Ban Test matches in Subcontinent

[Shri]

Imo, Australian wickets are flat but not as slow as SC wickets. Predictable bounce but chest high compared to the waist high bounce in the SC. Both are superb for batting once you get your eye in.

 

[Lostman]

But the amount of criticism (rightly) that the recent subcontinent and UAW test pitches have had, yet the lack of criticism for other pitches outside the subcontinent in recent years, which are also flat, is annoying.

They are though. Australia's top batsmen fit the "home track bully" stereotype far easier than a lot of subcontinental bastmen.

Some stats to prove this point;

Away includes neutral venues.
Mathew Hayden
Home: 5210 runs@ 58
Away: 3415 runs @ 43

Michael Hussey
Home: 2576 @ 66
Away: 1699 @ 39

Mahela Jayawardena
Home: 6070 runs@ 64
Away: 3457 runs @ 42

From the three one is routinely called a FTB while another is labelled a borderline ATG..

 

[Sanz]

Yeah if that was true it would an absolutely valid argument, but I think some of the recent subcontinent wickets Jono is referring to are unparalled in their batting friendly conditions. Typically the wickets in Aus aren't nearly as bad as the Gabba one was in the last few days.

Well you have not watched cricket in the 80s then.

 

[Blaze 18]

Yeah if that was true it would an absolutely valid argument, but I think some of the recent subcontinent wickets Jono is referring to are unparalled in their batting friendly conditions. Typically the wickets in Aus aren't nearly as bad as the Gabba one was in the last few days.

Oh please! To quote myself :

As has already been pointed out by a few posters, Dubai is not in the sub-continent. Indian pitches have been okay; there is the one out-and-out road in every second series, but the pitches produce results far more often than not.

Recent series in India :

Sri Lanka vs India in late 2009

Test one : road
Test two : India won by an innings
Test three : India won by an innings

Both matches two and three finished in four days if I recall correctly.


South Africa vs India, February-March 2010

Test one : South Africa won by an innings
Test two : India won by an innings

Australia vs India, October 2010

Test one : India won by a wicket - one of the best test matches in recent memory.
Test two : India won by seven wickets

New Zealand vs India, November 2010

Test one : Flat pitch but could have produced a result.
Test two : Road
Test three : India won by an innings.

So, that makes two dead draws in the last ten games; not too bad, is it ?

Sri Lanka only have one crap pitch at Colombo. All the others are good pitches. Pakistan are not hosting anyone at the moment, unfortunately.

In my opinion, suggesting that test cricket should be banned in the sub-continent is just crazy. Why should India, Pakistan and Sri Lanka not get to play in front of their home crowds ? Why should cricket fanatics in Pakistan, Sri Lanka and India get to only watch their favourite stars on television ?

A far better option would be to ban grounds that always produce dead wickets like Faisalabad, Ahmedabad among others.

Even the much maligned Hyderabad and Ahmedabad pitches were considerably better than the Brisbane one.

 

[Migara]

Some stats to prove this point;

Away includes neutral venues.
Mathew Hayden
Home: 5210 runs@ 58
Away: 3415 runs @ 43

Michael Hussey
Home: 2576 @ 66
Away: 1699 @ 39

Mahela Jayawardena
Home: 6070 runs@ 64
Away: 3457 runs @ 42

From the three one is routinely called a FTB while another is labelled a borderline ATG..

That's a good one!

 

[Faisal1985]

Play all Tests in England. Easy.

I knew it...! this was always about getting Pak banned......

 

[Faisal1985]

Was a minefield tbh, Cook was just awesome

Wasn't a minefield ..but he was awesome for sure.

 

[Dissector]

Sachin over the last 3 years in home tests which have ended in results (and no minnows)averages 85. So yeah his excellent record in recent years has little to do with flat Indian wickets.

 

[morgieb]

Some stats to prove this point;

Away includes neutral venues.
Mathew Hayden
Home: 5210 runs@ 58
Away: 3415 runs @ 43

Michael Hussey
Home: 2576 @ 66
Away: 1699 @ 39

Mahela Jayawardena
Home: 6070 runs@ 64
Away: 3457 runs @ 42

From the three one is routinely called a FTB while another is labelled a borderline ATG..

Except Hayden is called a flat track bully as well. Also, his away record > Jayawaredene's, but it's pretty marginal.

 

[Ruckus]

Well you have not watched cricket in the 80s then.

Na I meant unparalled in terms of the current wickets.

They are though. Australia's top batsmen fit the "home track bully" stereotype far easier than a lot of subcontinental bastmen.

