Australia Losing Could Save Test Cricket

[NUFAN]

Not in the style that this series was played. Overly negative attritional cricket has never produced popularity for the sport, and there was too much of it on both sides in this series. In some ways, both captains were hostages of the pitch, but if this is what test cricket is going to look like regularly, it will be dead within 5 years. There were some great individual performances, and periods of interesting cricket, but both teams were too ready to just try and bore batsmen out rather than attack the wicket and try to bowl quality deliveries.

One of the least enjoyable series in a fair while I'd suggest, apart from those with a partisan interest in whichever team had the ascendancy at the time. (and this isn't sour grapes, I have no problem with being beaten by a better team, which India was in this series).

Well said, I agree with this.

 

[howardj]

I know what the thread is getting at, and agree to an extent - a contest makes things more gripping rather than rampant domination. However, in this particular series, both sides dragged each other down, rather than each soaring to great heights. The crowds I think were a reflection of that. Frankly, I think both teams played cricket in the most appallingly cynical manner that I've seen in a long time. Defensive fields, ridiculous lines, appallingly slow over rates. Sadly, I think despite the close contest, series such as this will only turn people away from this form of the game. For the first time ever, I actually did feel like Test cricket was dying when I was watching some of this series.

 

[Richard]

Just wait for the Saffies. Save the match first and then see if you can win is their baseline tactic.

Damn good one an' al'.

Nonetheless, more a stereotype than an actual reality.

 

[pup11]

I think too much is being made of the Australia' test series loss to India, the Indians played good cricket and the Aussies were never really able to put them in any sort of trouble after the 1st test, and the lack of variety in the bowling attack and the inability of Clark and Lee to step up in the Indian conditions was what really contributed to Australia losing the series, i think the Aussie bowling attack is still good enough to take 20 wickets in most conditions expect for maybe in the sub-continent (mainly because of the spin problem), and i think India are the only side that have the all round balance in their batting and bowling to compete with Australia on a regular basis as they have prove over the years now.

As Goughy said Australia have always set the bench-mark and whenever a team has played upto their level, great test cricket has been on display (eg. Ashes 05, India in India 2001), given the strength of previous Aussie sides that doesn't use to happen too often, but this Australia side would have to fight for most of their wins against the good oppositions, but still i am confident that they would continue to do well, the same aura of dominance that they have had would no longer be there, but still they can will most of their games but maybe not as convincingly as they used to.

 

[S.P. Fleming]

Im not happy seeing New Zealand classified as a minnow. We are going through a rebuilding phase but there is a few guys around with some goos talent.

 

[Matt79]

Im not happy seeing New Zealand classified as a minnow. We are going through a rebuilding phase but there is a few guys around with some goos talent.

???

 

[Goughy]

Im not happy seeing New Zealand classified as a minnow. We are going through a rebuilding phase but there is a few guys around with some goos talent.

New Zealand, rebuilding since 1930

 

[Athlai]

I expect that we'll (Vettori will anyway) win a few sessions. Will be happy with that.

 

[Uppercut]

I expect that we'll (Vettori will anyway) win a few sessions. Will be happy with that.

I propose New Zealand change their name to "Vettoria".

 

[Uppercut]

Not in the style that this series was played. Overly negative attritional cricket has never produced popularity for the sport, and there was too much of it on both sides in this series. In some ways, both captains were hostages of the pitch, but if this is what test cricket is going to look like regularly, it will be dead within 5 years. There were some great individual performances, and periods of interesting cricket, but both teams were too ready to just try and bore batsmen out rather than attack the wicket and try to bowl quality deliveries.

One of the least enjoyable series in a fair while I'd suggest, apart from those with a partisan interest in whichever team had the ascendancy at the time. (and this isn't sour grapes, I have no problem with being beaten by a better team, which India was in this series).

Completely agree with this, it was a very underwhelming series IMO. Disgustingly flat pitches+both teams having batsmen a class above their bowlers+ Ponting's (and earlier Kumble's) negative captaincy= dullness. Highlight for me was Amit Mishra finally getting picked and kicking ass.

 

[Burgey]

Add Dhoni's captaincy on the last day as well when he went really negative. That was seriously weird stuff.

 

[Precambrian]

Add Dhoni's captaincy on the last day as well when he went really negative. That was seriously weird stuff.

I can understand had India drawn the test that Dhoni' tactics were negative. But FFS India won it, so how can be those negative???

 

[Top_Cat]

I can understand had India drawn the test that Dhoni' tactics were negative. But FFS India won it, so how can be those negative???

Maybe 'dour' is more what he's looking for. Can definitely win via attrition but geez it was dull to watch unless you had a personal investment in the winning team.

 

[silentstriker]

A win via attrition > loss due to stupidity of not employing said attrition. It's not a good advertisement for Test cricket if they treat it like T20. Sometimes a good Test match involves attrition.

 

[Johnners]

India didn't win it because of the way they were bowling to Hayden and Hussey, I think is the main point. The winning didn't happen because Bhaji & Sehwag were bowling outside off/leg and slowing the match down to a standstill.

 

[silentstriker]

The winning didn't happen because Bhaji & Sehwag were bowling outside off/leg and slowing the match down to a standstill.

You can't be accused of slowing the match down to a standstill if the opposition is scoring off every ball!

 

[silentstriker]

Note: I'm not talking about over rates, which is a separate issue where my views are well known.

 

[Precambrian]

India didn't win it because of the way they were bowling to Hayden and Hussey, I think is the main point. The winning didn't happen because Bhaji & Sehwag were bowling outside off/leg and slowing the match down to a standstill.

Really? How come they took 8 wickets for just 166 runs on the day these tactics were in place? The bottomline is India set a superb trap, into which Aussies blindly walked into.

 

[Top_Cat]

A win via attrition > loss due to stupidity of not employing said attrition. It's not a good advertisement for Test cricket if they treat it like T20. Sometimes a good Test match involves attrition.

Depends on the nature of said attrition. McGrath-like outside off-stump attrition = good Test cricket. What we saw yesterday = "Hmmmm.......what's on the other channel?" The difference between the two in the respective skill involved in both. Bowling like McGrath takes a lot of skill. Bowling a foot outside leg-stump to a guy looking to hit you around knowing he'll sky one eventually requires much less skill.

Bearing in mind, I'm in no way advocating that India shouldn't have done it or that it should be sanctioned because it's part of the game and at that level, I'd prefer the team to win than be nice. But it was quite dull to watch and I didn't find it a celebration of the skills of either side.

By your logic, Aus have been stupid for years for batting quickly and wrapping up Tests in 3 days when they could have played far less risky cricket and still won easily. I know what I prefer to watch.

 

[Johnners]

You can't be accused of slowing the match down to a standstill if the opposition is scoring off every ball!

As much as I don't think overrates are as big a problem as has been/is made out, 20 overs in 2 hours was by far the worst overrate seen in the series. The worst session previous to that was 24 by Australia in the first session of the 4th match when Sehwag went nuts (literally), and at no stage were there 2 spinners bowling at the same time. Hussey & Hayden weren't even scoring as fast as Sehwag and co. were that session.