Whenever a discussion has come up about the probable nature of the surfaces for the ongoing test series, Indian viewers have been quick to point out that if NZ do go in for the sort of seaming tracks which were dished out during the 2002 clashes, they will simply get a dose of their own medicine; fair call, with India's pace attack being markedly more penetrative and NZ's batting brittle. That scenario is entirely possible, but I think they're missing the point; all this talk about preparing wickets offering assistance to the seamers arises not from any lingering doubts about the Indian batsmen's ability to counter the moving ball, though that will always be a topic for debate. Rather, it has more to do with the fact that the kiwi attack mostly needs conditions of that sort to be effective at all.
The NZ bowlers appeared a bit short on stamina in Hamilton, where a long workout was anticipated given the flat wicket. But give a kiwi seamer a pitch with moisture in it and some humidity in the air as an added bonus, and suddenly he becomes twice the bowler. Recent cases in point were the Brisbane test last November, where the bowlers' good work was wasted as usual by the batsmen, or the final ODI of this tour at Eden park, where the Indians were caught off-guard on a slow,seaming track.
Everyone likes to look back to 2002 as an example of the kiwis' reliance on these sorts of pitches, but those conditions bordered on the farcical; a more convincing example is from 2005. During that home season, NZ hosted a three match series against the Aussies, followed by a two-match rubber against Sri Lanka. The core of their injury-ridden bowling lineup that summer was made up of Chris Martin, James Franklin, Kyle Mills, Iain O'Brien and Daniel Vettori - the same attack featuring in the ongoing series. The Australian series was predictably lost 2-0, and the first test against the Lankans was a high scoring draw. The second test at Wellington, however, sported a tinge of green on the first day, which was all Stephen Fleming needed to see. He put Sri Lanka in, and like the recently-concluded Hamilton test, the game was decided in the first session as the visitors stuttered to 65 for 5. All five were snapped up by Martin, who had barely bowled a ball in anger all season. And this was no ordinary lineup - the wickets to fall were Atapattu, Jayasuriya, Sangakkara, Jayawardene and Dilshan, a batting lineup nearly as formidable as the current Indian one.
A series of flat decks may be a good learning experience for the kiwi bowlers, for it is high time they developed skills to counter the more batsmen-friendly surfaces over the world. But just to ensure that this present tour does not descend into complete lopsidedness, the curators at Napier and Wellington would probably be justified in preparing the kind of slow, seaming tracks which used to be the scourge of visiting batsmen back in the day. When the chips are down, you need to play to your strengths, after all.
Top Cricket From The Second Tier
13 years ago
7 comments:
Good call Suhas.
Firstly, NZ needs to play in conditions where they have SOME chance, against what is clearly a superior Indian team as opposed to conditions where they (NZ) have to play out of their skins AND hope the Indians underperform.
Secondly - this from an Indian supporter! - its time to find out exactly how good these Indian bowlers are under conditions that help them, AS WELL AS how the Indian batsmen cope with adverse conditions. In short, how good is this Indian team anyway!
They may well be good enough. But, can we check?
Most importantly, it will make for interesting test cricket!!
I've always believed that home pitches should be made to suit the home team. So, when people call for more sporting pitches in India, pitches where the seamers are in the game throughout, I don't support them wholeheartedly. Just as it is challenging for an Indian batsman to counter the Perth wicket, I expect to find the Aussie struggle to cope with a turning wicket in Mumbai.
Similarly with New Zealand. As you said, it's probably New Zealand's only hope, but I see nothing wrong in that tactic. No one in New Zealand should be made to justify a slow seaming wicket...
@Heramba: Yup, I'm sure the Indians are actually itching to prove themselves once and for all on a seamer-friendly wicket. Certainly, after the bore draws in the West indies and Pakistan, test cricket needs those kinds of pitches.
@Swaroop: The point about sporting pitches is an fair one. Yes, visitng batsmen should bloody well be expected to try and cope with a square turner in India. But the focus on 'sporting' wickets has been quite beneficial for the Indians - you can see it in their improved performances abroad...
[continued]The interesting thing is, NZ now find themselves in a situation much like what India went through in the 90s. For a long time, because of the green nature of the wickets, mediocre medium pacers have been able to thrive on the domestic scene and as a result, kiwi batsmen have grown domestically with inadequate techniques because of the lack of quality Shane-Bond-like bowling to face up to, which is why they struggle in tests, especially abroad. Of late, there's been a conscious effort to produce more batter-friendly, 'sporting' wickets in NZ, and the short term effect is that it has spawned a lot of flamboyant strokeplayers who now play for the national side. The Ross Taylor and Jesse Ryder partnership yesterday was a good example.
I would contend that the likes of Ross and Jesse are the products of "unsporting wickets". On wickets where either team could be bowled out for roughly a low three digit score (as in the last series), scoring quickly is one way to counter the threat of not scoring any at all. What fun is it to bat like Richardson and score 20 numbing runs in 30 overs? Young teenage Jesse and Ross must have discussed this over a cold beer.
Still is there any doubt that this batch of Indian pacers happily thrives on helpful pitches? I agree with you on this point; the series in England should have said enough. New Zealand's only chance was the Napier wicket, which nullified the likes of Sharma and Khan, while also lulling the careless Indian batting line-up into a sense of false comfort.
As an aside, did you notice Khan's bulging gut? He's regressing, again.
Hi Anand, interesting observations as always! I'll respond to your points in reverse this time:
1. I actually did not notice Zak's gut. I certainly hope he works on it, for the last thing India needs is another passenger in the outfield.
2. The Napier wicket may have been NZ's only chance of DRAWING the game - most sides would have struggled to pick up 20 wickets against a half-decent batting lineup on that pitch. But to WIN a game, you need 20 wickets and that's where the whole bit about greentops comes in. I agree that the Indian attack revels on seaming tracks too, so the odds of NZ winning wouldn't be great. But if seam and swing bowling is your strength, you need to back yourselves no matter who the opposition may be.
3. While Ross Taylor does come across as hit-and-miss (though he is capable of some excellent innings - check out his 154 at Manchester last year), Jesse Ryder is a real talent, and I'd be a little hard pressed to call him a product of an unsporting wicket.
Speaking of which, one of the things I hoped to put across in this article was the fact that NZ wickets are not the "gardens" that many people seem to believe...given that India's previous tour was in 2002, I suppose most Indian viewers could be excused for thinking that. But the reality is different. Seamer friendly they may be, but more along the lines of a June English wicket.
Post a Comment