Kohli's top innings on difficult conditions (bowler friendly conditions+bowlers exploiting those conditons)

[Trichromatic]

11 minutes ago, express bowling said:

 

Check the list above in my first post of this thread.  

 

You cannot dismiss all those knocks

Most of those are on flat pitches. You can believe that pitch where both teams score 400 and 600 in first inning in SC is bowling friendly conditions and batsmen are supermen.

 

235 and 200, seriously? How can that be called tough batting pitch. England scored 400, India scored 631 and 4 100s were scored. Out of 500+ test matches played by India and possibly out of 800-900 innings that was out 14th highest score. By that way all matches are played on bowler friendly pitches as there is something on offer.

[express bowling]

8 minutes ago, Trichromatic said:

Most of those are on flat pitches. You can believe that pitch where both teams score 400 and 600 in first inning in SC is bowling friendly conditions and batsmen are supermen.

 

No, they were not.  

 

Johanesburg 13, Perth 12 both innings ,Kolkata 16, Asia Cup 16 were as lively as they get.

 

Rajkot 16 was a tricky situation to save the match in the 4th innings when the pitch had some uneven bounce

 

Antigua 16 was a seaming pitch too

 

Edited August 24, 2017 by express bowling

[putrevus]

28 minutes ago, Trichromatic said:

How is opportunist? He has missing consistently whenever other batsman others find it difficult to survive. He is good player under pressure situation, but not in difficult conditions. Be it Aus and SA home series, England away series, Pakistan ODIs series in 2012. Whether the balls swings and seams or turns, he rarely survives. You can almost be sure that if India has lost 6-7 wickets for less than 200, then Kohli would have failed too. He hardly seems like a player who can play Dravid, Tendulkar, Sehwag, Laxman type solo warrior innings where bowler is making the ball talk.

 

Happened in CT 17 and now this match.

 

Rahane, Rahul, Pujara, Vijay all have survived in certain types of difficult conditions despite shorter career. Kohli's inability to lift himself on pitches which are not flat is big question mark. 

Common in ODis he pretty much carries this team in chases.In test matches I agree to some extent he goes missing on difficult pitches much like his predecessor.

[Trichromatic]

3 minutes ago, express bowling said:

 

No, they were not.  

 

Johanesburg 13, Perth 12 both innings ,Kolkata 16, Asia Cup 16 were as lively as they get.

 

Rajkot 16 was a tricky situation to save the match in the 4th innings when the pitch had some uneven bounce

 

Antigua 16 was a seaming pitch too

 

And India scored 566-8 with even Mishra scoring a 50. How many times Indian team scored 500+ in an away match? Which inning are you talking about Kolkata? Against NZ? Johanessberg was first inning was good, 2nd inning was absolutely flat condition.

 

Johanesberg first inning, Perth, Asia cup and Rajkot 2nd inning. Very few to count for a top player.

[Trichromatic]

6 minutes ago, putrevus said:

Common in ODis he pretty much carries this team in chases.In test matches I agree to some extent he goes missing on difficult pitches much like his predecessor.

Already said that he is a proven player in pressure situation. Probably one of best in our history, but way behind others when it comes to bowling friendly conditions.

[express bowling]

1 minute ago, Trichromatic said:

And India scored 566-8 with even Mishra scoring a 50. How many times Indian team scored 500+ in an away match? Which inning are you talking about Kolkata? Against NZ? Johanessberg was first inning was good, 2nd inning was absolutely flat condition.

 

Johanesberg first inning, Perth, Asia cup and Rajkot 2nd inning. Very few to count for a top player.

 

Most batters have only a few good innings in tough conditions barring one or two batters.

 

Us scoring 500 + in Antigua does not negate the fact the there was movement.... we did it because of Kohli and Ashwin  .... Mishra came in to bat at 470+ and it is much easier to score then .... our pacers seamed the ball a lot.

 

 

[The Dark Horse]

So does that make Bhuvi a better batsman than Kohli

 

Kohli has batted under all circumstances in ODIs and done well. But the discussion is valid in tests.

[putrevus]

16 minutes ago, Trichromatic said:

Already said that he is a proven player in pressure situation. Probably one of best in our history, but way behind others when it comes to bowling friendly conditions.

What do rate bowler as friendly conditions.I don't rate Sachin's scores in 1999-00  against Australia as scores in bowler friendly conditions, it was just inept batting by rest of the Indian batting. Laxman 96 in Durban , or Dravid 148 in Leeds were scored in some what bowler friendly.

 

Gavaskar's 90 odd in 1987 against Pakistan on minefield is one of the best in my view as pitch was good along with caliber of bowlers.

Edited August 24, 2017 by putrevus

[Trichromatic]

13 minutes ago, express bowling said:

 

Most batters have only a few good innings in tough conditions barring one or two batters.

 

Us scoring 500 + in Antigua does not negate the fact the there was movement.... we did it because of Kohli and Ashwin  .... Mishra came in to bat at 470+ and it is much easier to score then .... our pacers seamed the ball a lot.

 

 

Our scoring 500+ in an away match shows it can't be called bowler friendly condition. If anything it was flat pitch with good batting condition,  WI batsmen failed in easy conditions.

