*Official* India Tour of Australia 2018/19

[Victor Ian]

No I'm pretty clearly saying that it's ubiquitous and pointless

Sorry, Wasn't directed at you.

 

[sunilz]

Nobody is crediting the series win to the tosses. They are merely saying it was an important factor.

Home team should never complain about toss imo. If you depend on toss then your team is as good as current Bangladesh/SL . When IND lost Pune test it was because our players except Pujara are rubbish player of spin rather than toss.

 

[Daemon]

Home team should never complain about toss imo. If you depend on toss then your team is as good as current Bangladesh/SL . When IND lost Pune test it was because our players except Pujara are rubbish player of spin rather than toss.

Sure, but they are not wrong to say the toss was an important factor.

 

[Burgey]

Did you consider making this a your face joke instead of a your post joke?

It was a close run thing tbh.

 

[vcs]

I don't think India have lost a match yet under Kohli's captaincy where they've won the toss.

They lost 2/3 tosses in SA and 5/5 in England, winning on both occasions where they batted first.

I think they also lost 4/5 tosses last time England visited, still won the series 4-0.

The statistics Gods still have plenty to do before anyone starts moaning about India being "lucky" with the toss.

 

[sunilz]

AUS won 6 consecutive toss between 2010 to 2013 in IND . They lost all the 6 tests. Certain AUS posters will never give credit to IND team . I can say with 99% confidence if Tendulkar had similar record against AUS as Warne has against IND , they wouldn't even consider him ATG .

 

[SillyCowCorner1]

I'm liking the conditional probability

 

[vcs]

Hmm... we could probably frame a decent Bayes Theorem problem out of that one.. given India won the match, what is the probability that they won the toss?

 

[marc71178]

AUS won 6 consecutive toss between 2010 to 2013 in IND . They lost all the 6 tests. Certain AUS posters will never give credit to IND team . I can say with 99% confidence if Tendulkar had similar record against AUS as Warne has against IND , they wouldn't even consider him ATG .

Ok Alanis

 

[morgieb]

I don't think India have lost a match yet under Kohli's captaincy where they've won the toss.

They lost 2/3 tosses in SA and 5/5 in England, winning on both occasions where they batted first.

I think they also lost 4/5 tosses last time England visited, still won the series 4-0.

The statistics Gods still have plenty to do before anyone starts moaning about India being "lucky" with the toss.

TBF there's people arguing that it would've been 4-0 if not for the toss at Perth. Two-way street.

 

[ankitj]

Hmm... we could probably frame a decent Bayes Theorem problem out of that one.. given India won the match, what is the probability that they won the toss?

You are a true geek if and only if you admire power of Bayes theorem.

 

[h_hurricane]

Why don't they completely do away with toss and give the visiting team the option to bat or bowl every time ? This would make exciting matches all the time. Home teams would be forced to pick players who thrive on difficult circumstances. There will be no flat track bullies or green track bullies. Teams who dominate all oppositions at home will not be discredited.

 

[Borges]

Why don't they completely do away with toss? There will be no flat track bullies or green track bullies.

The home side would prepare wickets where winning the toss would not give any meaningful advantage.
Lots of flat roads. Field days for flat track bullies; Nohit would become a test star.

 

[h_hurricane]

The home side would prepare wickets where winning the toss would not give any meaningful advantage.
Lots of flat roads. Field days for flat track bullies; Nohit would become a test star.

I think flat tracks would be prepared for sure. Ind vs Eng test series in 2016 as a recent example(though it had nothing to do with the toss). India still found a way to defeat Eng 4-0. Athers and Nasser mentioned that England were defeated resoundingly. I wonder they would have said the same if India won most of the tosses

Nohit would become a test star certainly, but he would get some credit as opposition would get better opportunity to bat on flat tracks.

 

[stephen]

Yep, flat tracks = home side advantage 90% of the time. Spicier decks tend to bring both sides into play.

The reason the toss matters more sometimes is that it's a big advantage not to bat 4th. If a home side knows that they'll be batting 4th we'll have pitches that intentionally deteriorate less.

The ideal test match has a but of juice in the deck on day one, is a great batting deck days 2 and 3 and begins to deteriorate day 4 and by the end of day 5 I'd offering a lot for the spinners.

 

[Spark]

The home side would prepare wickets where winning the toss would not give any meaningful advantage.
Lots of flat roads. Field days for flat track bullies; Nohit would become a test star.

Batting first on a flat track is a huge, huge advantage. It's one thing to know that the score of 450 that the opposition just put on you in 5 sessions is merely par, it's another thing to actually go out and prove it with the knowledge that any real slip-ups will probably leave you completely screwed by Day 4-5.

 

[h_hurricane]

Batting first on a flat track is a huge, huge advantage. It's one thing to know that the score of 450 that the opposition just put on you in 5 sessions is merely par, it's another thing to actually go out and prove it with the knowledge that any real slip-ups will probably leave you completely screwed by Day 4-5.

Yep. England had this advantage against India in the Chennai and Mumbai tests of 2016. Won the toss, batted first and posted 400+ totals. India batted big after England's turn, posted 600+ in both the tests and won by an innings.

England had defeated India 4 years previously, winning the Mumbai and Kolkata tests despite losing the toss.

Classic examples of better teams winning matches despite toss disadvantage.

 

[Spark]

well yes being the better team does tend to help you win games of cricket. but batting first on flat pitches is still an obvious advantages which is why captains universally take it if offered and are pilloried if they don't and it goes wrong

 

[h_hurricane]

well yes being the better team does tend to help you win games of cricket. but batting first on flat pitches is still an obvious advantages which is why captains universally take it if offered and are pilloried if they don't and it goes wrong

Agree with this. My point was that home teams starting with the obvious disadvantage of losing the toss and batting second makes for exciting viewing. If they end up winning the matches, they should be rightly be called as the better team.

May be I used a bad example of England in 2012 as they were the visiting team. They were clearly the better team though.

 

[SillyCowCorner1]

Seeing the five yellow stars on this thread as a rating takes me to International Cricket Captain and hoping my Windies players would at least have a five-star rating in their form.