Is Australia as usual peaking at the right time when KO stage approaches?

[Ultimate_Game]

By turners, if you are referring to Ind vs NZ type of pitches, it is not putting your best foot forward as batting first is also crucial in such games. Besides Ind vs NZ, Ind vs SL ('96) is another example

a square turner or green mamba usually neutralizes teams even when there is a mismatch.

only when there is a good quality pitch the good gets separated from crap.

you think Nathan mccullum is a better bowler than Ashwin???

 

NZ game was a one off and our first game after playing in Asia Cup. Just because we faltered against Kiwis doesn't mean we alter our gameplan of not going with turners against Aus. Aus is the best team to play on turners as they have a bunch of stroke-makers and nearly all of them have a weakness against spinners. They don't have spinners of their own and neither have they shown they can play spinners convincingly. on top of that Aussies haven't played too many games on turners whereas we have played 3 games so far so we should be much more suited to perform better on a turning track.

[zen]

 

NZ game was a one off and our first game after playing in Asia Cup. Just because we faltered against Kiwis doesn't mean we alter our gameplan of not going with turners against Aus. Aus is the best team to play on turners as they have a bunch of stroke-makers and nearly all of them have a weakness against spinners. They don't have spinners of their own and neither have they shown they can play spinners convincingly. on top of that Aussies haven't played too many games on turners whereas we have played 3 games so far so we should be much more suited to perform better on a turning track.

UG,

 

1st - Do you have any official statement that Ind team's game plan is to go in with turners vs Aus?

 

2nd - Could you provide details of Ind winning on square turners vs strong sides when it has batted 2nd in important tourneys hosted in India. I will give you examples of when it lost. From the top of my head: 

• vs NZ in this competition
• vs SL in '96 SF

 

3rd - Batting first on square turners is a different proportion than batting 2nd. The pitch is progressively getting difficult to bat on. By batting first, Aus could negate the advantage Ind spinners have. While bowling 2nd, Aus can use bowlers who can bowl slow off cutters and spin. If the pitch is a square turner, both Zampa and Agar would be playing. Then there is Maxwell as well. Warner and Smith can roll their arms too. This gives Aus tons of overs of spin. So it appears as if that you have based your opinion on the following assumptions:

• Aus would bat 2nd
• Aus would not play a 2nd spinner
• Aus would not use some of the other players to bowl spin 
• Ind's batting abilities on a turner batting 2nd vs Aus spinners >> Aus's ability to bat vs Ind spinners batting first (and when Ind's captain has a tendency to not even bowl all the overs from spinners / part time spinners)
• Probably, Ind will 100% win the toss to do as it pleases in the game
• If Ind is chasing on such wkts, others apart from Kohli would be successful too on such wkts and in KO pressure situation 

 

Please explain!

Edited March 25, 2016 by rett

[Ultimate_Game]

UG,

 

1st - Do you have any official statement that Ind team's game plan is to go in with turners vs Aus?

 

2nd - Could you provide details of Ind winning on square turners vs strong sides when it has batted 2nd in important tourneys hosted in India. I will give you examples of when it lost. From the top of my head: 

• vs NZ in this competition
• vs SL in '96 SF

 

3rd - Batting first on square turners is a different proportion than batting 2nd. The pitch is progressively getting difficult to bat on. By batting first, Aus could negate the advantage Ind spinners have. While bowling 2nd, Aus can use bowlers who can bowl slow off cutters and spin. If the pitch is a square turner, both Zampa and Agar would be playing. Then there is Maxwell as well. Warner and Smith can roll their arms too. This gives Aus tons of overs of spin. So it appears as if that you have based your opinion on the following assumptions:

• Aus would bat 2nd
• Aus would not play a 2nd spinner
• Aus would not use some of the other players to bowl spin 
• Ind's batting abilities on a turner batting 2nd vs Aus spinners >> Aus's ability to bat vs Ind spinners batting first (and when Ind's captain has a tendency to not even bowl all the overs from spinners / part time spinners)
• Probably, Ind will 100% win the toss to do as it pleases in the game
• If Ind is chasing on such wkts, others apart from Kohli would be successful too on such wkts and in KO pressure situation 

 

Please explain!

One doesn't need to be a rocket scientist to infer the Indian plan is to play on turners and hence the three turners so far in the first three games. I'm hoping the plan doesn't change moving forward.