[Trichromatic]

29 minutes ago, putrevus said:

What do rate bowler as friendly conditions.I don't rate Sachin's scores in 1999-00  against Australia as scores in bowler friendly conditions, it was just inept batting by rest of the Indian batting. Laxman 96 in Durban , or Dravid 148 in Leeds were scored in some what bowler friendly.

 

Gavaskar's 90 odd in 1987 against Pakistan on minefield is one of the best in my view as pitch was good along with caliber of bowlers.

Most batsmen will struggle in bowler friendly condition. If tailender are scoring run easily on a pitch, then it's most likely flat or there are no extraction of any type of help from bowlers.

 

Just to add there, McGrath was way too good even on flat pitches. Australia of late 90s and early 200s played lot of matches on flat pitches and still won lot of matches because of him and Warne.

[express bowling]

46 minutes ago, Trichromatic said:

Our scoring 500+ in an away match shows it can't be called bowler friendly condition. If anything it was flat pitch with good batting condition,  WI batsmen failed in easy conditions.

 

Then you did not see us bowl in that match.

 

Many people do not recognize seam movement on TV unless it is exaggerated.  But it is a different proposition when someone is batting and there is consistent seam movement.

Edited August 24, 2017 by express bowling

[Trichromatic]

6 minutes ago, express bowling said:

 

Then you did not see us bowl in that match.

 

Too many people do not recognize seam movement on TV unless it is exaggerated.  But it is a different proposition when someone is batting.

What about WI bowlers and balls faced by Indian batsmen?

 

Indian score of 566 automatically excluded it from difficult conditions inning. That is probably  among top 15 highest scores away from India.

 

Sure you can call it difficult condition by the different propositon when someone is batting without exaggerated movement on TV, then more than 90% of matches can be considered to be played on difficult conditions only and by that definition we are looking for innings in extremely difficult conditions where team struggle to score 250+, wickets are falling, bowlers are top either by bowling very well like ATG bowlers or getting lot of purchase from pitch. 

[express bowling]

5 minutes ago, Trichromatic said:

What about WI bowlers and balls faced by Indian batsmen?

 

There was moderate but rather consistent seam movement for lots of overs.

 

5 minutes ago, Trichromatic said:

Indian score of 566 automatically excluded it from difficult conditions inning. That is probably  among top 15 highest scores away from India.

 

No, it does not.  It was scored because Kohli and Ashwin batted well.

 

5 minutes ago, Trichromatic said:

Sure you can call it difficult condition by the different propositon when someone is batting without exaggerated movement on TV, then more than 90% of matches can be considered to be played on difficult conditions only and by that definition we are looking for innings in extremely difficult conditions where team struggle to score 250+, wickets are falling, bowlers are top either by bowling very well like ATG bowlers or getting lot of purchase from pitch. 

 

There is a difference between  consistent but moderate seam movement, which is not easy to counter and very infrequent seam movement, which is much easier to bat against.

 

In that match, it was moderate but consistent seam movement.

 

 

[putrevus]

3 minutes ago, express bowling said:

 

There was moderate but rather consistent seam movement for lots of overs.

 

 

No, it does not.  It was scored because Kohli and Ashwin batted well.

 

 

There is a difference between  consistent but moderate seam movement, which is not easy to counter and very infrequent seam movement, which is much easier to bat against.

 

In that match, it was moderate but consistent seam movement.

 

 

It does as Kohli and company have proved they are very vulnerable in seaming conditions.batting on a difficult pitch still needs bowlers who know what they are doing otherwise it is of no use.

[express bowling]

1 minute ago, putrevus said:

It does as Kohli and company have proved they are very vulnerable in seaming conditions.batting on a difficult pitch still needs bowlers who know what they are doing otherwise it is of no use.

Our test batting has looked vulnerable in seaming conditions, only in England.

 

It looked good in SA and NZ just before that.

 

[putrevus]

Just now, express bowling said:

Our test batting has looked vulnerable in seaming conditions, only in England.

 

It looked good in SA and NZ just before that.

 

In SA they never encountered true bowling conditions.Yes they did very well but it is different beast in England when ball swings.

[Trichromatic]

11 minutes ago, express bowling said:

 

There was moderate but rather consistent seam movement for lots of overs.

 

 

No, it does not.  It was scored because Kohli and Ashwin batted well.

 

 

There is a difference between  consistent but moderate seam movement, which is not easy to counter and very infrequent seam movement, which is much easier to bat against.

 

In that match, it was moderate but consistent seam movement.

 

 

And Dhawan also scored 84. 

[express bowling]

1 minute ago, Trichromatic said:

And Dhawan also scored 84. 

It was a chancy knock.

[Trichromatic]

Just now, express bowling said:

It was a chancy knock.

And still somehow 4 batsmen managed to score runs. Like I said you can call it difficult condition and then we can say that 90% of matches are played in difficult conditions only and we are looking for innings in extremely difficult conditions.

[express bowling]

1 hour ago, putrevus said:

In SA they never encountered true bowling conditions.Yes they did very well but it is different beast in England when ball swings.

 

Batting is the most difficult in SA as there is a combination of pace, bounce and seam movement off the deck.

 

England was considered much easier as long as  batters got county cricket experience.... as the pitches don't have the pace and bounce of SA or Australia.  Swing at moderate pace was not considered that difficult  till even 2010.

 

 

 

 

 

Edited August 24, 2017 by express bowling