'No toss' option rule at Test level..

[Xuhaib]

all it will do is home team will just start preparing roads also one of the reasons the Aus of the 00's and Windies of the 80's are considered so special is because they dominated both home and away. Winning an away series is a special feat and this rule would diminish the value of an away win.

 

[Xuhaib]

a more logical solution is teams arriving earlier and playing competitive warm up games on pitches that they will encounter in the test matches

 

[TheJediBrah]

a more logical solution is teams arriving earlier and playing competitive warm up games on pitches that they will encounter in the test matches

You'd think it would be obvious but go figure. The Sri Lankan board complained the other month because Australia's single warm up match was on spin friendly conditions and they wanted Australia to get as little valuable practice in as possible. Obviously it's not like that everywhere, but it shows that giving the touring side the best practice isn't always the host nation's no. 1 priority.

Add on top of this most touring boards and players being unwilling to spend any more time in certain countries than they absolutely have to and the most obvious course of action is for all intents and purposed impractical.

edit: and, no, I'm not using that as an excuse for Australia being **** in Sri Lanka, before an inevitable mouth-breather comes in to say that as if it somehow invalidates the obvious facts

 

[Xuhaib]

this is a piece from Asad Shafiq interview to Pakpassion.

PakPassion.net : What were your expectations and aims going into the Test series against England?

Asad Shafiq : I had a good idea of what to expect from England given that we had played against them twice in UAE not so long ago. We knew what our capabilities were and the aim was to utilise those capabilities in England and play with confidence. What was really beneficial was the army camp in Pakistan and then the fact that we arrived in England a few weeks ahead of the Test series. These two things when combined meant that mentally and physically we were ready for the challenge of facing England. The training in England before the Test series was a major boost to the confidence of all the squad and it helped paint a clear picture of what to expect and also helped us get used to playing with the Dukes cricket ball and adjusting to how that ball would behave in English conditions.

See there is no rocket science to performing well away from home arriving early and adjusting yourself to the conditions is the key ofcourse it may not work every time but if you do often you will succeed more often.

 

[TheJediBrah]

A lot of teams should follow Pakistan's example. Problem is they can't be assed. There's no way the Australian's would be willing to spend an extra 2 weeks in Sri Lanka or India if they didn't have to. Lazy ****s

 

[Xuhaib]

unfortunately the timing of the Windies series means we will be arriving cold in NZL

 

[Top_Cat]

Good teams make the toss irrelevant. #chapellibitch

 

[cnerd123]

The problem with home advantage isn't the toss. If you need to win the toss to win the game; then you don't really have home advantage.

Like Howe said, the reason the toss was removed from County Cricket was to prevent the weaker sides from putting out green seamers and banking on winning the toss to score some easy points. Ranji cricket has a similar issue at the moment. By removing the toss, the sides could no longer play this strategy, the pitches then trended to more 'normal' pitches, and lo and behold, spin was relevant again.

Removing the toss at International level wouldn't change much, because no Test team relies on winning the toss to win games. They all rely on having conditions that suit them the best, and that exploit the weaknesses of their opposition.

 

[cnerd123]

^having said that, I'm all for removing the toss in principle because I dont want anymore whinging about if everytime a side loses a Test. But practically speaking, its just going to lead to ridiculously flat pitches and dull cricket, and no one wants that.

 

[TheJediBrah]

The problem with home advantage isn't the toss. If you need to win the toss to win the game; then you don't really have home advantage.

Like Howe said, the reason the toss was removed from County Cricket was to prevent the weaker sides from putting out green seamers and banking on winning the toss to score some easy points. Ranji cricket has a similar issue at the moment. By removing the toss, the sides could no longer play this strategy, the pitches then trended to more 'normal' pitches, and lo and behold, spin was relevant again.

Removing the toss at International level wouldn't change much, because no Test team relies on winning the toss to win games. They all rely on having conditions that suit them the best, and that exploit the weaknesses of their opposition.

I feel like you're both right and wrong. The toss shouldn't be a decisive factor, and if touring teams keep losing it's obviously not solely because of the toss, they have other issues.

But there can be little doubt that automatically awarding the toss to touring sides would help them to some extent.

^having said that, I'm all for removing the toss in principle because I dont want anymore whinging about if everytime a side loses a Test. But practically speaking, its just going to lead to ridiculously flat pitches and dull cricket, and no one wants that.

I don't think this is as definite as it's being made out to be

 

[Top_Cat]

Whinging about the toss is as much part of cricket as whinging about the ball, whinging about LBWs, whinging about the length of the outfield grass on the second saturday and general whinging.

 

[theegyptian]

A lot of teams should follow Pakistan's example. Problem is they can't be assed. There's no way the Australian's would be willing to spend an extra 2 weeks in Sri Lanka or India if they didn't have to. Lazy ****s

Don't think it's an issue of being lazy. More schedule.

Aus, Eng, and India all play considerably more cricket than Pakistan. Plus their players play IPL whereas Pakistan don't.

 

[cnerd123]

But there can be little doubt that automatically awarding the toss to touring sides would help them to some extent.

Not really. I can't think of any time in recent history where the visiting side would have benefited from having no toss, unless by 'benefit' you mean reducing the margin of defeat. Because that's how sides like India, Australia and South Africa utilise home conditions so well. If they win the toss, they win the match, and if they lose the toss, they draw. They have built themselves to be near-unbeatable in home conditions - you essentially have to beat them at their own game.