I don't really see though how that can be used as proof that Australian wickets are flat. Just because a certain player happens to be a HTB, doesn't provide any insight into the nature of the wickets. E.g. there might be a batsman who excels at playing spin, but is average at everything else. If they happen to live in a region which only produces super-spin friendly wickets, then they will likely have stats that suggest they are a HTB. However, the wickets aren't roads because they are optimal for spin bowling.

The best way to determine whether certain wickets are flat is just by observation. And imo some of the recent subcontinent pitches are extremely flat, with many of the dismissals being soft and as a result of batsmen errors.

 

[Sanz]

The best way to determine whether certain wickets are flat is just by observation. And imo some of the recent subcontinent pitches are extremely flat, with many of the dismissals being soft and as a result of batsmen errors.

Batsmen are making those errors because the bounce and speed in the pitches are different from what these batsmen are used to. The best way to determine if the pitches are flat or not is by playing on them not by observing them, esp if you have no clue about pitch making, you have never set foot in those conditions.

 

[Sanz]

Na I meant unparalled in terms of the current wickets.

And you are still wrong.

 

[Ruckus]

And you are still wrong.

Yeah that's your opinion, and I disagree.

Batsmen are making those errors because the bounce and speed in the pitches are different from what these batsmen are used to. The best way to determine if the pitches are flat or not is by playing on them not by observing them, esp if you have no clue about pitch making, you have never set foot in those conditions.

Yeah obviously the best way is by playing on them, but seeing as though that is reserved for top class cricketers I see no point in even raising that argument. I think it was clear that I referring to the best way from an outsider's perspective. It should be noted anyway, that after playing on some of the flat wickets in the subcontinent players will often mention how the ball was coming onto the bat extremely well.

 

[centurymaker]

Yeah obviously the best way is by playing on them, but seeing as though that is reserved for top class cricketers I see no point in even raising that argument. I think it was clear that I referring to the best way from an outsider's perspective. It should be noted anyway, that after playing on some of the flat wickets in the subcontinent players will often mention how the ball was coming onto the bat extremely well.[/QUOTE]

Mostly, only players who do well are interviewed.
Therefore, if a player just scored a 100 on it- then, more often than not, it means that he had little trouble adjusting to the speed and the bounce of the pitch, so obviously he'll say that the ball was coming on nicely.

 

[Ruckus]

Mostly, only players who do well are interviewed.
Therefore, if a player just scored a 100 on it- then, more often than not, it means that he had little trouble adjusting to the speed and the bounce of the pitch, so obviously he'll say that the ball was coming on nicely.

What's it matter if they are players who have done well? You can still get a century and admit it was a tough innings. You don't say something like "the ball was coming onto the bat nicely" if there was significant swing and/or seam movement - it is an acknowledgment that the pitch was not doing much. Also, players often say things more directly to do with the pitch like "there wasn't much in it for the bowlers" etc.

But whatever the case, all of that was just a minor side-point I raised because Sanz mentioned the best way to see whether or not a pitch is a road is to play on it - and comments by players are essentially equivalent to doing that.

 

[Sanz]

It should be noted anyway, that after playing on some of the flat wickets in the subcontinent players will often mention how the ball was coming onto the bat extremely well.

Well it was coming nicely to them because that's what they are used to. It doesn't mean that the pitches are flatter than what we see in Australia.

Take for Example India Vs. Australia contests in 2000s.

Aussie batsman in the 2000s scored @ 44.26 in Australia and 30.71 in India.
Indian batsmen in the 2000s scored @ 35.25 in Australia and 32.25 in India.

So it seems that players from both teams have batted better in Aussie conditions.

 

[Sanz]

But whatever the case, all of that was just a minor side-point I raised because Sanz mentioned the best way to see whether or not a pitch is a road is to play on it - and comments by players are essentially equivalent to doing that.

Such Comments by players do not indicate if the pitch was flat. It is an indication of how well it suited to the individual players' batting style on that particular day. It is a subjective assessment and can't be assumed as a statement on behalf of the remaining 21 batsmen.

 

[Sanz]

In the 2000s,

Indian batsmen in England scored @39.27 and 33.71
English Batsmen in England scored @36.6 and 29.87

Again Both teams scored at a better rate in England.

 

[honestbharani]

I'm not criticising pitches for being spin friendly. More so, I'm making the point that subcontinent tracks tend to be heavily weighted towards batsmen until the 4th day where spin becomes a much larger factor. My main gripe is that the first three days are heavily weighted towards a batsmen and it just becomes so boring when bat completely dominates ball.

507/1 on day 5 in the second innings is just so much more exciting to watch, isn't it?

 

[GotSpin]

507/1 on day 5 in the second innings is just so much more exciting to watch, isn't it?

Like I said, I'm not sure who was posting on my account but the last two days made that person look fairly foolish