*Official* England in India 2023/24 #CryMoreTour

[honestbharani]

They don't, that is primarily on the Anglo-spheric broadcasters/pundits/writers for peddling that nonsense. The ICC is fine with turn on day 1, else they wouldn't put it as part of what is allowed in their Good ratings.

Fair enough, the extracts I saw did not seem to be the official ones. My bad.

 

[honestbharani]

Thanks but I'd rather **** in my own hands

Coz being you was not shitty enough?

 

[Burgey]

No it wasn’t

 

[Ashes81]

Leech is far and away our best spinner but after him we're pretty limited.

Obviously the Indian spin attack is leaps and bounds ahead of ours and that will be the deciding factor in the series.

India at home are unbelievably strong and whilst I think we'll be competitive at times, anything other than a comfortable win for them would be a surprise.

 

[Xix2565]

If he doesn’t make the runs he did they haven’t got targets to bowl to. He was a stand out tbh

His runs wouldn't have mattered if they couldn't take wickets. He was excellent, but he wasn't a one man army.

 

[Burgey]

He was more of a one man army with the bat than any of the bowlers were with the ball

 

[Spark]

His runs wouldn't have mattered if they couldn't take wickets. He was excellent, but he wasn't a one man army.

Sure but very specifically he was absolutely essential in ensuring that India had a chance at all at Adelaide in 2018 - there's not a bowling attack in the world that can reliably defend a first innings total of 120 - and then in 2021 without his innings at both Sydney and Brisbane on the final day - you know, after the bowlers have done their work - India likely lose both games.

EDIT: Though I might be misremembering when he played that knock at Sydney, whether it was first or second dig. Point still stands though, he was absolutely vital.

 

[Shri]

Whats the India squad likely to be

jaiswal
Rohit
Gill
Kohli
Iyer/rahul
Rahul/bharat/kishan ?
jadeja
Axar
Ashwin
Bumrah
Siraj

mukesh
Avesh
Kuldeep
Saurabh kumar
tilak/sarfaraz

shami still out injured ?

jaiswal
rohit
rahul
kohli
shreyas
kishan
jaddu
ashwin
axar
bumrah
siraj

i also want rinku, mukesh, arshdeep, tilak, sudharsan in the squad as substitutes and rotation players

shami expected to miss first 2 tests with ankle issue

 

[Xix2565]

Sure but very specifically he was absolutely essential in ensuring that India had a chance at all at Adelaide in 2018 - there's not a bowling attack in the world that can reliably defend a first innings total of 120 - and then in 2021 without his innings at both Sydney and Brisbane on the final day - you know, after the bowlers have done their work - India likely lose both games.

EDIT: Though I might be misremembering when he played that knock at Sydney, whether it was first or second dig. Point still stands though, he was absolutely vital.

I mean you say that, but the bowlers are the ones who helped ensure that there would be a lead in Adelaide 2018 in the first place (it's not like you could half ass bowling a team out for less than 250), and helped slowdown Australia's batting in 2020-21 at Sydney and Brisbane. Still have to take 20 wickets to win, no?

 

[Burgey]

And have to post a defendable total, yes?

the CW meme that only bowlers win games is trash. I’m not saying that’s your position, but it gets around the place a bit. If Pujara doesn’t play in those series I reckon India doesn’t win at least one, probably both of them. That’s not saying the bowlers weren’t terrific, but he was a stand out with the bat both times. I’m wrapt he likely won’t tour here tbh.

 

[Molehill]

And have to post a defendable total, yes?

the CW meme that only bowlers win games is trash. I’m not saying that’s your position, but it gets around the place a bit. If Pujara doesn’t play in those series I reckon India doesn’t win at least one, probably both of them. That’s not saying the bowlers weren’t terrific, but he was a stand out with the bat both times. I’m wrapt he likely won’t tour here tbh.

The one game England won on the last India Tour was as a result of Root going big and forcing scoreboard pressure onto India. It's pretty much our best chance of a win again this time.

 

[Spark]

I mean you say that, but the bowlers are the ones who helped ensure that there would be a lead in Adelaide 2018 in the first place (it's not like you could half ass bowling a team out for less than 250), and helped slowdown Australia's batting in 2020-21 at Sydney and Brisbane. Still have to take 20 wickets to win, no?

Scoreboard pressure is the greatest wicket taker of them all.

The nature of the game is fundamentally changed when the side batting first gets bowled out for a low total. For one thing, the bowlers inevitably feel pressured to over-attack and give away cheap and quick runs, and the already low pressure on the batting side evaporates. This happens virtually every time and is why getting shot out for <150 batting first is almost always terminal, no matter the pitch conditions. Some totals simply aren't defendable by reasonable means.

 

[Xix2565]

And have to post a defendable total, yes?

the CW meme that only bowlers win games is trash. I’m not saying that’s your position, but it gets around the place a bit. If Pujara doesn’t play in those series I reckon India doesn’t win at least one, probably both of them. That’s not saying the bowlers weren’t terrific, but he was a stand out with the bat both times. I’m wrapt he likely won’t tour here tbh.

Scoreboard pressure is the greatest wicket taker of them all.

