mickey arthur and the Kanpur track.

[f.b.m]

Yes. Because. Maybe. Whatever

...

How was Paul Harris cr@p? He took 4/140 or so in the Test. Not the greatest spell ever surely but surely not bad for a bowler who is a 12-13 Test veteran and was travelling India first time. I suppose most visiting spinners will take 4 wickets@35 in an Indian test with glee(just ask Warne).

Did you actually watch the match? The wickets that he got in this match (except the one of Sreesanth) were all cases of batsmen giving it away rather than him earning those wickets with any sort of skill (or even put in enough revs and let the wikcet do something). Sehwag looked like a much better bowler. In Ahmedabad, Harris got 1 wicket (of Kumble) despite bowling on day 3. The only serious wickets that he got was the one of Jaffer in Chennai (where he beat Jaffer in flight). The rest were all tailenders, or the batters were pushing on for a big score, or they played incredibly stupid shots (and not exactly due to pressure). 1 wicket as a left arm finger spinner in a 3 test series in India. Wow. This as opposed to 5 from Sehwag who only bowled in 2 of those games (do I need to add who bowled more overs?). I dont call anyone crap without reason. Nicky Boje, for example wouldnt be crappy like Paul Harris for this reason. India had intense preparations before Warne came (sachins chennai innings), dont tell me that they had anything other than Yuvi bowling a few in the nets as "preparation" for this guy.

Speaking of cr@p what the cr@p happened to India in 2nd test? How cr@ppy were Indian batsmen that were skittled for 70 odds? How cr@ppy is Rahul Dravid who scored a total of 20 runs? How cr@ppy is the Indian team that lost by an innings at home?

Yes, they were shambolic. Thats why we lost and by such a big margin. Did I say anything different to that? I never blamed the wicket or anything other than our batting effort (and bowling to an extent). If you bothered to read this thread, you'd find this post:

I think the last 2 wickets have been the best wickets (for cricket's sake) in India for a long time despite it being for completely different reasons.

There's no need to make random assumptions and get über defensive.

See how that works smarty pants :finger:

O'RLY?

[Lurker]

Looks like someone is still trying to figure out which team was crap and which was stellar in matches where no side lasted more than 70 overs in South Africa' date=' the land of fair pitches and paradise!:hysterical:[/quote'] Should I bother responding to someone who doesnt even read a response properly? :hysterical: I beleive I responded to your questions rather elaborately so what the hell happened to the question I raised?? Forgot? Didnt have a clue? Or started responding without reading eh?

[The Outsider]

Should I bother responding to someone who doesnt even read a response properly? :hysterical: I beleive I responded to your questions rather elaborately so what the hell happened to the question I raised?? Forgot? Didnt have a clue? Or started responding without reading eh?

What question did you ask - the Dhoni one? Firstly, I don't believe a lot of these stories coming out of our crappy media. Secondly, if Dhoni indeed did give the curator money it's completely unethical and an inquiry should be held and Dhoni should receive a ban/punishment if found guilty. But none of it is relevant to the discussion we are having. You asked for instances of matches in South Africa where they did not last 3 days because of pitch conditions. I provided you not one, but 6. None of them hopelessly one sided thrashings and in most of them no team lasted around 70-80 overs. I also asked you how the Kanpur pitch became crap only when South Africa lost wickets and was fine when they cruised to 150-1 or when India made 320 with Sreesanth and ishant adding 50 runs or when India knocked down 60 odd runs at 5 RPO.

[Ram]

And the blame was richly deserved too. Sorry but you need to do more homework Sriram. Firstly I am glad that you had to go all the way to mid 90s to dig up an example to support your cause. That itself vindicates what I am saying(and had you followed my posts I have already clarified that not since mid 90s have I see matches result in 3 days). And if you have looked further you would see that a visiting Pakistani team faught much better than India and match went till the last day so yes your argument on Durban pitch doesnt hold water.

No, my argument runs on completely different lines. All I am saying is, if we get bowled out on seaming bouncy tracks in Australia or South Africa, then no Aussie or Saffie fan runs in apologizing for the nature of the wicket. Then, its the Indian batsman who are labeled incompetent against pace. However, if visiting batsman struggle against spin, then the pitches are blamed. Why this double standard ?

