Your opinion on 3rd test wicket?

[jimmy101]

Not hard to see why. Tumbling wickets = Constant action.

Perfect for casuals/T20 lovers.

 

[cnerd123]

i had a great time during this game. the match threads were super active, whatsapp groups were buzzing, social media is full of chatter

how is that bad for Test cricket?

 

[silentstriker]

I think it's fine, and possibly even good - once in a while. But you can't have it too often - it devalues skill.

 

[cnerd123]

I think it's fine, and possibly even good - once in a while. But you can't have it too often - it devalues skill.

sure, but you can say that about any wicket. too many grassy ones devalue seam bowling skill and makes spin irrelevant, too many flat decks devalues batting skill and makes bowling irrelevant, too many bouncy tracks makes overspin/back of a length bowling/backfoot play the dominant forces.

I don't even think this pitch negated skill alltogether. It just required a different set of skills that the batsmen by and large didn't have. And that's fine every now and then, as you say.

 

[Athlai]

Am I crazy or has cnerd123 **** all over crazy green tracks before

 

[cnerd123]

Am I crazy or has cnerd123 **** all over crazy green tracks before

must have been back when I was defending the spinning nagpur wicket and was drawing comparisons with the kind of pitches where jesse ryder look unplayable.

 

[sunilz]

More than pitch , we need to discuss about Pink ball . I think it is sure now that Pink ball is too bowler friendly and we need to make sure,the pitch is flat for even contest.

 

[jimmy101]

More than pitch , we need to discuss about Pink ball .

You started a thread on that & we're discussing it in there though?

 

[silentstriker]

sure, but you can say that about any wicket. too many grassy ones devalue seam bowling skill and makes spin irrelevant, too many flat decks devalues batting skill and makes bowling irrelevant, too many bouncy tracks makes overspin/back of a length bowling/backfoot play the dominant forces.

I don't even think this pitch negated skill alltogether. It just required a different set of skills that the batsmen by and large didn't have. And that's fine every now and then, as you say.

Yes and no. This was the shortest game since 1935. Joe root took 5/8 in the first innings. The whataboutism doesn’t work. If the ball is so inconsistent for the fast bowlers that it’s also luck, then yes. And those pitches are also bad. And there’s been a few of them. And those pitches are fine once in a while too because it’s entertaining.

But I want Test cricket results to happen mostly due to skill - with the luck minimized. And that could be skill playing spin, skill playing seam, skill playing swing - whatever it may be. I want to go to the WACA and watch people handle bounce. I want to go to England and watch how people play swing. I want to go to India and see how they play spin. That’s what makes it fun IN THE LONG TERM. I want players who bowl the best to do the best and batsmen who bat the best to score the most. One offs like these not withstanding, which are entertaining but Joe Root is not the best spinner out of the 22 people who played. So you know, well done. But once a season is about right.

 

[cnerd123]

So according to you SS any pitch where a less skilled player outperforms a more skilled one is bad?

Wonder what you make of the Lord's pitch where Agarkar scored a ton then? Or more recently at the Gabba where Washington Sundar outbowled Nathan Lyon

 

[Immenso]

must have been back when I was defending the spinning nagpur wicket and was drawing comparisons with the kind of pitches where jesse ryder look unplayable.

Nagpur v Chelmsford?

 

[OverratedSanity]

where a less skilled player outperforms a more skilled one

Washington Sundar outbowled Nathan Lyon

Ima stop you right there

 

[sunilz]

How much of this pitch can be attributed to pressure to reach WTC final ?

After India lost the 1st test on a lottery wicket , team management thought they have no option but to eliminate toss advantage.

I feel 1st test was on a lottery wicket because the pitch changed its character drastically after 1.5 days

 

[_00_deathscar]

Eh I do feel it's kind of hard to take such games entirely seriously as a result. I don't know if it's a great advertisement of the game to have two day games where both sides can't even get to 150.

To be fair two of those innings were from England.
India collapsed bad which we are very prone to doing these days it seems, especially with our batting not clicking.

 

[Spark]

To be fair two of those innings were from England.
India collapsed bad which we are very prone to doing these days it seems, especially with our batting not clicking.

So, in short, both teams struggled to compile respectable scores on the same pitch.

 

[Black_Warrior]

All of this is true but the mitigating circumstance here is the pink ball and the day-night conditions. We don't still know if it was the pitch alone that caused all of this and you have to give the benefit of doubt for a new stadium as well as the curator and the guys working may still be figuring out how the soil behaves over multiple days and how much grass and water is needed etc. And the pink ball lacquer-straight ball connection has already been made by multiple players.

Yeah but most of the collapses happened long before the lights came on. England were bowled out during day light hours and so was India on Day 2.

 

[Spark]

It's not like there was any discernible difference in how likely the ball was to skid on when the lights came on that I could see. People have posited all sorts of explanations but I still think that it was totally random whether a ball would turn or not.

 

[honestbharani]

Washington Sundar outbowled Nathan Lyon

Washington Sundar has played a key role in the two GREATEST victories of the Indian side - The Nidahas Trophy and the Gabba Test. He is already better than Lyon forever.

 

[honestbharani]

Yeah but most of the collapses happened long before the lights came on. England were bowled out during day light hours and so was India on Day 2.

Still the pink ball, mate, which is the point. And I actually think the dew would have negated the spinners a bit, as we saw during the Virat-Rohit partnership. A pity we basically had only one session in the night for the test. So in a way, the batsmen never gave themselves the opportunity to be out there batting when the pitch might have been at its best for batting.

 

[honestbharani]

It's not like there was any discernible difference in how likely the ball was to skid on when the lights came on that I could see. People have posited all sorts of explanations but I still think that it was totally random whether a ball would turn or not.

Yes but the percentage of the turning ball would have been negated for sure though and the bowlers cant impart enough revs when the ball is wet too. Those things would have come into play had the batsmen been there for that period. Not defending the pitch, I have already said it is a bad pitch all things considered but its kinda sad that the batsmen never got a chance at a time when it might have been at its best for batting.