*Official* Australia in India 2023

[Line and Length]

Ball tampering - be it sandpaper, bottle tops, Murray Mints or biting the ball - is cheating ... and there is evidence that most countries have been equally guilty.

Claiming a catch when it's not been taken is also cheating as shown below.

I could go on posting videos depicting cheating (including examples by England players) but I think you get the picture. To call one country the "greatest cheats" is debatable and leaves yourself open for attacks on your own country. Can we leave it that?

 

[the big bambino]

WTF? Did you even watch the game?

My word but you’re parochial. I’ve responded to xix’s description of the game so if any comments about India’s selections, misreading the conditions or just being unlucky when they batted are wrong why don’t you just clear it up instead of being a dick head.

 

[Ashes81]

India literally batted in the worst conditions though. You act like in England things remain consistent when that isn't the case though. If England got sent in then they were just as likely to roll over like India. Like 58 all out vs NZ in 2018. Nagpur had the conditions remain similar for the duration of the game.

In the 1st innings, India definitely had the worst of the conditions but you often get that in England. As you say if we'd batted 1st, the boot would have been on the other foot.

We then scored about 400 and rolled India over again for about 130.

 

[the big bambino]

So England scored 400 only for the pitch to become magically trash again for India. That’s some impressive doctoring I have to say.

 

[Shri]

"greatest cheats" is debatable and leaves yourself open for attacks on your own country

patriotism is cancer and i don't mind people talking **** about "my" country if the take is fair and not hypocritical

 

[honestbharani]

My word but you’re parochial. I’ve responded to xix’s description of the game so if any comments about India’s selections, misreading the conditions or just being unlucky when they batted are wrong why don’t you just clear it up instead of being a dick head.

Hmmm... I pointed out the fact that you were commenting about a game that you clearly did not watch and yet you are so triggered.

 

[the big bambino]

Hmmm... I pointed out the fact that you were commenting about a game that you clearly did not watch and yet you are so triggered.

Then tell me what I've got wrong ...

 

[Xix2565]

What? Of course batsmen have a bearing on the game. It was a feature of your complaint that they were too well advantaged as the game went on. It is hardly a justfiable complaint about pitch condiotions that India so misread them as to pick 2 spinners. That's the team's fault, not the pitch's. And perhaps that better explains England doing so well in their batting. Because you picked an unsuitable attack. Once again nothing to do with the pitch.

Whereas Australia could not do anything in the way of strategy, selection or luck to alter the way they could play the Nagpur pitch. Not that I'd complain about turning wickets. We must better prepare for them. However the Lords pitch presented opportunities to both sides that India failed to grasp. Australia could do nothing on a pitch that obviously favoured their opponent's strength and for the duration of the game.

First, this idea that batters have a noticeable influence on the game compared to the pitches/conditions and the bowlers is nonsense. The other 2 factors dictate how the game plays out and heavily affects the results of the batters.

Secondly, my point with Lord's 2018 and Nagpur 2023 was that in the former both teams faced different conditions entirely whenever they batted and bowled, compared to Nagpur where things remained consistent throughout. It was to push back at this stupid idea that the former situation is more fair or reasonable than the latter, especially when both exposed the difference in bowling attacks which is what determines the results of the game. Away teams being hampered by injuries (Aus 2023) and bad selections (Ind 2018) is not a rebuttal to this because even in a perfect scenario away teams are rarely good enough (aka have good, suitable bowlers and comparable batting) to be in a position where you can say a bad selection had a major impact on the result.

In the 1st innings, India definitely had the worst of the conditions but you often get that in England. As you say if we'd batted 1st, the boot would have been on the other foot.

We then scored about 400 and rolled India over again for about 130.

The conditions still need the players to take advantage though, and England had that while India didn't. Same as every match in history. Either way it's not some sort of praise for the 'fair/good' nature of English pitches. They're as doctored to favour the home team as anywhere else apart from Pakistan recently.

 

[Molehill]

The conditions still need the players to take advantage though, and England had that while India didn't. Same as every match in history. Either way it's not some sort of praise for the 'fair/good' nature of English pitches. They're as doctored to favour the home team as anywhere else apart from Pakistan recently.

But 2018 isn't a very good example of that. England played 2 spinners in the final 2 Tests, Moeen took 12 wickets at 21. That doesn't sound very doctored to me.

 

[Xix2565]

But 2018 isn't a very good example of that. England played 2 spinners in the final 2 Tests, Moeen took 12 wickets at 21. That doesn't sound very doctored to me.

I see that English seamers dominating the series is just brushed aside I guess. How is the fact that England played 2 spinners in the last 2 Tests a rebuttal? It's like saying that Indian pitches don't favour spin because the likes of Bumrah, Shami, Umesh average less than 20 on the surfaces.

 

[Xix2565]

Definite weakness with this generation of players.

Also, come on now. The previous generations wouldn't even have been at this stage to dilly dally around like that.

 

[Ashes81]

First, this idea that batters have a noticeable influence on the game compared to the pitches/conditions and the bowlers is nonsense. The other 2 factors dictate how the game plays out and heavily affects the results of the batters.

