Bat first, win the toss & win the match? India wins luck dependent?

[G_B_]

Are we getting carried away with the win?

 

In the Kohli era at home. Opponents SA NZ and England 

Quote

 

9 games played so far. 7 of them we won the toss and batted first winning all 7.

 

1 won toss and fielded once where we drew the match. Where we were in the lead but rain played spoil sport at Bangalore

http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/903605.html

 

1 lost toss and we draw the match v England at Rajkot.

 

 

Check the attachment for more info. So the question is will the series be decided by Kohli winning the toss and batting first?

 

Lets be frank, i think no other team has put India under pressure at home. Cant remember SA or NZ doing that.

 

It also raises a question....are Indian pitches too toss dependent?

 

 

[G_B_]

In contrast in the lead up to handing the captaincy to Virat , MSD's win were just not toss dependent. MSD never lost a match after he lost the toss. 

 

We also seem to prefer fielding first under MSD than Virat. Period is from Sept 2011 to end of 2014 when he handed it over to Virat. A lot of the same team were in the side, from Ash Sir etc etc

 

This highlights a change in thought process in Virat and MSD. Under MSD we were chasers. Under Virat we aim to set the tone.

 

 

 

 

[G_B_]

I think comparing since 2000 is unfair. That was as good as a different era.

[putrevus]

 

It is very small sample to draw any conclusions, Rajkot was only match where India lost the toss and had to contend with a draw.

Under Dhoni India drew matches against NZ both winning toss and losing the toss in 2010 if we go further one season, they lost by an innings to SA in Nagpur after losing the toss. if you remember Bhajji was disgusted with Dhoni keeping on losing tosses.Against England in 2012 India lost both matches after winning the toss and batting first.

 When playing with just five batsmen if you lose toss and opposition piles on big score you run the risk of losing the match which Kohli is prepared  we have to give him time. Last match would have been totally different had we held on to catches.

 

 

 

Edited November 21, 2016 by putrevus

[Cricketics]

Batting first after winning the toss just indigates that the captain Kohli not only wants to use the pitch when it is best for batting but that he is backing his bowlers to make life hell for the opposing batsmen in 4th innings.

 

Kohli is the captain you want to play under if you are a bowler in India.  He drops a batsman to play an extra bowler, who can assist the other four bowlers in getting 20 wickets. He doesn't care about putting 500 on board as much as he cares about giving his bowlers the best conditions to get 20 wickets.  We as Indian cricket fans are concerned so much about the little collapse we have had, meanwhile in back of his mind, he will be working out the combinations of which 5 bowlers to play at Mohali. Such is the man. And I must say, the right man to lead INDIA. 

[putrevus]

59 minutes ago, Cricketics said:

Batting first after winning the toss just indigates that the captain Kohli not only wants to use the pitch when it is best for batting but that he is backing his bowlers to make life hell for the opposing batsmen in 4th innings.

 

Kohli is the captain you want to play under if you are a bowler in India.  He drops a batsman to play an extra bowler, who can assist the other four bowlers in getting 20 wickets. He doesn't care about putting 500 on board as much as he cares about giving his bowlers the best conditions to get 20 wickets.  We as Indian cricket fans are concerned so much about the little collapse we have had, meanwhile in back of his mind, he will be working out the combinations of which 5 bowlers to play at Mohali. Such is the man. And I must say, the right man to lead INDIA. 

I really hope Kohli does not play a player like Binny again just because he is termed as an all rounder. They need to to play five best batsmen and five best bowlers with Saha and ask everyone to place a premium on their wicket when batting. This approach may not result in many innings defeats but will keep them in games longer even if they lose tosses.

Edited November 21, 2016 by putrevus

[Sooda]

I think it is far too toss dependant - even if these are not spinning like the ones vs NZ they are the wear means that batting is pretty tough . It seems like pitches are either 1) pretty flat for most of the match 2) crumble significantly from day 3 ish 3) are a minefield from day 1

 

If England had won the toss the likelihood is that it would have followed a similar pattern to Rajkot, but with lower totals as the pitch would have aided the bowlers a bit more... in fact India would have been in trouble batting last

[Brainfade]

You still must bat, bowl and field better than the other guys.  

 

Plus, if you're going to go down the OP's road of thinking, consider this: we won toss, won match. They won toss, didn't win match. We still better at this point.

 

One thing is for sure though.  This England team is not a pushover. Our guys must bring it every session.

Edited November 21, 2016 by Moth2Flame

[putrevus]

How is this different from some green wickets where winning the toss pretty much seals the matches. Recent Pakistan vs NZ match also was sealed basis on toss.

[Laaloo]

Why is that? In the first innings, England made 537. We had to bat really well and we did. We were able to draw that match in the first innings. And to be frank, we dropped catches there. England shouldnt have made more than 350 there if we had taken some of the catches. 

[putrevus]

England play a very different kind of game, they want to prey of lack of patience from other teams both in batting and bowling, it makes them a very boring team to be honest.

