***Official*** 4th Test @ The Oval, London - 2nd-6th September

[anil1405]

It is forecasted to aid spin on later days. If England get only a slender lead (which I think they won't), they are still in trouble since they have to bat last. Any support from the pitch and Jadeja will become a different bowler from what he has been so far in the series.

Credit doesn't go to the pitch, it's the 4 right handed pace bowlers that India picked to create rough for Jaddu. ?

 

[Blenkinsop]

Yes England will be up against it if they have to chase a big fifth-day target on a worn pitch against the best spinner in the world.

Oh, wait.

 

[StephenZA]

Why is there so much Jadeja bashing for him batting at 5? He has improved his batting by notches and has a solid defence now. He is as good as any specialist batsman at that position and has domestic credentials on getting high scores from that position. Has always done well for Saurashtra at #5 position. It is not his mistake that he is a good bowler too.

At least give him a couple of innings to fail before judging that he is a failure at 5.

The fact that Jadeja at 5 is even considered a decent option is an indictment on current international batting standards for top 6 batsmen... Jadeja in international top quality side should be considered a very good 7 or an excellent 8.

 

[Apex Predator]

Below are his last 16 innings. He has been extremely consistent in almost all the test in the 30s-60s category. At number 7 with bunnies batting at the other end, you cannot be expecting centuries.

In the form that he is in, give him a chance at #5 to convert those not-out or last out thirties and fifties to hundreds. How do we know that his ceiling is not high without giving him a chance at higher positions? Domestic cricket?

81	-	81	2	73	0	0		v Australia	Sydney	3 Jan 2019	Test # 2339
58	1*	59	2	106	0	0		v West Indies	North Sound	22 Aug 2019	Test # 2358
16	DNB	16	4	77	0	0		v West Indies	Kingston	30 Aug 2019	Test # 2359
30*	40	70	6	211	1	0		v South Africa	Visakhapatnam	2 Oct 2019	Test # 2363
91	-	91	4	133	0	0		v South Africa	Pune	10 Oct 2019	Test # 2364
51	-	51	3	55	1	0		v South Africa	Ranchi	19 Oct 2019	Test # 2365
60*	-	60	0	57	0	0		v Bangladesh	Indore	14 Nov 2019	Test # 2366
12	-	12	0	13	1	0		v Bangladesh	Kolkata	22 Nov 2019	Test # 2369
9	16*	25	2	46	2	0		v New Zealand	Christchurch	29 Feb 2020	Test # 2387
57	DNB	57	3	43	2	0		v Australia	Melbourne	26 Dec 2020	Test # 2398
28*	DNB	28	4	62	0	0		v Australia	Sydney	7 Jan 2021	Test # 2402
15	16	31	1	45	0	0		v New Zealand	Southampton	18 Jun 2021	Test # 2425
56	DNB	56	0	50	1	0		v England	Nottingham	4 Aug 2021	Test # 2428
40	3	43	0	48	0	0		v England	Lord's	12 Aug 2021	Test # 2429
4	30	34	2	88	0	0		v England	Leeds	25 Aug 2021	Test # 2432
10	-	10	-	-	0	0		v England	The Oval	2 Sep 2021	Test # 2433

Again these are good stats for a no 7 or even 8 but a proper batsman is way way better. These stats look good in hindsight coz we have absolute trash bozos in middle order. I'll take Jadeja over both Pujara & Rahane in a heartbeat but that doesn't mean he is as good as a specialist batter in the side.

 

[honestbharani]

There is circular reasoning going on in here. The reason Jadeja has great stats at 7 and 8 are because he is a very good player and he is playing in those positions. The only way to be sure if he can cut it as a top 6 international batsman is to first try him there. The usual comparison is domestic cricket and he has the scores there to warrant him being tried as a long term #5 or #6, as it also helps us get a rare left hander in the our top 6. And temperamentally, he is more of a #5 than a #7.

 

[honestbharani]

Credit doesn't go to the pitch, it's the 4 right handed pace bowlers that India picked to create rough for Jaddu. ?

Heads I win, Tails you lose. #Kohlitactics

 

[Manee]

The fact that Jadeja at 5 is even considered a decent option is an indictment on current international batting standards for top 6 batsmen... Jadeja in international top quality side should be considered a very good 7 or an excellent 8.

And as much as I would love to say India are the most abysmal batting around, it does feel a global problem in Test batting where the quality is just much lower than before.

