Discussing the 2nd test between India and SA at Kolkata, 2010

[DomainK]

Chill guys. Every team makes pitches to suit them. That's why a team is supposed to be strong at home.

[flamy]

You tell me what satisfaction you derive after playing on a pitch that has been instructed to make the home side win.

The satisfaction of winning? :dontknow: There are no extra points for difficulty, this is not a videogame.

[Gambit]

You tell me what satisfaction you derive after playing on a pitch that has been instructed to make the home side win. Spin the words and sanitize the language to your hearts content but you can't deny the fact that the curator is pressurized to produce the same pitch that was intentionally and purposefully doctored to make India win (Kanpur '08).. Use the right words, lets be very clear about the language. For the record, it doesn't matter if England did it, Australia did it, South Africa did it, the same logic applies to everyone.

Let me level with you once and for all on this issue. Carefully read the following, reflect, internalise and move on. 1. Traditionally, there has never been homogeneity in pitches in different countries. 2. There is no defunct 'good pitch' definition that has to be followed. 3. The beauty of cricket is, like tennis and unlike football, the surface adds a dimension to the game. 4. Traditionally, each country has prepared tracks that suited their bowlers who learnt their cricket on similar tracks. 5. Traditionally, captains always implore curators to prepare a certain kind of track suited to their strengths. 6. Traditionally, India has always had better spinners than fast bowlers. 7. Hence, India have always made tracks more suited to their strengths. 8. Before you starting frothing at the mouth vis-a-vis 6 and 7, think for a moment as to why South Africa or the West Indies have traditionally never produced pitches that are more conducive to spinners than to pacers. Why were the only remote spinner friendly tracks in Windies around when the likes of Ramadhin were around? 9. If you think about it, India is the only country that has produced all variety of tracks. From the rock hard pace pitch at VCA to Krumblers in the 90s to the awesome 'something in it for everyone' tracks at Chennai/Kolkata to roads. 10. Why has South Africa never produced a spinning track? 11. Why has Sri Lanka never produced a green mamba? 12. Why was Sydney in the 1999 Ashes test more of a Krumbler than usual? Is it because England sucked against spin and Australia had not one but two good leggies and one offie? (Colin Miller) Now that you are acquainted with a little cricket history, let's talk about the 2nd Test. India are not placing land mines, with weight specific triggers for South Africans, on the Kolkata track. The pitch will be the same for both sides. Both teams will be bowling with the same ball. If you want to groan and moan about this, then let's see your posts bemoaning RSA's request for the 5th test pitch v England. PS - Kanpur produced more overs than the Ashes Test at Headingley in 2009. RSA were 150/1 in Kanpur before they imploded when faced with very good bowling. RSA were found wanting against good spin on a track that assisted spin. Had we lost at Jo'Burg on that green mamba in '06, I bet you and your ilk would cried your eyes out about Indian batsmen being pathetic on fast bowling tracks instead of taking RSA for task for preparing a pitch for their pace battery.

[EnterTheVoid]

India are not placing land mines' date=' with weight specific triggers for South Africans, on the Kolkata track. The pitch will be the same for both sides. Both teams will be bowling with the same ball.[/quote'] It would have been appropriate had you condoned any of this but you legitimize such thuggery. ONE LAST TIME: Preparing a pitch that advantages the home team is not the same as being pressurized to prepare a pitch thats made to make the home team win This basic, basic fact, spin this as much as you want, cite as many examples as you want, you cannot equate the two. My position is very clear, irrespective of the opposition.

[saneindian]

Does anyone here think that the pitches for the Kanpur test vs SA or the Mumbai test vs Aus in 2004 would not have been in so much of limelight had the winning team been SA or Aus and not India? The durban pitch were we got shot for 66 and 100 or the pithces for the test series in NZ in 2002 were as bad a pitch I have ever seen with seam, bounce, swing all there. But because we were at the receiving end, cricket world had no problem. But the moment we won at Mumbai defending 107 or at Kanpur despite batting 4th, the conspiracy theories started! They said both wickets were underprepared, but then if a track has too much of grass or too much hardness(and hence awkward bounce), isn't that underprepared too? At least on a turning track no one is going to get hit, pitches with more bounce are more likely to result in injuries to the players. Also lets see the kind of pitches SA roll out when we go on tour later in the year.