I recall India getting the better of Aus in WC 2011 QF batting 2nd (was that at Nagpur?) where the pitch was definitely spin friendly and Ashwin opened the bowling. In the end we ended up winning while chasing since Aus didn't have spinners to exploit the conditions. It's the same here. India has a better chance of beating this Aussie team on a turner than a true/flattish pitch where any one of Finch, Maxwell, Warner, Smith, Watson, Faulkner etc. can win the game on their own. We simply don't have the same batting power to compete with them, hence a turner.

[zen]

One doesn't need to be a rocket scientist to infer the Indian plan is to play on turners and hence the three turners so far in the first three games. I'm hoping the plan doesn't change moving forward.

 If that were the plan, Ind would have gone in with 3 spinners and/or we would also have had more overs of spin .... Looking at the team's composition and the comment that Dhoni actually made in Asia Cup, it would appear as if the team was expecting pitches where the batsman can score freely

http://www.espncricinfo.com/asia-cup-2015-16/content/story/977077.html 

'Low-scoring pitches not good practice for World T20' - Dhoni

(there is an actual statement available by someone in the squad, which is why I had asked you the question)

 

I recall India getting the better of Aus in WC 2011 QF batting 2nd (was that at Nagpur?) where the pitch was definitely spin friendly and Ashwin opened the bowling.

 

 

^ The venue is A'bad .... and it is a typical A'bad pitch .... And you can hear Ponting's comment at toss on pitch

 

 In the end we ended up winning while chasing since Aus didn't have spinners to exploit the conditions. It's the same here. India has a better chance of beating this Aussie team on a turner than a true/flattish pitch where any one of Finch, Maxwell, Warner, Smith, Watson, Faulkner etc. can win the game on their own. We simply don't have the same batting power to compete with them, hence a turner.

Those are again examples similar to the assumption that I already listed earlier 

Edited March 26, 2016 by rett

[Ultimate_Game]

 

 If that were the plan, Ind would have gone in with 3 spinners and/or we would also have had more overs of spin .... Looking at the team's composition and the comment that Dhoni actually made in Asia Cup, it would appear as if the team was expecting pitches where the batsman can score freely

http://www.espncricinfo.com/asia-cup-2015-16/content/story/977077.html 

'Low-scoring pitches not good practice for World T20' - Dhoni

 

 

 

^ The venue is A'bad .... and it is a typical A'bad pitch .... And you can hear Ponting's comment at toss on pitch

 

Those are again examples similar to the assumption that I already listed earlier 

 

So there is not much evidence to support your claims .... And then you are also willing to write off the loss vs NZ as an exception while not being able to recall one proper game as an example that supports your theory 

 

PS I am not saying Ind cannot win under such circumstances but that it was depend up on a lot of factors working for Ind and against Aus leaving the result to chance as well 

Leaving the result to chance would be taking on Aussies on a patta as they have hitters throughout their long lineup. The odds would be with us if we go with a turner. Aussies batsmen have shown us they can't handle spin and neither do they have a bowling attack to thrive on a turner. If you believe our best bet is to take on Aussies on a flat/true wkt, so be it but I disagree. IMO our best option to beat Aussies is on a turning track where we negate their hitters and their pre-dominantly seam based bowling attack.

[zen]

If you believe our best bet is to take on Aussies on a flat/true wkt, so be it but I disagree. IMO our best option to beat Aussies is on a turning track where we negate their hitters and their pre-dominantly seam based bowling attack.

My position is below:

"I don't like to worry about pitches too much .... If the pitch is as per my liking, great! If not, I would play horses for courses and make the pitch as per my liking  "

Edited March 26, 2016 by rett

[Nova]

One doesn't need to be a rocket scientist to infer the Indian plan is to play on turners and hence the three turners so far in the first three games.
 

I don't think the Indian team had planned to play on turning pitches. Yes, some pitches were expected to be slow but not raging turners. Consider the following from Cricinfo:

"Officials privy to the pitch preparation in Nagpur, said that, while they expected the pitch to be low and slow because of the amount of cricket it had taken, they were also surprised with the amount of turn. Nagpur has experienced hot weather in the month leading up to the World T20; it has also hosted practice matches and six qualifiers. The pitch for the India-New Zealand game was being used for the fourth time; the last match it hosted was Afghanistan v Zimbabwe on March 12.