 

[Manee]

There is circular reasoning going on in here. The reason Jadeja has great stats at 7 and 8 are because he is a very good player and he is playing in those positions. The only way to be sure if he can cut it as a top 6 international batsman is to first try him there. The usual comparison is domestic cricket and he has the scores there to warrant him being tried as a long term #5 or #6, as it also helps us get a rare left hander in the our top 6. And temperamentally, he is more of a #5 than a #7.

I think whatever one's view - it would be truly mad to give him just one opportunity to bat five. Gotta give him at least one more.

 

[StephenZA]

And as much as I would love to say India are the most abysmal batting around, it does feel a global problem in Test batting where the quality is just much lower than before.

India don't even crack the top 3 most abysmal Test batting sides right now. Most teams seems to have one or two really good batsmen, and then nothing else. We are all searching.

 

[Flem274*]

I think its just the hangover from the 00s tbh. Through most of test history, 35 was the bare minimum, 40 was good, 45 very good and 50 exceptional.

The 80s saw about 3-4 50 average players and plenty of 35. The 00s almost 20 guys averaging 50. There's been a return to normal and our brains need to adjust.

 

[Spark]

Yeah we saw in the early-to-mid-10s when spicy pitches started appearing again that batsmen who had come of age in the road era of the 00s and had 45-50 averages got caught out hard when the pitches got spicy.

This current era probably lacks the mid tier of players who average low 40s, but otherwise the distribution of averages is pretty normal, I think. Mid-to-high 30s is just how a lot of Test batsmen used to be, now forgotten.

 

[Arachnodouche]

Heads I win, Tails you lose. #Kohlitactics

 

[Uppercut]

I think its just the hangover from the 00s tbh. Through most of test history, 35 was the bare minimum, 40 was good, 45 very good and 50 exceptional.

The 80s saw about 3-4 50 average players and plenty of 35. The 00s almost 20 guys averaging 50. There's been a return to normal and our brains need to adjust.

This is most pronounced at even lower scores imo. People still talk like averaging 30 is the same as averaging zero.

 

[Teja.]

While things are much harder for batsmen in the last 5 years or so, I do think the ability of average test class batsmen to play swing bowling as a matter of routine has declined.

I wonder if it has to do with the current generation of batsmen growing up and learning to bat in the 00s in a generation of flatter tracks where there was presumably less emphasis on technique against the moving ball to succeed in test cricket.

Obviously other attacking skills are way better in modern batsmen than the past.

 

[honestbharani]

The main difference between the 90s and now is that those batsmen did not have to play as much LO cricket. Even the ones who only play the longer formats seem to lack the nous of getting off strike in risk free fashion. Otherwise, yes, this is very much a reversion to mean of the 90s. Also remember, teams are pushing home advantage harder than they used to do even in the 90s IMO.

The CEO pitches era of 2000-2015 is long gone.

 

[Arachnodouche]

Strangely though, despite all the limited overs innovations, a run rate of 3 or even below is still very much the norm in Test cricket (anecdotally, no real stats to back this up). So people are making an effort at conservative batting, it's just their techniques that aren't up to scrutiny.

 

[anil1405]

While things are much harder for batsmen in the last 5 years or so, I do think the ability of average test class batsmen to play swing bowling as a matter of routine has declined.

I wonder if it has to do with the current generation of batsmen growing up and learning to bat in the 00s in a generation of flatter tracks where there was presumably less emphasis on technique against the moving ball to succeed in test cricket.

Obviously other attacking skills are way better in modern batsmen than the past.

And T20 cricket.
A guy like Murali Vijay wouldn't have lost his spark in test cricket, I believe, if not for the shortest format of the game.

 

[honestbharani]

And T20 cricket.
A guy like Murali Vijay wouldn't have lost his spark in test cricket, I believe, if not for the shortest format of the game.

I blame the same for Rahane.

 

[Arachnodouche]

That's a strong-looking Eng lower order today. Expecting plenty of nuggety resistance all the way through. Be a good showing if the lead is restricted to 50 at most.

 

[Flem274*]

While things are much harder for batsmen in the last 5 years or so, I do think the ability of average test class batsmen to play swing bowling as a matter of routine has declined.

I wonder if it has to do with the current generation of batsmen growing up and learning to bat in the 00s in a generation of flatter tracks where there was presumably less emphasis on technique against the moving ball to succeed in test cricket.

Obviously other attacking skills are way better in modern batsmen than the past.

Hmm I disagree but that just might be our respective countries talking (the average nz fc player is now better, the average indian batsman perhaps worse).

I think the biggest difference is DRS. Whenever i watch games from my childhood or even earlier, batsmen got away with daylight robbery.

Fingerspinners in particular are getting the wickets they always should have now.