Is it better to attack or defend on a green mamba

[G_B_]

I think the title is self explanatory.

 

The problem with attacking on a green pitch is that the risk is huge.

 

But equally if you just defend there will be a ball you cannot play against.

 

What do you think?

[sandeep]

That's why they make the big bucks.  So that they can revert to the cliche of playing each ball on its 'merit', and make that decision umpteen times.  

 

On a serious note, it obviously fluctuates a bit depending on the game situation, ball condition, score on the board, etc etc.  Ultimately you win and compete in test matches by scoring runs, and on a mamba, they are even more of a premium commodity.  You have to think of the entire innings, and have the top order do the hard yards so that the other guys can attack at a (slightly) lower risk.  Of course, it helps a lot if you have a Veeru-like wild card who can just do it from ball 1.  

[G_B_]

I am of the opinion our lower order needs to swing away

[Global.Baba]

There is never a steadfast rule in cricket. If the situation comes down to saving a test match regardless of the pitch, logic says defend.

 

Anyways from assumption(too lazy to look up stats)  guys like Dravid,Gavaskar have better records on green mambas than say a Sehwag or even Viv Richards.

[ShoonyaSifar]

Follow the template we had for Jo’burg Test in SA. Hold an end up, be positive from other. That pitch had more tricks due to uneven bounce, Perth pace and bounce will be consistent, so expecting batting to be slightly easy.

[goose]

they will need to put away shots in thew V and play square of the wicket