The nature of the game is fundamentally changed when the side batting first gets bowled out for a low total. For one thing, the bowlers inevitably feel pressured to over-attack and give away cheap and quick runs, and the already low pressure on the batting side evaporates. This happens virtually every time and is why getting shot out for <150 batting first is almost always terminal, no matter the pitch conditions. Some totals simply aren't defendable by reasonable means.

I mean the batters aren't taking 20 wickets though? Scoreboard pressure doesn't matter as much if the bowlers aren't good enough to take advantage consistently, so to me largely crediting Pujara for both series wins is taking away from the effort put in to bowl out Australia multiple times, especially in 2020-21. I love Pujara's performances then, but it's not exactly accurate to say he's the biggest reason they won. Those two tours were the first time ever that India actually had a worthwhile pace attack, albeit less so for 20-21 with the injuries. Don't think we'd win if they weren't there at all or were England's level.

 

[Spark]

I mean the batters aren't taking 20 wickets though? Scoreboard pressure doesn't matter as much if the bowlers aren't good enough to take advantage consistently, so to me largely crediting Pujara for both series wins is taking away from the effort put in to bowl out Australia multiple times, especially in 2020-21. I love Pujara's performances then, but it's not exactly accurate to say he's the biggest reason they won. Those two tours were the first time ever that India actually had a worthwhile pace attack, albeit less so for 20-21 with the injuries. Don't think we'd win if they weren't there at all or were England's level.

You keep ignoring the actual specific situations that are cited and dragging it back to the same vague "twenty wickets tho" pablum when we have actual specific games involved and in at least three if not all four of the Test involved - Adelaide 2018, Melbourne 2018, Sydney and Brisbane 2021 - we can point to a specific contribution Pujara made and say with confidence that had he got out for 0 each time, the likelihood of Australia winning every one of those games shoots up dramatically.

It's not about generalised probabilities and the relative importance of a bowling attack. It's about what he actually did.

 

[Spark]

They were 5/86 at Adelaide in a game they ended up winning by all of 30 runs ffs. The next highest score to Pujara's 128 in the entire game was 71 scored by... Cheteshwar Pujara, in a game where all four innings were between 230 and 310. It's just ignoring the actual game of cricket that happened to pretend that he was anything but by far the biggest influence on that game. On his own he contributed close to a full innings' worth of runs.

This is exactly what I mean by completely forgotten. It's somehow been memory holed completely in both Australian and Indian memories of that tour just how impactful he was.

 

[Xix2565]

You keep ignoring the actual specific situations that are cited and dragging it back to the same vague "twenty wickets tho" pablum when we have actual specific games involved and in at least three if not all four of the Test involved - Adelaide 2018, Melbourne 2018, Sydney and Brisbane 2021 - we can point to a specific contribution Pujara made and say with confidence that had he got out for 0 each time, the likelihood of Australia winning every one of those games shoots up dramatically.

It's not about generalised probabilities and the relative importance of a bowling attack. It's about what he actually did.

Again, the bowlers still have to take those wickets to win. Unless Pujara actually changed bodies and bowled teams out I don't see why I can't say that he wasn't a one man army. His batting was great, but it's not alone as far as contributions go, which was my entire point. Everytime you point out the chances of Aus winning rising if he didn't make runs, I can point to the chances of Aus winning rising if the wickets weren't being taken regardless of whether scoreboard pressure existed or not.

 

[Spark]

Again, the bowlers still have to take those wickets to win. Unless Pujara actually changed bodies and bowled teams out I don't see why I can't say that he wasn't a one man army. His batting was great, but it's not alone as far as contributions go, which was my entire point. Everytime you point out the chances of Aus winning rising if he didn't make runs, I can point to the chances of Aus winning rising if the wickets weren't being taken regardless of whether scoreboard pressure existed or not.

You understand the meaning of the phrase "difference between the sides", yes? It's not "he was the only contributor on the team", or "no one else mattered", or "one man army". It's "he made the most consistently decisive contributions" and "without those contributions the result would have been very different" and - this is the kicker which is what makes this conversation relevant in the first place - "those are the most difficult contributions to replace".

 

[Spikey]

Sure but very specifically he was absolutely essential in ensuring that India had a chance at all at Adelaide in 2018 - there's not a bowling attack in the world that can reliably defend a first innings total of 120 - and then in 2021 without his innings at both Sydney and Brisbane on the final day - you know, after the bowlers have done their work - India likely lose both games.

EDIT: Though I might be misremembering when he played that knock at Sydney, whether it was first or second dig. Point still stands though, he was absolutely vital.

he played important knocks in both innings.

they were just slow so Ponting spent the entire time complaining about it

 

[GIMH]

Scoreboard pressure is the greatest wicket taker of them all.

The nature of the game is fundamentally changed when the side batting first gets bowled out for a low total. For one thing, the bowlers inevitably feel pressured to over-attack and give away cheap and quick runs, and the already low pressure on the batting side evaporates. This happens virtually every time and is why getting shot out for <150 batting first is almost always terminal, no matter the pitch conditions. Some totals simply aren't defendable by reasonable means.

It's also why even on flat decks 400 has been chased in the 4th innings like what, 3-4 times?

 

[Spark]

he played important knocks in both innings.

they were just slow so Ponting spent the entire time complaining about it

Lmao I remember that. I'm sure Cummins et al were so thankful for that commentary once Pujara had spent two series grinding them into the dirt.