If the visiting side got to pick what they do first, the results will probably go from 3-0, 4-0 thrashings to 1-0 or 2-0 results with more draws. So if that's the benefit you're talking about, then sure. But I don't see the toss changing the outcome of any series.

England are probably the exception in this, in that they often prepare pitches that suit the visiting side more than themselves. Lords does this a lot. It's probably the only country where removing the toss might change the outcome of a series, but then again I doubt it.

 

[TheJediBrah]

Not really. I can't think of any time in recent history where the visiting side would have benefited from having no toss, unless by 'benefit' you mean reducing the margin of defeat. Because that's how sides like India, Australia and South Africa utilise home conditions so well. If they win the toss, they win the match, and if they lose the toss, they draw. They have built themselves to be near-unbeatable in home conditions - you essentially have to beat them at their own game.

This is a strange thing to say. India, maybe. But I don't see how the winning toss really helps Australia or South Africa when playing at home. Pretty sure with Australia at least whether they win the toss or not rarely affects home results that much, especially recently.

The main toss-related advantages tend to be either dustbowls that break up increasingly significantly over 4-5 days where batting first is a huge advantage or green-tops that flatten out where bowling first is a huge advantage. These rarely happen in Australia or South Africa recently.

If the visiting side got to pick what they do first, the results will probably go from 3-0, 4-0 thrashings to 1-0 or 2-0 results with more draws. So if that's the benefit you're talking about, then sure. But I don't see the toss changing the outcome of any series.

Couldn't agree less with this, and besides, it shouldn't be changing the outcome of a series. That would be a bad thing.

England are probably the exception in this, in that they often prepare pitches that suit the visiting side more than themselves. Lords does this a lot. It's probably the only country where removing the toss might change the outcome of a series, but then again I doubt it.

lmao

Also disagree strongly with the second sentence. By far subcontinental conditions would be the most affected by the toss IMO.

 

[TheJediBrah]

This is a strange thing to say. India, maybe. But I don't see how the winning toss really helps Australia or South Africa when playing at home. Pretty sure with Australia at least whether they win the toss or not rarely affects home results that much, especially recently.

Out of interest I went through the last 5 years of Australia Tests.

When Aus won the toss, they've won 76%, lost 5.9%, drawn 17%
When Aus lost the toss. they've won 70%, lost 10%, drawn 20%

so as expected the toss has had little impact. If this sort of trend holds true for other countries then maybe you guys are right and this whole "give the toss to touring side" might be pointless after all.

Another fun fact, in the last 5 years of Tests in Aus, Australia have won the Toss 17/27 times (62%)

 

[TheJediBrah]

Did the same thing for Indian home tests and it's pretty much the same (though if you take out the 2013 Australia tour where Aus won the toss every single game and lost, the toss becomes significantly more influential, not that that should be a factor though).

Might look at some other countries stats in this regard, but it's looking like I'm most likely wrong about the toss being that influential.

 

[the big bambino]

I think the main countries to impacted would be SA and India and then in some series. Would SA prepare green tops v Australia and England or Pakistan if their opponents had first and best use of the conditions? Would India produce crumblers if they had to bat last against SL and Pakistani spinners?

 

[cnerd123]

I think the main countries to impacted would be SA and India and then in some series. Would SA prepare green tops v Australia and England or Pakistan if their opponents had first and best use of the conditions? Would India produce crumblers if they had to bat last against SL and Pakistani spinners?

Yes they would.

Winning the toss is a 50/50 situation. No Test team in the world hangs their success on winning the toss. Even BD don't do this.

 

[the big bambino]

You know theres no great difference btwn say Oz and SA. I reckon the thought of ceding the best bowling conditions to touring Australian team in every single home test would make them stop and think.

 

[TheJediBrah]

Toss + Result audit for each country playing at home:

Australia:

When Aus won the toss, they've won 76%, lost 5.9%, drawn 17%
When Aus lost the toss. they've won 70%, lost 10%, drawn 20%

Won 62% of Tosses

India:

When Ind won the toss, they've won 61%, lost 23%, drawn 15%
When Ind lost the toss. they've won 67%, lost 17%, drawn 17%

Won 52% of Tosses

Eng:
When Eng won the toss, they've won 57%, lost 29%, drawn 14%
When Eng lost the toss. they've won 46%, lost 23%, drawn 31%

Won 62% of Tosses

SL:
When SL won the toss, they've won 62.5%, lost 12.5%, drawn 25%
When SL lost the toss. they've won 37.5%, lost 62.5%, drawn 0%

Won 67% of Tosses

SA:
When SA won the toss, they've won 57%, lost 35%, drawn 7%
When SA lost the toss, they've won 58%, lost 17%, drawn 25%

Won 54% of Tosses

NZ:
When NZ won the toss, they've won 28%, lost 0%, drawn 71%
When NZ lost the toss, they've won 50%, lost 29%, drawn 21%

Won 33% of Tosses


- I guess England not much different either, but possibly significant. Slightly more draws but
those were pretty much all rain-affected.

- Sri Lanka looks to be the only one so far where the toss seems to have had an influence in the last 5 years --> those are pretty massive differences.

Also interesting that the home side has won the majority of tosses every time so far