An extra batter doesn't do anything other than take the score to respectability. Like even South Africa played 5 out and out bowlers in the recent series! A finger spinner adds a variety and they come into the game as it goes along.
And I think you've heard Jarrod talk about pitches and how they behave. Is the green top like the one in …
An extra batter doesn't do anything other than take the score to respectability. Like even South Africa played 5 out and out bowlers in the recent series! A finger spinner adds a variety and they come into the game as it goes along.
And I think you've heard Jarrod talk about pitches and how they behave. Is the green top like the one in Hagley Oval or the one in Hobart?
In the end, we can argue till the cows come home, but we won't be any further precisely because all the decisions are subjective and can be argued either way from hindsight.
All I'm saying is it makes prudent sense to know your team's strengths and weaknesses and make decisions based on that - if we know that our batting is weak because of a shaky middle order then when we win the toss on a pitch with grass in a series with lot of assistance for the seamers why not bowl first and give ur strong bowling attack the best use of conditions to get an advantage earlyup! Same as how england should've bowled first at the gabba and finally learnt their mistake and chose to bowl first in hobart
If it had gone wrong, we'll be sitting here and arguing that they should've batted first!
Historically, batting 4th has been toughest due to degradation of pitch and low bounces, so I wouldn't say that they made the wrong decision.
Also, we are not in the coach's rooms so all we say here is just conjecture and not based on solid information. We can guess, but I do think the teams do a good job more often than not on making these decisions.
Again, historical average of the whole world, speaking of the pitches we've seen have we seen any cracks? It's gotten better to bat as the test went along! And test is not even going to the 5th day because of the seaming conditions! When there's grass or cloud cover and cold weather in England it's not going to break up as the test goes along! There's any number of things that could've happened on selecting the safer option of bowling first in seaming conditions but at least u give urself the best shot of success rather than hope ur batsmen (who're not doing well lately) to bail youout and puton a big score in challenging conditions
Like are we watching the Hobart test now? England are finding it tough to bat in the 4th innings on a traditional 3rd day's pitch. It is tough to bat across the world in all conditions. This is because everyone wants results as draws leads to lower test match interest.
What is success? For Ravi Shastri and Kohli whenever we have heard them talk was taking 20 wickets and that was possible because of 5 bowlers.
Again we are talking about stuff after the fact. If we had to make a decision on what we did yesterday, we'll make 100/100 correct decisions.
Yes picking 5 bowlers in hot aus conditions makes most sense but in England or south africa in seaming cloudy conditions where ur getting a lot of seam help and ur batting's not performing ur not gna win if ur not putting enuf of a score on the board
Yes England r not finding it easy but even Aus didn't! England bowled first and if Robinson was fit they would've got Aus out for less in Aus first innings - if they had batted first they wouldbe all out for 100 given their batting frailties against a fresh Aus attack
Regarding south africa picking maharaj, I think it's clear he contributes more as a nightwatchman vs india than as a bowler! I don't know if they had another batter in reserve but if they did they would've been better served picking that batter since maharaj was barely called on to bowl and when he was it was against pant which was a laughable mistake given his record of obliterating left hand finger spin
Green top like the one in headingley, but generally in South Africa this series too
If it's subjective then why just stick with one theory why not try another, once we saw that it was a clear mistake to bat first at headingley why repeat that in South Africa?
Because they take into history of the pitches and the scores that have happened historically. Like dude, there have been matches played on pitches since a long time.
If you want to quibble with the South Africa series, then you should ensure that the bowlers grow up by at least 6-7 inches. The worst bowler in the series, Wian Mulder got more movement on 3rd day due to higher release point. That was the only drawback. Otherwise, India created as many false shots or more than South Africa and were unlucky.
Regarding the false shots, one also creates their own luck, how many catches fell short, when we have shorter bowlers couldn't they bring up the slips a bit! They had at least 4-5 catches go down like that
if historical scores at a ground were all that's needed then u wouldnt need to go out and see the pitch at the toss would u! Do you think mcg has played the same from ashes 2017-18 to this time? Pitches change all the time, that's why they evaluate how much grass is on the pitch, how cloudy the conditions are particularly in England, with Jimmy Anderson bowling on bowling conditions at headingley at the toss to select to bat is throwing ur batsmen to the lions.
Anderson takes wickets because he's a great bowler. He doesn't wickets because of clouds! Like he did well in Sri Lanka and India in 2021 where there were hardly cloudy conditions. And Duke's ball with it's pronounced seam gives bowlers more help.
Like if India had bowled first and given up lets say around 250+ and got all out for similar score at Headingley, would we be arguing here about how it was a stupid decision to bowl?
Yes Anderson is a great bowler that gets more assistance when there's clouds and grass, are we really debating that those conditions make him more potent? Why give the dukes ball with Anderson the most help by asking them to bowl first under cloudy conditions in a green headingley!
Yes india bowling first could've given 250 but that would mean they wouldn't have exploited the conditions enuf, but even if that was the case the odds would be less of us getting out for 80-odd when batting, yes it could've happened but we wouldn't have said it was a bad decision because it was a decision taking into account the conditions and the strengths and weaknesses of the team! It's about giving ur team the best chance of success
Lol we are circle jerking. For the last time, hindsight is 20/20. Foresight is never 20/20. Its all could've, should've, would've. Nothing is concrete and we are just debating on conjecture. Anyways, nice talking to you. Have a great day!
