I remarked in another thread that India have a habit of preparing pitches which are batting paradises for the first day, but deteriorate rapidly from day 2 into spin-friendly death traps.

Ordinarily, this wouldn't be such an issue, as both teams should have a fair go at the same facilities.

However, India do seem to win an unfeasibly high percentage of the toss which means that they get flat pitches on which to rack up huge scores on days one and two, and then bowl their opposition out twice on day three, as happened a couple of days ago to the Windies.

Now I see that Pakistan have Aus on the rack, winning the toss and getting to 258 for three on day one.

It's a little too early to suggest that the track will deteriorate from here (Ramiz Raja suggests that it won't), but it's extraordinary how home Nations seem to win the toss. I'm not suggesting that anyone is cheating (well, I might be, but I can't see how it's done unless David Blaine is involved).

The South African trip to Sri Lanka was similarly one-sided as far as the toss was concerned (and, indeed, the cricket!) and I think the home side won every single toss.

Surely doing away with the toss would see fewer of the sort of pitches which are designed to give the side batting first a distinct advantage and to limit the runs in the final innings to 150 or less?

Jesus, Australia's batting lineup without Smith and Warner

It looks like aids. The bad kind.



Bowling attack would still rip through most teams though.

Solution is surely to win the toss more?

Do away with tours to the sub continent?

I thought there was a proposal that the toss would be replaced by just giving the visiting team the first option to bat or field?

Do away with Indians and Pakistanis ?

//DAC / Bimbo / MOG

Here we are, the proposal ws rejected in May.



Clearly that's working well...

Cricket without tossers wouldn't be cricket.

Yes.

It's a little too early to suggest that this pitch is going to be unplayable in the later innings', but certainly the one at Rajkot although pretty placid on day one, was turning square by tea on the second day.

I'm not saying that the Windies wouldn't have lost the test anyway, but this track didn't give them a sniff and the game ended with the Windies being bowled out twice in just over three sessions.

Indian conditions suit Indians, Autralian conditions suit Australia, Nlish conditions suit India. Its really a case of whether you think every Test should be a totall level playing field or whether you think a visiting team should have to do more to win on someones back yard. I side with the latter, however the balance may be swinging too far in favour of home teams. The toss is ok when its a a margnal decision, which Root had a few times this summer, but too often its not. Irrepsective, if you are in India, your going to be turning on raging burners, and they'll skitle yo just as well in the 3rd innings as the fourth.

The key is winning the toss though.

If you've prepared a brittle road which is going to be easy to bat on on the first day, but start breaking up on the second day, then you don't want to batting last on it.

If you give the visitors the option of using the pitch first, that should stop you from preparing those sort of pitches.

This pitch appears to be breaking up on schedule.

Labuschagne (or Labbyshane, according to the Aussie commentator) gets one to rip out of the dust and take the edge. 412 for 5.

They did this is the county championship and the teams all just produced runways. AFAIK they scrapped it.

It will likely lead to worse cricket due to unforeseen consequences.

This wasn't a runaway?
http://www.espncricinfo.com/series/18902/scorecard/1157752/india-vs-west-indies-1st-test-west-indies-in-india-2018-19

Sorry. misread your post.

You were talking about the quality of the pitch rather than the result.

I believe the desired pitch is a decent contest between bat and ball.

If batting is your strength, then yes, I would expect a road. What I don't want to see is a pitch on which it's impossible to bat last.

Warner and Smith are gorn. Just need to give Kohli, Stokes and every Pakistani a break too.

He means a wicket that is both great for batting AND never disintegrates. Sure, it's fair, but it's dull as anything to watch.

Yes, sorry.

I have corrected my post.

The visiting side is given the option to bowl first, if they decline (i.e. they want to bat first) then it goes to a toss. It hasn't been scrapped.

The ECB believes the change is having the desired effect with more matches going into a 4th day and more wickets taken by spin:

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2016/ ... d-division

That doesn't make sense.

If I prepare a pitch that will break up for my spinners late on day 2 and day 3, the visiting side has no option to bat first apart from the toss?

How is that going to make sure that I don't prepare a road for the first innings that breaks up quickly when when the side batting second comes on to bat?

I appreciate that the toss is theoretically going to even out, but I haven't seen any evidence of that happening in the last few tours to the subcontinent (including Sri Lanka). I wouldn't mind seeing some statistics, but it does seem that 90% of the toss is won by the home side.