Thats an argument that comes out of Indian mouth only, ever thought of that? A substandard pitch that cracks on day 1 is a challenge? Then I suppose the conditions on wonderbra NZ wickets were equally challenging and no surprises Indian prima donnas were found wanting. Question: Do you think NZ wickets were International quality the last time India travelled there? Was it challenging enough Sriram? xxx

Forget that Lurks. You first have to prove to me the pitch at Kanpur was substandard. I say it was quite decent and the Saffie batsman were not good enough to handle the challenge.

[graphic23]

Thats a misnomer Graphic. On a spin track a spinner will come early, say 10th over, even 6-7th but if the spinner is given the brand new ball that should tell you exactly how much the pitch is spinning. Anyone who has played cricket will agree it is hard to spin a new ball, indeed on a spin track pacers are often used to "deaden" the ball. However here Bhajji was given 1st over. So that speaks as much about the pitch as it does about Harbhajan really.

Agreed. This was a raging turner and thats why he was given the new ball. (I'm a spinner of sorts - and yeah, it is hard to spin the new ball, I agree). I think playing spin in itself is a special skill, and I cannot help but say that this was just as much "sportive" and "fair" as the pitch at Ahmedabad. Steyn, Morkel, and Ntini could've hurt a lot of our batsmen (I am thankful they didn't) because of the very very variable bounce. So, I do think it had something for all types of bowlers. Batsmen had to play a different game here because they would never feel set. Thats a different issue.

No I dont agree with that at all. I will repeat what I mentioned in other thread someplace. On such turning tracks ONLY India wins. Yes you can argue we have never lost on Kanpur but that does not mean we have great spinners or anything, we just play a little better on such wickets. Heck the stats of Bhajji and even second string bowlers like Raju and Chauhan would not be half-bad. Such pitches just make half-decent bowler come across as world beater. You mentioned WACA pitch but what you did not mention is how WACA pitch was always pacey(it has started to go all slow now). Kanpur used to be batsman's paradise till it was changed completely to aid Indian spinners. How can you compare the two? xx

1. Why don't you think we have great spinners? 2. If we play a "little better" on these tracks than most other teams, why should we not take advantage of that? Its not like these sort of tracks can be made elsewhere (can they? I don't know.) So when they come to India, we expect them to be on par with our skill when we play on such tracks. I am not sure why that is a problem at all? Why should we be nice and ask them to play on tracks we know they can score runs on rather than trouble them a bit? 3. In the 1997-98 West Indies tour of Australia, Curtly Ambrose ran through the Australian batting order. The WACA curator was fired for creating a pitch that suited the foreign team more than the home side. Thereafter, I think, it has been changed because of that.

[Holysmoke]

Question: Of the examples you put up, how many of them ended up with the captain sending out cash renumeration to the curator? I am sure you have read of Dhoni sending 10,000 curator's way by now. http://www.expressindia.com/latest-news/Dhoni-says-thanks-to-Kanpur-pitch-curator/296643/ xxx

"It is a general practice to give some money to the curator so that he can distribute it among the groundsmen. This money is contributed by the players and given to the curator," he said. "Even when India lost the match in Ahmedabad, the cricketers gave tips to the curator. It was not any special case in Kanpur," Shukla said. "If giving money to the curator ensured a win, we would have won all the matches," he added.

[Gambit]

A blast from Mickey Mouse's(as Eddie calls him) past:

The issue of "pitch doctoring" flared again yesterday when the curator at Newlands revealed he had been contacted by South Africa coach Mickey Arthur 10 days before the first Test and asked to prepare a wicket that would seam around for the first two days of the match. Groundsman Christo Erasmus claimed he ignored the request and prepared the sort of strip he has turned out for previous Tests, but added he was pressured into watering the pitch two days before play began and was accused of playing into Australia's hands. Erasmus criticised South Africa's tactics, claiming it had effectively lost the Test by opting to bat first because it was afraid of having to face leg-spinner Shane Warne in the fourth innings on a pitch that showed signs of wear before a ball was bowled. "The South African team management should stand up and admit that they were responsible for what happened," Erasmus was quoted as saying in the Cape Times newspaper yesterday. "They shouldn't blame the groundsman."

http://www.foxsports.com.au/story/0,8659,18555178-23212,00.html

[The Outsider]

Forget that Lurks. You first have to prove to me the pitch at Kanpur was substandard. I say it was quite decent and the Saffie batsman were not good enough to handle the challenge.

