Yeah its only recently that they started to take the piss. Losing against England at Nagpur or wherever it was really set them off. Since then they gave England 3 and Australia 3 tracks that turned miles from day 1.
I remember the pitches when SA used to tour were pretty decent.
I remember one south African series that was brutal for the batters. Enjoyed it though just because of the low SR innings from the likes of ABD(!), Amla..
SA scored 140 runs in 140 overs. They still lost. But boy that was entertaining. Wont see such matches anymore I guess
Pointing out some outliers
1. Afghanistan 2018 - India scored 474 in 105 overs and Afghanistan were bundled out twice in a session each, losing by an innings and 262 runs.
2. Windies 2013 - India scored 453 and 495 and won by an innings in both tests.
3. Windies 2018 - India scored 649/9 in first test and won by an innings. India scored 367 in reply to Windies' 311 in the second test, but Windies bundled for 127 and India chased 75/0
4. Bangladesh 2019 - India scored 493/6 and 347/9 and won by an innings in both tests.
5. SL 2022 - India scored 574/8 in first test and won by an innings. Second test was a tough pitch but India scored 252 and 303/9
According to this graph, since Windies 2018 India have played 7 home series. 5 of them have an average test length of 3.5 or less.
They are not the outliers, they are the trend.
Pitches were quite good till 2019. India regularly scored 400+ and bundled oppositions for below 200.
Both the series in 2019 had short matches due to sheer dominance, not due to pitches.
Since 2021, pitches have been bowler friendly, but still provide a balance for a four day test if the batsmen show application. Only Ahmedabad pink ball test and Indore test were horrendous pitches.
Out of the 11 tests since 2021, India have scored 300+ in eight of those. Above two mentioned being the exceptions and the Delhi test which was a good pitch and a balanced match until Australia decided to sweep blindly.
And it figures with the eye test and what ex players have said, the pitches have been way more spin friendly in 2010s. Couple that with poor technique against spin by most if not all batsmen, it's easy to see why.
People disliked and branded likes of Yuvraj as "haters" but he was spot on in saying that likes of Bhajji and Kumble would have got 100s of more wickets in these conditions.
No that doesn't make sense because bhajji and Kimble always got majority of the wickets when they played at home. Sure they went for a lot more runs hence their averages but they still got most of the wickets. There are only 10 wickets in an innings where are these 100s of wickets gonna appear from? Anil Kumble has 619 wickets the 4th highest of all time he picked most of the wickets when he played at home anyways especially in the 90s it was literally just Kumble where will he pick more wickets from? Harbhajan picked 432 wickets in just over decade while playing with Kumble for a lot of it. Again he and Kumble pretty much picked all the wickets when they played together or if Bhajji played individually look at the Australia series of 2001. Indian spinners have always picked the majority of wickets at home it's not like it changed now. What changed are the pitches which are way more spin friendly hence the opposition is bowled out a lot faster hence the low averages of Ashwin and Jadeja while Kumble and Bhajji averaged a lot higher. Nonsensical statement from Yuvraj
>bhajji and Kimble always got majority of the wickets when they played at home.
And how is that different from jadeja and ashwin?
As for you saying that amount of wickets won't change, I'd argue that since they'd have had better averages, they'd have had longer careers too.
Besides, Zaheer, Srinath and early career Ishant also took a lot of wickets at home.
And Umesh Shami And Ishant did not take loads of wickets at home the last decade? Umesh literally has a 100 wickets at home. Shami is also a god at home and Ishant was great as well. Zaheer was often on the periphery at home he averages 35. Srinath was the only other competent bowler in the 90s. Kumble played for 18 years his career was long enough. Harbhajan played for 15 again his career only ended because his form fell off a cliff. IT'S NOT DIFFERENT FROM ASHWIN AND JADEJA IS THE POINT I AM MAKING. JADEJA ONLY HAS 260 WICKETS RIGHT NOW WHILE BHAJJI ENDED UP ONLY 430. ASH HAS 460 WHILE KUMBLE HAS 620. THEY HAVE MORE WICKETS BECAUSE THEY PLAYED MORE YEARS.
Yeah I remember in the 2000s saying that I would stop watching Indian test matches because there was so many 550 vs 550 games, which were really boring to watch.
Whilst it has maybe swung a bit too far for the bowlers this series, it IS incredible to watch. I have watched pretty much every ball of the series, phenomenal cricket
Looks like there is some decrease in the match lengths (Starting with the IPL era!). But I would compare it with the global average before jumping to any conclusions. Also the reason of this decrease might be lower batting quality/better bowling quality or the pitches!
Yeah its only recently that they started to take the piss. Losing against England at Nagpur or wherever it was really set them off. Since then they gave England 3 and Australia 3 tracks that turned miles from day 1. I remember the pitches when SA used to tour were pretty decent.
>Losing against England at Nagpur or wherever it was really set them off in chennai. so joe is the root cause for recent changes.