[Gambit]

It would have been appropriate had you condoned any of this but you legitimize such thuggery. ONE LAST TIME: Preparing a pitch that advantages the home team is not the same as being pressurized to prepare a pitch thats made to make the home team win

Are you intentionally being obtuse? Given the Grand Canyonesque gap between the RSA bowling and Indian bowling, how can any curator make a pitch that will guarantee an Indian win? Like I said earlier, had we lost at Jo'Burg on that green mamba in '06, I bet you and your ilk would cried your eyes out about Indian batsmen being pathetic on fast bowling tracks instead of taking RSA for task for preparing a pitch for their pace battery. And as saneindian points out, RSA/OZ losing on spinning tracks leads to much chest beating, moaning and groaning from self-righteous loathers like yourself but India losing on pacy tracks leads to a criticism of the India batting.

This basic, basic fact, spin this as much as you want, cite as many examples as you want, you cannot equate the two. My position is very clear, irrespective of the opposition.

So let's see your posts criticising the Saffers for doing against England in the recent series.

[flamy]

Excellent posts by Gambit. sree_oz pwned.

[Sachinism]

Laxman has a weakness against in-cutters pitched at a good length' date=' and Steyn will expose that. I have seen him play off the back-foot to such deliveries and get out on many occasions. I wouldn't send him at No.3 if we lose the first wicket for only a few runs.[/quote'] You're right he is suspect against the incoming delivery, but he's an experienced player and its hopefully something he can counter

[Fontaine]

It's not the curator's job to win the match for the team. There was plenty of spin and good turn on the first day when there was still some moisture on the pitch and our spinners failed. If India go on to lose this test it'll be because they weren't good enough. The curator shouldn't be blamed for doing his job by preparing a good pitch that lasts 5 days. I said it before the first match and I'll say it again, the biggest factor in this series was going to be our spin bowling because Bhajji and the other spinner were always going to get the MOST amount of overs on pitches against SA who could be targetted against spin. If our spinners don't perform (and they didn't) then we don't have a chance.

[EnterTheVoid]

Are you intentionally being obtuse? Given the Grand Canyonesque gap between the RSA bowling and Indian bowling' date=' how any curator make a pitch that will guarantee an Indian win?[/quote'] From the curator himself:

“They (BCCI officials) called me today, requesting I come up with a pitch that will suit the Indian brand of cricket. Test cricket is meant to be played on good wickets. Can anyone please define what exactly is a turner? If you want the ball to turn square from day one, why do you need a curator? The Eden Gardens wicket will have even bounce and decent carry. Spinners will come into play as the match meanders along,” Mukherjee told The Indian Express.

Than going on to say:

Mukherjee said that in the lead-up to the Test, the pressure on him is expected to mount. “In the past, more illustrious names have tried to persuade me to prepare a pitch of their liking. I am sure this time it will be no different.

So the No 1 team playing their home series needs to resort to such under handed tactics to draw their series, why , can't they win on merit alone ?

Like I said earlier, had we lost at Jo'Burg on that green mamba in '06, I bet you and your ilk would cried your eyes out about Indian batsmen being pathetic on fast bowling tracks instead of taking RSA for task for preparing a pitch for their pace battery. And as saneindian points out, RSA/OZ losing on spinning tracks leads to much chest beating, moaning and groaning from self-righteous loathers like yourself but India losing on pacy tracks leads to a criticism of the India batting.

Done putting words in my mouth ? Indulging in hyperbole, in the could've, should've, would'ev etc. Provide reference to where I said that, than this conversation would be more meaningful

So let's see your posts criticising the Saffers for doing against England in the recent series/

I don't need to regurgitate the same arguments over and over again.

[Guest Gunner]

Sree_oz, Can you please define a good pitch so that I understand better your point of view.