Exactly. Yeah, one can say the Bombay wicket of 2004 and the NZ wonderbras were substandard tracks but a pitch where the side batting first gets off to a 150-1 start before committing harakiri and the side batting second responds with 320+ runs with number 10 and 11 adding 50 runs, where pacers and spinners both got assistance is not a sub standard pitch by any standards except for a chosen few who would knock down an Indian win by using all kinds of twisted logic.

[PaiN_KiLLeR]

:hysterical: How did you manage dig that up, Gambit?

[umpire]

Lurker is confused I think. When he started his argument he wanted example of the pitches in SA and Aus. When he was given those examples, those examples were not valid, because none of them were raging turner. Spinner did not open the bowling blah blah. When he was shown other example like the Sydney Test in last Ashes, his argument was that pitch was not substandard, but England were crap. Yes Genious, you are right England were crap and on similar lines SA were crap on spinning track. They dig their own hole. Their batting was pathetic in 2nd innings, none of them wanted to score runs. This was kind of pitch were you need to score runs and show initiative rather than wait for bad balls. His next argument was that Dhoni gave money to curator for making such pitch, and it does not happen anywhere. Yes Genious, every damn country doctors pitches to suit them.

[Lurker]

What question did you ask - the Dhoni one? Firstly' date= I don't believe a lot of these stories coming out of our crappy media. Secondly, if Dhoni indeed did give the curator money it's completely unethical and an inquiry should be held and Dhoni should receive a ban/punishment if found guilty.

That story has made it to most of Indian media. From Indian express(whose link I quoted) to Times of India and more. The curator is on record admitting that(read up). I will give the benefit of doubt that this may not have happened and is a media spin but I will also keep my option open. If this happen it basically settles every argument about this whole "playing to strength thingy".

But none of it is relevant to the discussion we are having. You asked for instances of matches in South Africa where they did not last 3 days because of pitch conditions. I provided you not one, but 6. None of them hopelessly one sided thrashings and in most of them no team lasted around 70-80 overs. I also asked you how the Kanpur pitch became crap only when South Africa lost wickets and was fine when they cruised to 150-1 or when India made 320 with Sreesanth and ishant adding 50 runs or when India knocked down 60 odd runs at 5 RPO.

Of course it is. It is just that you in your infinite wisdom fail to understand it. And as is your wont you would much rather be a stiff one than ask for clarification. Your argument is that of matches that finished in 3 days. Lets see the example. West Indies vs South Africa. The first team boasts of Ambrose-Walsh-McLean-Dillon, easily a very potent attack. The other attack boasts of Donald-Pollock-Kallis-Terbrugge, again a formidable attack. This particular ground is in South Africa and they dared, yes sir, to build a green top against arguably the best opening bowling pair of the time, indeed one of the all time greats Ambrose-Walsh. And you compare that with Indian "doctoring" a pitch to bring Bhajji on. Yeaaah sure!

[Holysmoke]

That story has made it to most of Indian media. From Indian express(whose link I quoted) to Times of India and more. The curator is on record admitting that(read up). I will give the benefit of doubt that this may not have happened and is a media spin but I will also keep my option open.

But lurker, it happens in EVERY game. Happenned in A'bad as well, where the captain of the Indian team was at odds with the curator.

[The Outsider]

That story has made it to most of Indian media. From Indian express(whose link I quoted) to Times of India and more. The curator is on record admitting that(read up). I will give the benefit of doubt that this may not have happened and is a media spin but I will also keep my option open. If this happen it basically settles every argument about this whole "playing to strength thingy".

Holy, has already clarified that part, so forget about it. Apparently, it happens in every ground, so it's not some unique thing at Kanpur. In fact, I would say it's good that the players do give the poorly paid ground staff money as long as it is done uniformly, as appears to be the case.

Your argument is that of matches that finished in 3 days. Lets see the example. West Indies vs South Africa. The first team boasts of Ambrose-Walsh-McLean-Dillon, easily a very potent attack. The other attack boasts of Donald-Pollock-Kallis-Terbrugge, again a formidable attack. This particular ground is in South Africa and they dared, yes sir, to build a green top against arguably the best opening bowling pair of the time, indeed one of the all time greats Ambrose-Walsh.