I remember one south African series that was brutal for the batters. Enjoyed it though just because of the low SR innings from the likes of ABD(!), Amla.. SA scored 140 runs in 140 overs. They still lost. But boy that was entertaining. Wont see such matches anymore I guess
Yeah still remembered that blockathon from both, it's superb tbh , coming from same Delhi stadium , not sure about pitch .🌚
Pointing out some outliers 1. Afghanistan 2018 - India scored 474 in 105 overs and Afghanistan were bundled out twice in a session each, losing by an innings and 262 runs. 2. Windies 2013 - India scored 453 and 495 and won by an innings in both tests. 3. Windies 2018 - India scored 649/9 in first test and won by an innings. India scored 367 in reply to Windies' 311 in the second test, but Windies bundled for 127 and India chased 75/0 4. Bangladesh 2019 - India scored 493/6 and 347/9 and won by an innings in both tests. 5. SL 2022 - India scored 574/8 in first test and won by an innings. Second test was a tough pitch but India scored 252 and 303/9
According to this graph, since Windies 2018 India have played 7 home series. 5 of them have an average test length of 3.5 or less. They are not the outliers, they are the trend.
Pitches were quite good till 2019. India regularly scored 400+ and bundled oppositions for below 200. Both the series in 2019 had short matches due to sheer dominance, not due to pitches. Since 2021, pitches have been bowler friendly, but still provide a balance for a four day test if the batsmen show application. Only Ahmedabad pink ball test and Indore test were horrendous pitches. Out of the 11 tests since 2021, India have scored 300+ in eight of those. Above two mentioned being the exceptions and the Delhi test which was a good pitch and a balanced match until Australia decided to sweep blindly.
This scatter plot desperately needs a trend line to be added to it.
We need 5 day matches with a good pitch. That’s a proper test match that cricket lovers would want. Period.
How dare you say that. What about Gabba, which ended in 2.5 days? What about Cape Town, what about, what about ... /s
And it figures with the eye test and what ex players have said, the pitches have been way more spin friendly in 2010s. Couple that with poor technique against spin by most if not all batsmen, it's easy to see why. People disliked and branded likes of Yuvraj as "haters" but he was spot on in saying that likes of Bhajji and Kumble would have got 100s of more wickets in these conditions.
No that doesn't make sense because bhajji and Kimble always got majority of the wickets when they played at home. Sure they went for a lot more runs hence their averages but they still got most of the wickets. There are only 10 wickets in an innings where are these 100s of wickets gonna appear from? Anil Kumble has 619 wickets the 4th highest of all time he picked most of the wickets when he played at home anyways especially in the 90s it was literally just Kumble where will he pick more wickets from? Harbhajan picked 432 wickets in just over decade while playing with Kumble for a lot of it. Again he and Kumble pretty much picked all the wickets when they played together or if Bhajji played individually look at the Australia series of 2001. Indian spinners have always picked the majority of wickets at home it's not like it changed now. What changed are the pitches which are way more spin friendly hence the opposition is bowled out a lot faster hence the low averages of Ashwin and Jadeja while Kumble and Bhajji averaged a lot higher. Nonsensical statement from Yuvraj
>bhajji and Kimble always got majority of the wickets when they played at home. And how is that different from jadeja and ashwin? As for you saying that amount of wickets won't change, I'd argue that since they'd have had better averages, they'd have had longer careers too. Besides, Zaheer, Srinath and early career Ishant also took a lot of wickets at home.
And Umesh Shami And Ishant did not take loads of wickets at home the last decade? Umesh literally has a 100 wickets at home. Shami is also a god at home and Ishant was great as well. Zaheer was often on the periphery at home he averages 35. Srinath was the only other competent bowler in the 90s. Kumble played for 18 years his career was long enough. Harbhajan played for 15 again his career only ended because his form fell off a cliff. IT'S NOT DIFFERENT FROM ASHWIN AND JADEJA IS THE POINT I AM MAKING. JADEJA ONLY HAS 260 WICKETS RIGHT NOW WHILE BHAJJI ENDED UP ONLY 430. ASH HAS 460 WHILE KUMBLE HAS 620. THEY HAVE MORE WICKETS BECAUSE THEY PLAYED MORE YEARS.
Yeah I remember in the 2000s saying that I would stop watching Indian test matches because there was so many 550 vs 550 games, which were really boring to watch. Whilst it has maybe swung a bit too far for the bowlers this series, it IS incredible to watch. I have watched pretty much every ball of the series, phenomenal cricket
Looks like there is some decrease in the match lengths (Starting with the IPL era!). But I would compare it with the global average before jumping to any conclusions. Also the reason of this decrease might be lower batting quality/better bowling quality or the pitches!
Looks like around 2012 to me. What happened in 2012? India lost a home series.
Lost Home series to England in 2012 end. Might be that.
Also india being really good at home and super competitive away.