[EnterTheVoid]

If India lose this test, you can bet your bottom dollar that the curator would be roasted on a spit fire. Where is no one questioning this and those questions that are raised, why are they so muted ?

[Desi Cartman]

Oh all u whiners .. remember even Aussie prepared a flat pitch after losing the perth test to make sure that they win the series 2-1 .. SAF did the same only a month ago to square the series against Eng so I dont know why some people are whining about it. BTW this curator should be sacked for talking crap in public .. even if he was instructed to something and he refused then why does he want to tell the world about it

[EnterTheVoid]

Can you please define a good pitch so that I understand better your point of view.

He should prepare the pitch that he normally prepares, in no way should he be pressurized into dramatically altering the characteristics of the pitch to ensure that India win. Play the game on a level field, if they are not good enough to beat South Africa, so be it, why should the curator cop the abuse for doing his job and producing a pitch that lasts five days instead of one that will be over in three days and lead to an Indian win ?

[Sachinism]

I'm 200% sure that board would not have sent any such SOS for the type of pitch. BCCI is least interested in the result of test matches. All it wants is money without much hassle. If the TV rights are fetching it money, it is not bothered if Indian team wins or loses. So saying is board sent an SOS is a definite lie.

True. If anything they'd have sent an SOS to make sure the match lasts 5 days

[bunny]

Let's not have a flat pitch, that's all. We either need a seaming paradise or a spinner's haven. Our bowlers turn impotent on a flat pitch, and then it's upto the batsmen to post 600+ scores to win a match. It's not gonna happen this time around. I'd actually love a seaming wicket. It will expose the Saffies like anything.

[Guest DeveGowda]

Oh all u whiners .. remember even Aussie prepared a flat pitch after losing the perth test to make sure that they win the series 2-1 .. SAF did the same only a month ago to square the series against Eng so I dont know why some people are whining about it. BTW this curator should be sacked for talking crap in public .. even if he was instructed to something and he refused then why does he want to tell the world about it

desi, he was instructed in phone...he wants a mail...i agree with him..if some thing bad happened due to Pitch he will Lose his job and the guys who ordered this change will not be affected.. Now question is can BCCI send him a Official mail regarding that ? * we are leaving in corporate world.....evrything Done by mails so that each of us save Ourselves....:)

[Gambit]

From the curator himself: Than going on to say: So the No 1 team playing their home series needs to resort to such under handed tactics to draw their series, why , can't they win on merit alone ? Indulging in hyperbole, in the could've, should've, would'ev etc. Provide reference to where I said that, than this conversation would be more meaningful

What you've posted above has nothing to do with your assertion that India wants a pitch that will guarantee an Indian win. As I told you, given the Grand Canyonesque gap between the RSA bowling and Indian bowling, how any curator make a pitch that will guarantee an Indian win? If India win, it will be on merit. The 'underhanded tactics' are commonplace in every cricketing nation and it's known as home advantage. The history lesson I gave you in my previous post should make you understand it is an accepted practice. Tell me, why does a host country choose and pick it's test centers? Why does Australia almost always schedule the first test of a major series at the Gabba where they have a stellar record and is a veritable Aussie fortress? Isn't that 'underhanded tactics'? I don't see you wailing about that. Unless you show evidence of you protesting against an Australia or Saffie or any other captain of doing the same, I suggest you keep your self righteous crap to yourself.

I don't need to regurgitate the same arguments over and over again.

Good. Recycling crap doesn't make it gold.

[EnterTheVoid]

The 'underhanded tactics' are commonplace in every cricketing nation and it's known as home advantage.

What excuses you give for such inexcusable behavior Did India earn the No 1 ranking or was it handed to it on a silver platter ? Why than are we hiding behind then curator ?

[saneindian]

One more angle to this home advantage business is seen when we travel away from the sub continent. The practce matches for us (the 1 or 2 matches that we are lucky to play at times) are played on absolute featherbeds with no similarity to the actual pitch we end up playing on in the test matches. Isn't that done deliberately to ensure a lack of preparation for us?