One official said it was wrong to suggest the pitch was doctored or spin-friendly. "It was a flat, shiny surface even when I checked the pitch after the match," he said. "The pitch had got sufficient rolling. It was intact after completion of the match. Then how can you blame anyone or the curator for a low-scoring match?" New Zealand, though, were not fooled by the sheen, and selected three spinners, benching their lead quicks, Tim Southee and Trent Boult.

Over in Dharamsala, overuse has come up as one of the reasons behind slow pitches. An official there told ESPNcricinfo that it had been a really cold winter, and that the ground had hosted camps organised by the Asian Cricket Council. Oman had been in Dharamsala till February 17 when they left for the Asia Cup. Lack of sun, though, has emerged as a big problem. The Bermuda grass needs ample sunshine to grow, and the square has not had much of it here. Without grass it is difficult to get pace." [1]

Also in Kolkata the weather and rain affected the pitch. Everyone was surprised by the nature of the pitches due to factors outside the control of the curators. It is therefore reasonable to conclude that there is no per-determined correlation between the pitches curated and Indian game plan.

[1] http://www.espncricinfo.com/icc-world-twenty20-2016/content/story/983677.html

 

 

 

[Ultimate_Game]

My position is below:

"I don't like to worry about pitches too much .... If the pitch is as per my liking, great! If not, I would play horses for courses and make the pitch as per my liking  "

 

Problem is we don't have "horses" to match Aussies on a flat track. Yuvraj is a has-been, Jadeja is not a batsman, our openers aren't going to match likes of Warner and we have a longish tail. The only way we get odds in our favor is if we play Aussies on a pitch supporting spin.

[zen]

Problem is we don't have "horses" to match Aussies on a flat track. Yuvraj is a has-been, Jadeja is not a batsman, our openers aren't going to match likes of Warner and we have a longish tail. The only way we get odds in our favor is if we play Aussies on a pitch supporting spin. 

That is a selection problem .... One needs to select the right squad to account for various factors .... It is not other teams fault 

[diehardpacer]

Against Aussies we will be able to managed nevertheless. Aus only have Zampa and Maxwell who are slower bowlers and Maxwell is the same level as Raina. Even if we play the way we have continued to do so, i.e. Ashwin and Jadeja bowling 4 and Raina maybe 2, that will still be 10 overs of spin for India vs just 6 for Aussies. That's a significant advantage. IMO curators and groundsman should be roughing up the pitch even as we speak trying to make it spin friendly.

Maxwell bowled full quota of 10 overs in ODI series and our top 3 were hardly able to plunder more than 50 runs from him.He bowls on stumps and gets some turn,On these turners,he can be difficult to hit.

[rkt.india]

The problem is that Aussie batting lineup is so far ahead of the rest on flat pitches, it's pointless to get into a ba-off with them. They bat all the way down till 10 and even if you get 3-4 wkts, they still have plenty of batting depth available. IMO we need to have wkts to suit our strength - spin - as that's what's called home advantage and I see nothing wrong in exploiting the advantage. After all in the WC2015 SF how come we got such a flat patta at Sydney when it's supposed to be the most spin friendly track in Australia? Fact is every team prepares pitches which suit them and this is what NZ and Aus did the last WC. All I'm saying is we do the same.

Sydney is not a spin friendly pitch for a long time now. Since 2009, it mostly is a pace friendly pitch or a flat pitch if they remove the grass.

[rkt.india]

One doesn't need to be a rocket scientist to infer the Indian plan is to play on turners and hence the three turners so far in the first three games. I'm hoping the plan doesn't change moving forward.
I recall India getting the better of Aus in WC 2011 QF batting 2nd (was that at Nagpur?) where the pitch was definitely spin friendly and Ashwin opened the bowling. In the end we ended up winning while chasing since Aus didn't have spinners to exploit the conditions. It's the same here. India has a better chance of beating this Aussie team on a turner than a true/flattish pitch where any one of Finch, Maxwell, Warner, Smith, Watson, Faulkner etc. can win the game on their own. We simply don't have the same batting power to compete with them, hence a turner.

that was in Ahmedabad. Amedabad pitch was slow but not really a turner. Ponting scored a 100 which tells you that it was not a big turner. Aus posted a decent total too 260.

