Test cricket shouldn't be so easy for batsmen

[Ilovecric]

Watching the Ind/Sri series is really making me sick, runs should be valuable and cherished. After finishing the first day of a test match, the batting team shouldn't be looking at a first innings total of 600 plus runs because the day ended with the team on 417-2. The first three batsmen in a batting line-up shouldn't all score centuries. There is something I really love about boycott expressing how he felt when getting to 50 against a West Indies bowling attack, he really appreciate those runs 20 plus years later because he was actually doing something to get them - proving himself as a good batsman. Runs shouldn't be taken for granted like this, Tendulkar isn't even pass 30 runs at the moment and it wouldn't surprise me if he made a century too and as a spectator thats not good. We should be on the edge for our favourite players at all times. Killing test cricket.

 

[NUFAN]

Yeah I don't think you'll find too many people disagreeing with you.

I love the games where a score of 250-300 is a par TEAM score. Sadly it hardly ever happens anymore.

 

[Furball]

If England or Australia went away for the Ashes, fielded first and saw the opposition rack up 400/2 on day 1, we'd be almost universal in condemning the poor standard of bowling on show.

Fair enough, I only watched the morning session, but Herath and Mendis were utterly dreadful.

 

[Ilovecric]

And that's lunch. India's session yet again, but the best one Sri Lanka have had in this Test

If this isn't a joke then I don't know what is. Almost 550 at lunch on the second day of a test match.

 

[Sanz]

If this isn't a joke then I don't know what is. Almost 550 at lunch on the second day of a test match.

It is not a joke, majority of Indian fans have enjoyed the game so far.

 

[Sanz]

If this isn't a joke then I don't know what is. Almost 550 at lunch on the second day of a test match.

2nd Test: Australia v India at Adelaide, Dec 12-16, 2003 | Cricket Scorecard | Cricinfo.com

Australia were 556 in 127 overs.

2nd Test: Australia v New Zealand at Hobart, Nov 22-26, 2001 | Cricket Scorecard | Cricinfo.com

558 in 124 overs

Infact you should take a look at the some of the matches played in Australia in last decade.

Team records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | Cricinfo.com

or England :-

http://stats.cricinfo.com/ci/engine...eam=1;template=results;type=team;view=innings

or South Africa :-

http://stats.cricinfo.com/ci/engine...eam=3;template=results;type=team;view=innings



and compare with the matches played in India.

Team records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | Cricinfo.com

 

[Athlai]

Eh? Its hardly India specific.

And comparing this innings to those matches where the 500+ score lost is a bit odd considering India are probably on track to get 800.

 

[Sanz]

Well one can also argue that current run rate is largely due to Sehwag's batting

 

[honestbharani]

Eh? Its hardly India specific.

And comparing this innings to those matches where the 500+ score lost is a bit odd considering India are probably on track to get 800.

What is wrong with good batting? The only reason we have time enough to make 800 is because runs are being scored so fast...

 

[Streetwise]

2nd Test: Australia v India at Adelaide, Dec 12-16, 2003 | Cricket Scorecard | Cricinfo.com

Australia were 556 in 127 overs.

2nd Test: Australia v New Zealand at Hobart, Nov 22-26, 2001 | Cricket Scorecard | Cricinfo.com

558 in 124 overs

Infact you should take a look at the some of the matches played in Australia in last decade.

Team records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | Cricinfo.com

or England :-

Team records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | Cricinfo.com

or South Africa :-

Team records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | Cricinfo.com



and compare with the matches played in India.

Team records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | Cricinfo.com

I looked at your stats.

This is how often teams pass 600 runs

40 tests for England and have not passed 600 once

Australia pass 600 runs every 14 tests
South Africa pass 600 every 11 tests

India pass 600 runs every 4 tests.

 

[Sanz]

Eh? Its hardly India specific.

And comparing this innings to those matches where the 500+ score lost is a bit odd considering India are probably on track to get 800.

We did make 800, didn't we ?

 

[Sanz]

40 tests for England and have not passed 600 once .

That tells more about England than anything else.

 

[Athlai]

We did make 800, didn't we ?

Epic fail by India.

 

[Sanz]

Epic fail by India.

Ofcourse, when Indian batsmen score runs, it is the pitch, when they don't it is the Great Fall.

 

[Athlai]

Ofcourse, when Indian batsmen score runs, it is the pitch, when they don't it is the Great Fall.

Na India have great batsman. When 7 wickets fall for **** all its a fail.

 

[Matt79]

lol at Sanz's ability to turn a generalised complaint which cites a match involving India as a current example, into a conspiracy against India.

 

[Athlai]

Quite right though, every single poster hates India.

 

[Sanz]

Na India have great batsman. When 7 wickets fall for **** all its a fail.

7 batsmen fell for 200 runs, All in all 9 wickets fell on Day 2 and less than 300 runs were scored.

kinda disaproves the accusation that pitch is a road.

 

[Athlai]

7 batsmen fell for 200 runs, All in all 9 wickets fell on Day 2 and less than 300 runs were scored.

kinda disaproves the accusation that pitch is a road.

The bottom 5 scored how many runs exactly? What about the top 6?

 

[Sanz]

lol at Sanz's ability to turn a generalised complaint which cites a match involving India as a current example, into a conspiracy against India.

When the complaint comes only when the matches are played in India/(and in Pakistan), it has to be said. 9 wickets fell for <300 runs, why are people comlaining that it is a featherbed ?