Secondly, my point with Lord's 2018 and Nagpur 2023 was that in the former both teams faced different conditions entirely whenever they batted and bowled, compared to Nagpur where things remained consistent throughout. It was to push back at this stupid idea that the former situation is more fair or reasonable than the latter, especially when both exposed the difference in bowling attacks which is what determines the results of the game. Away teams being hampered by injuries (Aus 2023) and bad selections (Ind 2018) is not a rebuttal to this because even in a perfect scenario away teams are rarely good enough (aka have good, suitable bowlers and comparable batting) to be in a position where you can say a bad selection had a major impact on the result.


The conditions still need the players to take advantage though, and England had that while India didn't. Same as every match in history. Either way it's not some sort of praise for the 'fair/good' nature of English pitches. They're as doctored to favour the home team as anywhere else apart from Pakistan recently.

I'm not talking about doctoring pitches, I'm talking about pitches that are poor as I believe the pitch at Indore was.

The pitch started off taking too much spin and generally got worse.

The pitch in 2018 at Lords did a bit early on but then settled down. India were rolled over for 130 in their 2nd innings after we'd scored 400. The pitch favoured seam bowling but that doesn't make it a poor pitch.

I'd liken the Lords 2018 pitch to the Nagpur pitch in the 1st test. That pitch favoured spin but wasn't a poor pitch as India showed by making 400.

At Lords in 2018, India couldn't cope with England's seam bowling in helpful conditions just as the Aussies couldn't cope at Nagpur with India's spin attack in helpful conditions.

But I wouldn't describe either as poor pitches.

 

[the big bambino]

First, this idea that batters have a noticeable influence on the game compared to the pitches/conditions and the bowlers is nonsense. The other 2 factors dictate how the game plays out and heavily affects the results of the batters.

Secondly, my point with Lord's 2018 and Nagpur 2023 was that in the former both teams faced different conditions entirely whenever they batted and bowled, compared to Nagpur where things remained consistent throughout. It was to push back at this stupid idea that the former situation is more fair or reasonable than the latter, especially when both exposed the difference in bowling attacks which is what determines the results of the game. Away teams being hampered by injuries (Aus 2023) and bad selections (Ind 2018) is not a rebuttal to this because even in a perfect scenario away teams are rarely good enough (aka have good, suitable bowlers and comparable batting) to be in a position where you can say a bad selection had a major impact on the result.


The conditions still need the players to take advantage though, and England had that while India didn't. Same as every match in history. Either way it's not some sort of praise for the 'fair/good' nature of English pitches. They're as doctored to favour the home team as anywhere else apart from Pakistan recently.

Your first point is foolish. England scored 400 and India failed a second time. The old adage bowlers win matches should not be inferred to diminish the role of batting.

Second, both circumstances are fair but India at Lords were better placed to work with the conditions they found. Whereas Australia has to prepare its players better for spin.

 

[Xix2565]

I'm not talking about doctoring pitches, I'm talking about pitches that are poor as I believe the pitch at Indore was.

The pitch started off taking too much spin and generally got worse.

The pitch in 2018 at Lords did a bit early on but then settled down. India were rolled over for 130 in their 2nd innings after we'd scored 400. The pitch favoured seam bowling but that doesn't make it a poor pitch.

I'd liken the Lords 2018 pitch to the Nagpur pitch in the 1st test. That pitch favoured spin but wasn't a poor pitch as India showed by making 400.

At Lords in 2018, India couldn't cope with England's seam bowling in helpful conditions just as the Aussies couldn't cope at Nagpur with India's spin attack in helpful conditions.

But I wouldn't describe either as poor pitches.

Indore wasn't bad because of the spin alone. You're forgetting the variable bounce which is a bigger factor in these things than lateral movement by seam or spin.

Except that I didn't call it a poor pitch though, I just didn't think you could say it was good enough to make claims that every players' skills were fairly tested.

Your first point is foolish. England scored 400 and India failed a second time. The old adage bowlers win matches should not be inferred to diminish the role of batting.

Second, both circumstances are fair but India at Lords were better placed to work with the conditions they found. Whereas Australia has to prepare its players better for spin.

If you could read who batted against which bowlers in which conditions maybe you'd stop peddling this nonsense. Batters can't force results their way when conditions are tilted heavily in the bowlers' favour.

India wasn't better placed at all ffs. They picked 2 spinners instead of 4 fast/seam bowlers on a greentop. As bad as Australia's options in Nagpur.

 

[cnerd123]

what is the worst part of this series - the pitches or the thread?

 

[anil1405]

what is the worst part of this series - the pitches or the thread?

Pitches, during the test series. Once the tests were done this thread behaved like the Indore pitch.

 

[andruid]

The tour is over. Start a horrible pitches thread for this.

 

[Burgey]

what is the worst part of this series - the pitches or the thread?

Your face.

And your posts.

 

[Molehill]

I see that English seamers dominating the series is just brushed aside I guess. How is the fact that England played 2 spinners in the last 2 Tests a rebuttal? It's like saying that Indian pitches don't favour spin because the likes of Bumrah, Shami, Umesh average less than 20 on the surfaces.

If England were doctoring pitches in 2018 to favour themselves over India, then they wouldn't have played 1 spinner let alone 2. What's forgotten is the ridiculously dry and hot June/July that year which forced the hands of some groundsmen.

 

[TheJediBrah]

Don't think there was anything wrong with the pitches this series. Sure maybe 1 or 2 were minefields that gave the bowlers too much assistance but that's entertaining enough in small doses