5 day bore draws or over in 3 days

whenever there is anything in the pitch one of the teams folds in a heap

the 3 day option is considerably more interesting

[Dr Cricket]

wow someone from SA talking sense.

Instead, Birrell focused on the changing nature of Test cricket which has become more cut-throat and intense. "Look at it beyond India and more worldwide. There are a lot of Tests not going the full five days. There are very few draws," he said. "The game is a lot faster. Runs per over are a lot quicker. I don't think there are too many easy games. Every Test I have been involved in over the last two-and-a-half years has been very competitive and very tense. I think that's good. It's probably the way that Test cricket should be. It's got to be tense and be competitive and there is a lot on the line."

personally agree with him quite prefer teams winning games then having one or two draw games a series.

[Arthur Crabtree]

Not sure there's a definite way of looking at it. Rushed games can feel a bit cheap and lacking in quality. Draws can be very tense, and allow for that very cricket thing, for he revelation of character in adversity. Was Dravid loved around the world for his four hour hundreds? Longueurs and frustration aren't always bad, though only that is. Some three day Tests are exciting, but I wouldn't want that to be typical. I don't really want anything to be typical.

[Arthur Crabtree]

A problem might be that tours are too short to allow sides to acclimatise. But you don't want conditions around the word to become homogenised to make home advantage less exaggerated. An impasse. If sides prepare a strip traditional for that ground, that's understandable, and provides interest. If groundstaff leave grass on around the strip so there's less likely to be reverse swing, that's less obviously a reasonable thing to do.

The Aussies take a little pride in the traditional conditions of their Test grounds. With drop in pitches, it seems that is being lost, but I think they do try and protect that tradition. My impression is that the ECB are a bit more manipulative.

Maybe we can rethink what the bowlers can do to help themselves, beyond the given nature of the surface. I don't know why they shouldn't be able to throw the ball in on the bounce, as long as it doesn't bounce on the pitch. I don't know why players can chew gum, and they can spit on the ball, but it's cheating to chew gum and spit on the ball. Maybe it should be rethought how much bowlers can encroach on the pitch in their follow through? These are natural means of deterioration that somehow are frowned upon, but don't need to be.

[Dr Cricket]

Kohli having a dig at the ICC.
http://www.espncricinfo.com/india-v-sou ... 47605.html
it is a joke Perth hasn't been reported or people not criticizing Adelaide.

[Red Devil]

Kohli having a dig at the ICC.
http://www.espncricinfo.com/india-v-sou ... 47605.html
it is a joke Perth hasn't been reported or people not criticizing Adelaide.

I'm not surprised. It's a very warped view when you look at what happens with pitches in Eng, SA, Aus and NZ never being reported. preparing a pitch tailor made for quality seamers to bundle out the oppoisition seems to be fine, but a pitch that turns seems to be an issue. This is where the BCCI should get involved and actually use it's power to sort this out - it's detracting from a good series win for Ind.

Kohli's absolutely right that when ind batters can't handle conditions abroad and the bowlers can't utilise the conditions everyone talks about the players weaknesses, mindset etc ... but when those countries struggle in ind conditions then all the talk is about the pitch. Pure bias.

[rich1uk]

when 20 wickets fall in a single day of test cricket , the most I believe to ever fall in a day in test history in india then of course questions have to be asked

especially when it happens on just the second day of the game, the day usually recognised as being the best day for batting, and also taking account of the quality of the 2 bowling attacks in relation to the batting lineups

[Aidan11]

when 20 wickets fall in a single day of test cricket , the most I believe to ever fall in a day in test history in india then of course questions have to be asked

Didn't 22 wickets fall in a single day in a Lord's test? Could have been the one in 2000 v WIs when at least one ball was bowled in all four innings in a single day.

[rich1uk]

when 20 wickets fall in a single day of test cricket , the most I believe to ever fall in a day in test history in india then of course questions have to be asked

Didn't 22 wickets fall in a single day in a Lord's test? Could have been the one in 2000 v WIs when at least one ball was bowled in all four innings in a single day.

that's why I said "in india"

I don't know how many of the people commenting on the pitch watched all of the game live , but it really was painful to watch , batsmen almost couldn't play a shot as they had no idea what the ball was doing, if anything the game only lasted as long as it did as the ball was turning so much that the batsmen couldn't get their bats anywhere near the ball to edge it

and I repeat that was from some pretty ordinary spin bowlers

[Red Devil]

when 20 wickets fall in a single day of test cricket , the most I believe to ever fall in a day in test history in india then of course questions have to be asked

especially when it happens on just the second day of the game, the day usually recognised as being the best day for batting, and also taking account of the quality of the 2 bowling attacks in relation to the batting lineups

but 10 wickets in 90 minutes at trent bridge is ok in a 2-day test?
finishing the test match in less than 2 days against WI at headingley is ok?
the current Aus v NZ test series regularly finishing tests in 3 days is ok (adelaide was about 2 and a half days)?

or this match at Lords - http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/566921.html with scores of 232,207,213 and 68

or this match at Lords - Pak losing 20 wickets in 2 sessions, let alone a whole day, on a deteriorating wicket after only a day and a half's play - http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/426416.html

if the pitch was so bad in Nagpur then how did Ind basically score 200 twice, and SA bat out 90 overs batting last on the pitch to score 185?

I'm sorry but it just doesn't add up

I watched bits of the test and it was good attritional cricket with the batters having to work hard and it being difficult to score quickly.

As for ordinary spinners, I'm not sure they are - Ashwin was the main weapon and I don't think he's an ordinary spinner at all.

[Aidan11]

when 20 wickets fall in a single day of test cricket , the most I believe to ever fall in a day in test history in india then of course questions have to be asked

Didn't 22 wickets fall in a single day in a Lord's test? Could have been the one in 2000 v WIs when at least one ball was bowled in all four innings in a single day.

that's why I said "in india"

Sorry. I must read posts properly.

[Dr Cricket]

personally thought Mohali was a worse wicket how they somehow concluded Nagpur was a poor pitch and Mohali wasn't baffles me.

Mohali essentially had the full area scuffed up and the good area good for batting.
Personally think Nagpur is getting done for the amount of wicket fell and not for the criteria set out by the ICC and even then they don't exactly regulate properly.

Yes it had turn on the first day but that really shouldn't stop batsman from scoring runs or getting out since it is bit like seam where too much can make it easier to survive.
did it have uneven bounce, not really so much to get very concern and if they said yes then pretty much most games in the history of cricket would get reported. I thought it had more uneven pace than bounce, but pace isn't mentioned by the ICC.
was the pace good/carry no but was it totally different to what india or Sub C Normally provides also Nagpur is the slowest wickets in india, can't exactly do anything about it.

How Nagpur got reported and mohali didn't baffles me.
Especially considering Perth didn't even get reported for a shocking wicket.

[Dr Cricket]

Really don't see any difference to this pitch and the delhi one or the kanpur one or most of the WI series ones.

Only difference being SA batting has been crap and india hasn't been anything good either, like some people said in twitter discussion would be all dead if india batted better in all the first innings although looking at the teams not that surprising both are playing 4-5 batsman in each team pretty weak batting lineups for the conditions.

Nagpur seems to be getting only done because mohali was borderline but I would have it the other way around.