There are lots more examples but apparently you have huge problem if a spinner opens the bowling but no issues if a spinner bowls a handful of overs even in the last innings of a test, and in some cases teams did not even bother playing a spinner. All that is fine with you, but a spinner opening the bowling is sign of pitch doctoring. Pray tell, if a spinner does not have a role to play even in the final innings of a test is that not pitch doctoring extending your logic?

[Lurker]

No' date=' my argument runs on completely different lines. All I am saying is, if we get bowled out on seaming bouncy tracks in Australia or South Africa, then no Aussie or Saffie fan runs in apologizing for the nature of the wicket. [b']Then, its the Indian batsman who are labeled incompetent against pace. However, if visiting batsman struggle against spin, then the pitches are blamed.

Which world do you live in Sriram? You have watched cricket to realize your folly, but sure I will help you out. Indian batsmen are targetted because when they go to say, South Africa, they practically used to get effed everywhere. If it was a 4 test series generally the score-line would be 3-0 or 4-0, indeed drawing a game is often considered a win. Most Indian batsmen will return with an average of 25, 35 and so on. On the other hand when SOuth Africa comes to India do they get beaten 4-0? NO. Do their batsmen go back with an average of 25? Hell no. Do you understand the comparison? Let me throw some examples. I will pick 5 random South African batsmen since 90s and 5 Indian batsmen too. South African batsmen - Kirsten, Kallis, Smith, Gibbs and I dont know say ABDV? Indian batsmen - Azhar, SRT, Dravid, VVS, Ganguly. Between the two lot clearly Indian batting is stronger. Now lets see how they compare. Average in India: Kirsten: 52.3 Kallis: 55.7 Smith: 44.5 Gibbs: 22.7 ABDV: 76. India in South Africa: Azhar: 23.3 SRT: 39.7 Dravid: 33.60 VVS: 41.1 Ganguly : 36. There it is. Tell me where am I going wrong. xxx PS: You cant just move about the NZ pitch with a "you have to show Kanpur". Kanpur was doctored simply because on an even track we got our ar$e handed over to us..for about 70 odd runs. Now whats your opinion on NZ tracks?

[Lurker]

1. Why don't you think we have great spinners?

Because I dont use the word great liberally. Amongst the current Indian lot Kumble is a great spinner. Harbhajan Singh is a decent spinner at best. More often than not he has turned cr@ppy performances. His stock has been boosted by his macho performance in Australia and his success in this series else I wasnt the only one asking for his head. Similarly second string spinners like Raju-Chauhan-Aashisk Kapur- Murali Karthick that have helped India win on these tracks completely get screwed when they travel abroad. So no we dont have great spinners, except Kumble.

2. If we play a "little better" on these tracks than most other teams, why should we not take advantage of that? Its not like these sort of tracks can be made elsewhere (can they? I don't know.) So when they come to India, we expect them to be on par with our skill when we play on such tracks. I am not sure why that is a problem at all? Why should we be nice and ask them to play on tracks we know they can score runs on rather than trouble them a bit?

I have answered this somewhere else. Will repeat it. I dont have issues with a spin track that starts cracking from day 3, turning into a vicious spinner by day 4/5. That still gives batsmen a couple of days, as also the pace bowlers. On tracks like Kanpur it is picnic for spinners from day 1 and is completely one-sided. Just as a dead batting track is bad for cricket, similarly is a dead spin track.

3. In the 1997-98 West Indies tour of Australia, Curtly Ambrose ran through the Australian batting order. The WACA curator was fired for creating a pitch that suited the foreign team more than the home side. Thereafter, I think, it has been changed because of that.