As a side note, it does look as though the pitch in this game is holding up better than I expected it to.

In the last five years, the Windies have won only 4 of the 22 matches in which they've won the toss. They've managed to lose 12. Those 4 wins have all come at home or in Zimbabwe.

When they lose the toss, they're actually more likely to win - 7 out of 24 times. They're just less likely to draw.

Turns out they are really shit away from home regardless of the toss, and just mediocre at home.

It may not be a solution for the rest of the world. This way round is specific to Engoish conditions- i.e. green seamers on day 1 where a 60mph part timer has an even chance of getting a fivefer

There is a flaw to this plan.

If we can't decide who bats/fields first then we have no match.

I'm not disputing that.

But bearing in mind the weakness of the opposition, surely it helps no one (apart from the Indian team's ICC ranking) to prepare a road which deteriorates into a raging bunsen on day 2?

Sure.

In Indian conditions your choices are that or a feather bed.

What's wrong with the spinners getting some help? No-one complains about S.A. or Aussie wickets being too fast. Some one eyed people moan about English conditions being unfair, I suppose, but we can ignore those as pure chippyness.

All part of the variety of cricket. Wouldn't have it any other way.

We have drifted off the subject.

Of course Indian pitches will suit Indians.

However, pitches are being prepared which are impossible to bat last on. Removing the toss may address that.

Again, preparing the exact sort of pitches you seem to want is nigh impossible in India.

That does seem unlikely, but I'll bow to your superior knowledge.

Why is it unlikely? Are you at all familiar with the role that climate plays when preparing cricket pitches?

Of course.

I just don't have your faith in the fair-mindedness of Indian groundsmen.

I've made no comment on "fair mindedness" in the slightest. I just think that several decades of cricket in India suggest you can only get two kinds of wickets in India.

But maybe it's a huge and unfair conspiracy, just like English swinging conditions. Must be sad, disliking cricket this much but still watching it.

Of course you haven't.

I've repeatedly referred to Asian pitches as being flat but prepared to be prone to early breakup. There have been a number of series recently where visiting teams lose the toss and the home side amasses a large total on an initially benign pitch which degenerates to unplayable from day 2.

I suggest you guys read this article if you want to understand what goes on during pitch prep and how Groundstaff can 'tailor' conditions to suit their own teams, regardless (to some extent) of where they are played. There's far more too it than just 'natural' local conditions.

https://indianexpress.com/article/sports/cricket/the-pitch-story-beauty-the-beast/

Of course. But you simply cannot replicate Aussie or English wickets in India without the stars aligning in terms of climate.

I mean there's a reason why India benefit so much from these pitches being like this, and it has nothing to do with the toss. It's because all Indian pitches forever at all levels are one of a narrow band of types.

Having spent years preparing pitches, but only in England (obviously not to test standard) I'll bow to you obvious expertise of Indian pitches.

So you'd have found it easy to produce a wicket that could be a raging turner, or a featherbed, or a seamer, or with vicious bounce, or a slow dead pitch?

You must give all those test groundskeepers the secret of your success. They'd tear your arm off.

Pakistan scores 483 over two days (164 overs). Three wickets fall on day one and seven (two of which were run outs) fall on day 2.

On day three 13 wickets fall.

If this was an isolated incident, I would say yes, pretty poor batting from Australia. But it's not. Pitches are prepared to be benign for the first day and most of the second day and then to deteriorate rapidly after that.

If you are saying that it's impossible to prepare pitches differently because of the unique weather patterns across a pretty wide swath of the planet, fair enough; I am not sufficiently well versed to argue.

However my suspicion that pitches are prepared to make batting last pretty nigh impossible is largely born out by recent results.

This is a silly comment, not worthy of the discussion.

Read your own posts sometime.

Oval is advocating that the local climate isn't the biggest factor in pitch preparation. Which would come as a huge surprise to everyone in England, Sri Lanka, India, Pakistan, the UAE, Bangladesh, South Africa, Australia, and New Zealand.

Rinkals, if it were that straightforward then why would teams as good as India risk losing the match on a coin toss?

Oh, hang on - India have won 18 and lost 2 of the 27 matches they've played in the last decade in India when they've lost the toss.

Lost two.

Two.

Finally, Mr "India wins the toss an unfeasible amount of times", in the same period they've won the toss 26 times, so they're just under 50% on winning the toss at home.

I fear this thesis is based on false information, or as people like to call it these days, fake news.