 

Australians for example feel draw is as good as loss so they always try to go for wins and that makes their matches very interesting. In this match England cannot cry on losing the toss, they played over 100 overs in fourth innings, if they had shown any intent on scoring rather than just blocking it would have made Kohli's life harder.

[WC2011INDIA]

24 minutes ago, putrevus said:

England play a very different kind of game, they want to prey of lack of patience from other teams both in batting and bowling, it makes them a very boring team to be honest.

 

Australians for example feel draw is as good as loss so they always try to go for wins and that makes their matches very interesting. In this match England cannot cry on losing the toss, they played over 100 overs in fourth innings, if they had shown any intent on scoring rather than just blocking it would have made Kohli's life harder.

According to Kumble, test cricket is supposed to be a boring game. 

[rkt.india]

53 minutes ago, Sooda said:

I think it is far too toss dependant - even if these are not spinning like the ones vs NZ they are the wear means that batting is pretty tough . It seems like pitches are either 1) pretty flat for most of the match 2) crumble significantly from day 3 ish 3) are a minefield from day 1

 

If England had won the toss the likelihood is that it would have followed a similar pattern to Rajkot, but with lower totals as the pitch would have aided the bowlers a bit more... in fact India would have been in trouble batting last

India would have scored more than 255 in their first innings that England scored because pitch was still very good to bat when England batted in their first innings.

[rkt.india]

37 minutes ago, putrevus said:

How is this different from some green wickets where winning the toss pretty much seals the matches. Recent Pakistan vs NZ match also was sealed basis on toss.

Same case in Aus-SA matches.

[G_B_]

47 minutes ago, putrevus said:

How is this different from some green wickets where winning the toss pretty much seals the matches. Recent Pakistan vs NZ match also was sealed basis on toss.

even thats lucky then.....nobody is saying only India does it.

[G_B_]

44 minutes ago, putrevus said:

England play a very different kind of game, they want to prey of lack of patience from other teams both in batting and bowling, it makes them a very boring team to be honest.

 

Australians for example feel draw is as good as loss so they always try to go for wins and that makes their matches very interesting. In this match England cannot cry on losing the toss, they played over 100 overs in fourth innings, if they had shown any intent on scoring rather than just blocking it would have made Kohli's life harder.

thats what sets England aside from other western terms. You hit the nail on the head. They play an attritional brand of cricket. They are not set up to the white washed. Its not just the bowling. Its the depth in batting. They have a deeper batting order than SA or Aus even if you can say the quality of the middle order is not the best atm.

 

This is why Kohli was so important for India. In both innings in this test he broke the stranglehold playing some traditional cricket shots.

 

The one thing about Anderson is that even if he is not picking up wickets he has the ability to bowl long spells and keep it tight. This allows others around him to pick up wickets. 

 

 

 

 

 

[sandeep]

2 hours ago, Cricketics said:

Batting first after winning the toss just indigates that the captain Kohli not only wants to use the pitch when it is best for batting but that he is backing his bowlers to make life hell for the opposing batsmen in 4th innings.

 

Kohli is the captain you want to play under if you are a bowler in India.  He drops a batsman to play an extra bowler, who can assist the other four bowlers in getting 20 wickets. He doesn't care about putting 500 on board as much as he cares about giving his bowlers the best conditions to get 20 wickets.  We as Indian cricket fans are concerned so much about the little collapse we have had, meanwhile in back of his mind, he will be working out the combinations of which 5 bowlers to play at Mohali. Such is the man. And I must say, the right man to lead INDIA. 

Definitely has his heart in the right place, and logic is sound - Wants to win tests and knows he needs to take 20 wickets for that - so make bowling stronger.  Doesn't get it all right all the time - choices like Binny, Karn Sharma instead of Ash @ Adelaiade, etc can be wrong, but made with right intent.  And hopefully draws the right lessons from those as well.  

 

On-field captaincy, with field placing etc is still a work in progress, but the intent is right.  Over time, hopefully the execution keeps getting better.

 

And I loved his shout-out to the fast bowlers after this test - they toiled hard and did their part well inspite of getting only a few wickets, and Cappo appreciating it publicly does count.   

[sandeep]

On the subject of the thread, let's reserve judgement till the end of the series - by this logic England should have won the Rajkot test, but didn't.

[putrevus]

even thats lucky then.....nobody is saying only India does it.

So why is this even a topic of discussion, this notion that pitches have to behave a certain way is utter nonsense as long as they are not mine fields India should always play to their strengths.

Pommies prepared a green top for us at lords and a spinning track for Pakistan neither of the teams complained, where as Cook was stressing so much on toss being a factor.

Mr. Cook and other whining pommies who want to make this about toss need to look for some other excuse.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Lannister]

We just need to be smart with the team selections. If it's a low scoring pitch, play 5 bowlers and if it's a high scoring one, play an extra batsman. As long as we follow that simple rule, we will be fine and may not lose even a single Test match. That should be our goal not letting England win anything.