WACA has always been a pacey track. This is the same track on which Fredricks once scored 169 in 140 odd deliveries against an Aussie attack that boased of Lilee, Thommo, Walker and Pascoe. The point being on a fast track there is always the chance for a batsman to score big as well. Just play the shot right and the ball speeds to the boundary. Hence WACA often gives a score of 400 or more, certainly 300 is no great shake. Kanpur was a sham where by day 1 300 was considered a match winning score. It just doesnt offer anything to batsmen at all. xxxx

[graphic23]

Because I dont use the word great liberally. Amongst the current Indian lot Kumble is a great spinner. Harbhajan Singh is a decent spinner at best. More often than not he has turned cr@ppy performances. His stock has been boosted by his macho performance in Australia and his success in this series else I wasnt the only one asking for his head. Similarly second string spinners like Raju-Chauhan-Aashisk Kapur- Murali Karthick that have helped India win on these tracks completely get screwed when they travel abroad. So no we dont have great spinners, except Kumble.

Got it. I whole heartedly agree. Though I'd probably give Harbhajan more credit than a "decent" bowler but yeah, he isn't great like Kumble yet. I'd probably say that he is a very good bowler rather than "just decent."

I have answered this somewhere else. Will repeat it. I dont have issues with a spin track that starts cracking from day 3, turning into a vicious spinner by day 4/5. That still gives batsmen a couple of days, as also the pace bowlers. On tracks like Kanpur it is picnic for spinners from day 1 and is completely one-sided. Just as a dead batting track is bad for cricket, similarly is a dead spin track.

Okay. Please let me know if I'm mistaken in my following assessment. I think that if a track spins from day 1 drastically, it is just like a track that would assist swing the first 3 or 4 days or a track that would bounce and seam throughout the first 3 or 4 days. I say only 3 or 4 days because the pitch at Green Park was slowing down on the 3rd day (I didn't watch the match, I am just basing this information off of cricinfo). So I think it would've been easier to bat on the next 2 days. But anyways,I think a track that spins from day 1 is not very common around the world. So, in that sense, I think I'd like a pitch like this to test the batsmen, especially in the subcontinent. I definitely still don't see why the issue is whether it starts spinning from day 3 or day 1. I do agree that most tracks around the world assist the spinners when the ball gets old and when the pitch has a lot of footmarks. But this one was a bit different and offered a different challenge. On a dead flat pitch, the batsmen have advantage and the bowlers have no advantage. It takes a LOT of effort to get wickets. I think though with this spinning pitch, the bowlers do have a lot of advantage but it offers the batsmen opportunity to score runs more than the flat pitch offers the bowlers something. In that sense, I'd probably say the spinning track is far better than the dead flat pitch.

WACA has always been a pacey track. This is the same track on which Fredricks once scored 169 in 140 odd deliveries against an Aussie attack that boased of Lilee, Thommo, Walker and Pascoe. The point being on a fast track there is always the chance for a batsman to score big as well. Just play the shot right and the ball speeds to the boundary. Hence WACA often gives a score of 400 or more, certainly 300 is no great shake. Kanpur was a sham where by day 1 300 was considered a match winning score. It just doesnt offer anything to batsmen at all. xxxx

I have not seen many live matches being played on the WACA ground (apart from the recent one), and I've always heard that it was the fastest pitch in the world. The reason I mentioned the fact was just to show that the curator is also involved in the match results outside of India.

[Lurker]

Got it. I whole heartedly agree. Though I'd probably give Harbhajan more credit than a "decent" bowler but yeah, he isn't great like Kumble yet. I'd probably say that he is a very good bowler rather than "just decent."

Fair enough. We can agree to disagree on this one.

Okay. Please let me know if I'm mistaken in my following assessment. I think that if a track spins from day 1 drastically, it is just like a track that would assist swing the first 3 or 4 days or a track that would bounce and seam throughout the first 3 or 4 days. I say only 3 or 4 days because the pitch at Green Park was slowing down on the 3rd day (I didn't watch the match, I am just basing this information off of cricinfo). So I think it would've been easier to bat on the next 2 days. But anyways,I think a track that spins from day 1 is not very common around the world. So, in that sense, I think I'd like a pitch like this to test the batsmen, especially in the subcontinent. I definitely still don't see why the issue is whether it starts spinning from day 3 or day 1. I do agree that most tracks around the world assist the spinners when the ball gets old and when the pitch has a lot of footmarks. But this one was a bit different and offered a different challenge.