[rkt.india]

Problem is we don't have "horses" to match Aussies on a flat track. Yuvraj is a has-been, Jadeja is not a batsman, our openers aren't going to match likes of Warner and we have a longish tail. The only way we get odds in our favor is if we play Aussies on a pitch supporting spin.

We thrashed this same Aus bowling in Australia recently beating them 3-0.

[Ultimate_Game]

We thrashed this same Aus bowling in Australia recently beating them 3-0.

Yes but our top 3 were at the top of their game. Yuvraj was struggling there as well as the last T20 showed. Plus Aus had a lot of hacks from Big Bash to replace the regular members who had left for the NZ tour. The Big Bash replacements struggled for Aus and wasted the starts provided by their top order. Doubt this Aussie lineup would do so.

[asterix]

I fail to understand the need for UV to be in the team... There are so many young talents out there who are missing out... Why ICC events are used to give farewell to players?

Yes UV has contributed to Indian cricket bet there's no justification of this uninterested player being in the T20 team...

[express bowling]

Our best chance is on a flat track, which is typical for T20s all over the world.

• On slow turners, anyone who bats second faces a huge disadvantage as the pitch usually becomes more difficult to bat on. I would like it to be a fair contest and not a gamble based on the pitch.
• As we are playing 2 pacers and 2 spinners irrespective of the pitch...a neutral track would suit us most.
• Our strength in LOIs is chasing these days and flat tracks are most suited for that.

[sandeep]

Thread derailed into "pitch, pitch, kitch, kitch".  

Australia look better because they stopped the stupidity of dropping Finch for uncooked Mitchell Marsh, who's not good enough with the bat yet.  That extra batsman makes them a lot stronger and its not like Mitch is Mcgrath, so it doesn't weaken the bowling that much either.  Zampa is a handy spinner, so overall they are looking better than they did at the start of the tournament.  And their weakest T20 bat played well against Pak, so its all looking better now.  

To stick with the obsession on this thread, a pitch offering decent turn should rein in their over-aggressive bats, and it should be a good game.  Better team will win

[rkt.india]

Yes but our top 3 were at the top of their game. Yuvraj was struggling there as well as the last T20 showed. Plus Aus had a lot of hacks from Big Bash to replace the regular members who had left for the NZ tour. The Big Bash replacements struggled for Aus and wasted the starts provided by their top order. Doubt this Aussie lineup would do so.

You need to some perspective of the context. Our top 3 isnt out of form. They have just not got such good batting pitches after that. We are saying they are out of form because they aren't scoring a lot of runs, but no other team has on those same pitches. NZ too scored 145 today on a turning track.

Sent from my MX5 using Tapatalk

[adi B]

One doesn't need to be a rocket scientist to infer the Indian plan is to play on turners and hence the three turners so far in the first three games. I'm hoping the plan doesn't change moving forward.
I recall India getting the better of Aus in WC 2011 QF batting 2nd (was that at Nagpur?) where the pitch was definitely spin friendly and Ashwin opened the bowling. In the end we ended up winning while chasing since Aus didn't have spinners to exploit the conditions. It's the same here. India has a better chance of beating this Aussie team on a turner than a true/flattish pitch where any one of Finch, Maxwell, Warner, Smith, Watson, Faulkner etc. can win the game on their own. We simply don't have the same batting power to compete with them, hence a turner.

we smashed them 3-0 in their backyard amd all of them were flat pitches so dont know why you are saying we cant compete with them in terms of batting.their bowling is absolutely pathetic on flat pitches , Pakistan scored 172 and even Bangladesh scored 156 against them.I would fancy a flat pitch with little turn and grip and our spinners are good enough to choke them in the middle overs our batsmen will easily smash their harmless bowlers,though that said I won't mind a Turner against aus

[adi B]

Yes but our top 3 were at the top of their game. Yuvraj was struggling there as well as the last T20 showed. Plus Aus had a lot of hacks from Big Bash to replace the regular members who had left for the NZ tour. The Big Bash replacements struggled for Aus and wasted the starts provided by their top order. Doubt this Aussie lineup would do so.

what? The aussie bowling is same in the wt20 as in that series with the inclusion of Hazelwood who's an average t20 bowler.their batting was the same ,only khawaja was missing in that series ,warner played the first t20 and they had shaun and finch in the form of their life in that series.don't know which hacks you are talking about?