• Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

Modern-day batsmen and flat pitches

Xuhaib

International Coach
Yeah I rate that Inzi inning very highly because Mohd Rafiq was bowling as well as a left arm spinner can ever bowl. Infact I have never seen Vettori bowl that well as Rafiq did in that game. That does not mean Rafiq> Vettori its just that for that particular test match Rafiq was world class so runs against him in that game trully hold some value.
 

popepouri

State Vice-Captain
Interestingly Sehwag debuted in SA and scored a hundred. Can't remember if the pitch was flat though.

Edit: Oh wait, Gibbs scored a hundred in that game too so yes it was flat.
 
Last edited:

aussie

Hall of Fame Member
Interestingly Sehwag debuted in SA and scored a hundred. Can't remember if the pitch was flat though.

Edit: Oh wait, Gibbs scored a hundred in that game too so yes it was flat.
HA, dont let the Indian fans on this site hear you say that pitch was flat sir, they are going to cry out..
 

Sanz

Hall of Fame Member
HA, dont let the Indian fans on this site hear you say that pitch was flat sir, they are going to cry out..
This is getting ridiculous. Continous baiting of Indian members on the forum on Sehwag isue.

India were 4/68, It was Sehwag's debut match and the guy went onto score a 100.

Tendulkar at the end of the day :- "It wasn't a flat track, that's for sure"

But let me guess, we have to just disregard the 20 years worth of Cricketing excellence and experience and depend on your ability to read scorecards, isn't it ?
 

aussie

Hall of Fame Member
This is getting ridiculous. Continous baiting of Indian members on the forum on Sehwag isue.

India were 4/68, It was Sehwag's debut match and the guy went onto score a 100.

Tendulkar at the end of the day :- "It wasn't a flat track, that's for sure"

But let me guess, we have to just disregard the 20 years worth of Cricketing excellence and experience and depend on your ability to read scorecards, isn't it ?
:laugh:. I got a fish...

Well no you dont have to believe me, i saw the game BTW (specifically the highlights of the Sehwag/Tendy partnership) so its was never arguing just on reading the test scorecard.

It is funny that a actual South African poster called the pitch flat, when i was bashed for saying so. Thus no-one can say i have a biased agenda towards Viru, so you can go argue with the South African now..
 

Furball

Evil Scotsman
:laugh:. I got a fish...

Well no you dont have to believe me, i saw the game BTW (specifically the highlights of the Sehwag/Tendy partnership) so its was never arguing just on reading the test scorecard.

It is funny that a actual South African poster called the pitch flat, when i was bashed for saying so. Thus no-one can say i have a biased agenda towards Viru, so you can go argue with the South African now..
I'll take Tendulkar's word over yours thanks.
 

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
Interestingly Sehwag debuted in SA and scored a hundred. Can't remember if the pitch was flat though.

Edit: Oh wait, Gibbs scored a hundred in that game too so yes it was flat.
I remember that Test well and the deck offered a decent bit in the opening session-and-a-bit, hence Pollock (who was by then only capable of bowling really well on seaming decks no longer flat ones) and co. reduced India to 60-odd for 4. Tendulkar played superbly for 20 overs or so to coast that out, Sehwag played really well for about 5-6 overs to do likewise. They then both made spectacular hay when the deck flattened-out, which it did and remained thus for the rest of the game.

That's why I think Sehwag's best would've come as a middle-order batsman if decks were green more often over his career.
 

Manee

Cricketer Of The Year
That's why I think Sehwag's best would've come as a middle-order batsman if decks were green more often over his career.
Perhaps, but it is a double-edged sword. Sehwag's potential has been maximised as an opener, in this generation, because he is able to dispatch the new ball which comes on and flies off the bat quicker than the old ball, does.
 

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
Of course it has. I still think he'd have been damn successful as a middle-order batsman in the time he's played but in said time he's met the needs of the day well.

I don't think he'd meet the needs of the more "standard" day well at all though.
 

Uppercut

Request Your Custom Title Now!
Not sure about that, considering the amount of openers that we got through in the late 1990s and early 2000s.
Most of them were poor cricketers though. At times it's quite visibly easier to bat against a new ball in India than an old ball. After the 20th over there are either spinners or fast bowlers bowling reverse swing, both of whom are more effective than quicks bowling with a new ball that isn't doing anything.

Although usually in India, batting is straightforward whatever stage the match is at.
 

Sir Alex

Banned
Most of them were poor cricketers though. At times it's quite visibly easier to bat against a new ball in India than an old ball. After the 20th over there are either spinners or fast bowlers bowling reverse swing, both of whom are more effective than quicks bowling with a new ball that isn't doing anything.

Although usually in India, batting is straightforward whatever stage the match is at.
The lack of good Indian openers (apart from Gavaskar) as compared to good middle order players, which has been a trend in our cricketing history, till the 2000s, is good proof of the fact hat opening has not been actually that easy a job in India.

I am not sure what you meant by "batting is straightforward" in India either. The necessary adjustments need to be made like to adjust for the variable bounce, to crouch more and play deliveries around shin height, to play spin off the backfoot wherever possible so as to earn maximum time to judge it etc.
 

aussie

Hall of Fame Member
I remember that Test well and the deck offered a decent bit in the opening session-and-a-bit, hence Pollock (who was by then only capable of bowling really well on seaming decks no longer flat ones) and co. reduced India to 60-odd for 4. Tendulkar played superbly for 20 overs or so to coast that out, Sehwag played really well for about 5-6 overs to do likewise. They then both made spectacular hay when the deck flattened-out, which it did and remained thus for the rest of the game.

That's why I think Sehwag's best would've come as a middle-order batsman if decks were green more often over his career.
Bullet..thats my boy i know for fact uncle Richard does turk cricket on Skysports like me..:laugh:
 

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
Most of them were poor cricketers though. At times it's quite visibly easier to bat against a new ball in India than an old ball. After the 20th over there are either spinners or fast bowlers bowling reverse swing, both of whom are more effective than quicks bowling with a new ball that isn't doing anything.

Although usually in India, batting is straightforward whatever stage the match is at.
In recent years it has been (as elsewhere) but before 2001/02 batting at most Indian Test grounds was usually a trial by spin. There has always been the odd ground which typically produces the "slow ****heap" which offers nothing to any bowler and doesn't make scoring especially easy either (what I just call a "bad pitch"), but until pretty recently there were more spin-friendly decks than not.

Also no-one will convince me that most Indian openers of the 1970s, 1980s and 1990s were poor batsmen. To date there's no evidence Wasim Jaffer or Gautam Gambhir are any better than Vikram Rathour or Devang Gandhi, even though they've enjoyed far more success. Shiv Sundar Das too was an excellent technician prone to lapses in concentration and Navjot Sidhu was a fine batsman.

Good-quality new-ball bowlers have typically prospered in India, because it does swing if they use the right ball (India is one of the few places to hold-out against the use of Kookaburras, though they currently use SGs which are still inferior to Dukes and Readers).
 

Top