Testing batsman is different from making them play on a landmine. Just as I am not going to accept that NZ tracks in recent series against India were world class similarly I dont quite see how this track was International level as well. Your point, of pitches spinning on day 1, is well taken. However it brings me to the next question. Why are such tracks, that spins on day 1, not made for the entire series?? Such dustbowls, specially recently, are prepared only when India are facing the barrell, as in playing Australia last time, or down 0-1 against South Africa this time. Putting it simply this was more an effort of pitch doctoring to save face.

I have not seen many live matches being played on the WACA ground (apart from the recent one), and I've always heard that it was the fastest pitch in the world. The reason I mentioned the fact was just to show that the curator is also involved in the match results outside of India.

In a way you have answered your own question. See WACA has always been a pacey wicket(it has started to lose its pace recently though). And so when a Sachin tendulkar walks out to bat at Perth he knows what to expect. When a Dravid embarks on Down Under he knows very well he will face chin music at Perth. However do you truly think a Kallis comes to India expecting a dustbowl at Kanpur? No. What he does expect is a dustbowl someplace. and this someplace is what I have issues with. Make Mohali a pacy pitch, make Green Park a spin track. Set the expectations right and dont resort to such field doctrination when you are on the wrong end of the gun. By the way you should check Roy Fredricks innings of 169 at Perth in what has been mentioned by many as one of the fastest tracks of all times. He made those runs in about 145 deliveries. My point being on a fast track you give the batsman the ability to score runs as well, specially those who are good with square cuts, pulls and hooks. Spin tracks doesnt do any such thing...unless one is willing to sit and haul a$$ for a few days. xxx

[graphic23]

I cannot argue with your point that the Kanpur track was made to save the series for us. Perhaps, they ought to be made for the whole series so we can win 3-0 :D ( though I think the opposing batsmen will learn to bat fairly quickly). I agree that we should not have been in that situation in the first place. But I will not take the credit away from Harbhajan, our batsmen, and Sehwag for the way they performed on the pitch. Though the pitch helped them, it must have taken a lot of mental resolve to comeback after one of our worst defeats at home in nearly 50 years. Thanks for the Roy Fredericks' stat. I remember reading about that in cricinfo. It was apparently one of the most dominating innings ever played at Perth. I will look into it further.

[Desi Cartman]

to All, when u criticize the pitch for the 3rd test then please make sure u also say that Ahemdabad pitch was also cr@p. here are the stats : 2nd test Scores Losing team : 404/20 (114 overs) Winning team : 494/7 (141 overs ) Total Overs : 265 3rd Test scores Losing team : 386/20 (153 overs) winning Team : 416/12 (114 overs) Total overs : 267 overs Should a pitch be criticized because 5 extra wickets fell :nervous: Infact 3rd test had 2 more overs :two_thumbs_up:

[Bumper]

Lurker, tipping the curator is not anything new. If you go by this news piece, its been a long tradition in Indian cricket. http://www.zeenews.com/articles.asp?aid=436718&sid=ARC Dhoni should have been more open-hearted: Nikhil Chopra Zeenews Bureau Noida, April 14: On what was meant to be a token of appreciation from Mahendra Singh Dhoni to the Kanpur’s Green Park stadium curator has led to a new debate on whether such tips are warranted. Zee News’s in-house cricket expert Nikhil Chopra feels they are. Infact Dhoni should have been more generous, he said. Following are the excerpts of an exclusive interview with Zee News: “The final Test match was won by India not because of the pitch and its preparation but because of the home team’s superior play. Both the teams got an equal chance to try their skills at the famed 22 yards and India came out with a better strategy. It has been a long tradition to tip the grounds men after the match is over to reward them for their efforts. There is nothing wrong in this and the poor curator and his men also feel vindicated for working so hard for their country. Every captain has given his token of appreciation from over a decade, and MS Dhoni’s giving some token money to the curator of Kanpur ground is the right thing to do. I was surprised by the fact that the amount given by the Indian skipper was too less. According to me, the tip should have been at least ten times more as these people maintaining the ground get very less salaries. In fact, even Harbhajan Singh should have given some token money from his side to the curator as his efforts on the ground got valuable wickets for India. The curator prepares the pitch according to the guidelines of the board and a captain has no role in it. It is a right thing to tip the people who spend their life for maintaining the level of the game and it is the least a captain can do for them, regardless of the fact whether his team wins or loses.”