I agree on hindsight but I felt those opinions at the toss itself when hearing about the conditions/knowing about our recent batting form and team composition, not after seeing the scorecard after. Cheers.
An extra batter doesn't do anything other than take the score to respectability. Like even South Africa played 5 out and out bowlers in the recent series! A finger spinner adds a variety and they come into the game as it goes along.
And I think you've heard Jarrod talk about pitches and how they behave. Is the green top like the one in Hagley Oval or the one in Hobart?
In the end, we can argue till the cows come home, but we won't be any further precisely because all the decisions are subjective and can be argued either way from hindsight.
All I'm saying is it makes prudent sense to know your team's strengths and weaknesses and make decisions based on that - if we know that our batting is weak because of a shaky middle order then when we win the toss on a pitch with grass in a series with lot of assistance for the seamers why not bowl first and give ur strong bowling attack the best use of conditions to get an advantage earlyup! Same as how england should've bowled first at the gabba and finally learnt their mistake and chose to bowl first in hobart
If it had gone wrong, we'll be sitting here and arguing that they should've batted first!
Historically, batting 4th has been toughest due to degradation of pitch and low bounces, so I wouldn't say that they made the wrong decision.
Also, we are not in the coach's rooms so all we say here is just conjecture and not based on solid information. We can guess, but I do think the teams do a good job more often than not on making these decisions.
Again, historical average of the whole world, speaking of the pitches we've seen have we seen any cracks? It's gotten better to bat as the test went along! And test is not even going to the 5th day because of the seaming conditions! When there's grass or cloud cover and cold weather in England it's not going to break up as the test goes along! There's any number of things that could've happened on selecting the safer option of bowling first in seaming conditions but at least u give urself the best shot of success rather than hope ur batsmen (who're not doing well lately) to bail youout and puton a big score in challenging conditions
Like are we watching the Hobart test now? England are finding it tough to bat in the 4th innings on a traditional 3rd day's pitch. It is tough to bat across the world in all conditions. This is because everyone wants results as draws leads to lower test match interest.
What is success? For Ravi Shastri and Kohli whenever we have heard them talk was taking 20 wickets and that was possible because of 5 bowlers.
Again we are talking about stuff after the fact. If we had to make a decision on what we did yesterday, we'll make 100/100 correct decisions.
Yes picking 5 bowlers in hot aus conditions makes most sense but in England or south africa in seaming cloudy conditions where ur getting a lot of seam help and ur batting's not performing ur not gna win if ur not putting enuf of a score on the board
Yes England r not finding it easy but even Aus didn't! England bowled first and if Robinson was fit they would've got Aus out for less in Aus first innings - if they had batted first they wouldbe all out for 100 given their batting frailties against a fresh Aus attack
Regarding south africa picking maharaj, I think it's clear he contributes more as a nightwatchman vs india than as a bowler! I don't know if they had another batter in reserve but if they did they would've been better served picking that batter since maharaj was barely called on to bowl and when he was it was against pant which was a laughable mistake given his record of obliterating left hand finger spin
Green top like the one in headingley, but generally in South Africa this series too
If it's subjective then why just stick with one theory why not try another, once we saw that it was a clear mistake to bat first at headingley why repeat that in South Africa?
Because they take into history of the pitches and the scores that have happened historically. Like dude, there have been matches played on pitches since a long time.
If you want to quibble with the South Africa series, then you should ensure that the bowlers grow up by at least 6-7 inches. The worst bowler in the series, Wian Mulder got more movement on 3rd day due to higher release point. That was the only drawback. Otherwise, India created as many false shots or more than South Africa and were unlucky.
Regarding the false shots, one also creates their own luck, how many catches fell short, when we have shorter bowlers couldn't they bring up the slips a bit! They had at least 4-5 catches go down like that
if historical scores at a ground were all that's needed then u wouldnt need to go out and see the pitch at the toss would u! Do you think mcg has played the same from ashes 2017-18 to this time? Pitches change all the time, that's why they evaluate how much grass is on the pitch, how cloudy the conditions are particularly in England, with Jimmy Anderson bowling on bowling conditions at headingley at the toss to select to bat is throwing ur batsmen to the lions.
Anderson takes wickets because he's a great bowler. He doesn't wickets because of clouds! Like he did well in Sri Lanka and India in 2021 where there were hardly cloudy conditions. And Duke's ball with it's pronounced seam gives bowlers more help.
Like if India had bowled first and given up lets say around 250+ and got all out for similar score at Headingley, would we be arguing here about how it was a stupid decision to bowl?
Yes Anderson is a great bowler that gets more assistance when there's clouds and grass, are we really debating that those conditions make him more potent? Why give the dukes ball with Anderson the most help by asking them to bowl first under cloudy conditions in a green headingley!
Yes india bowling first could've given 250 but that would mean they wouldn't have exploited the conditions enuf, but even if that was the case the odds would be less of us getting out for 80-odd when batting, yes it could've happened but we wouldn't have said it was a bad decision because it was a decision taking into account the conditions and the strengths and weaknesses of the team! It's about giving ur team the best chance of success
Lol we are circle jerking. For the last time, hindsight is 20/20. Foresight is never 20/20. Its all could've, should've, would've. Nothing is concrete and we are just debating on conjecture. Anyways, nice talking to you. Have a great day!
I agree on hindsight but I felt those opinions at the toss itself when hearing about the conditions/knowing about our recent batting form and team composition, not after seeing the scorecard after. Cheers.