Jono said:
I know its not impossible but then your theory completely goes against the generalisation often used here that batting on the sub-continent is easier when facing fast bowling.
I'll tell you what, the 3rd test pitch India served up in the India vs. England test (can't remember the location for the life of me) was far more 'bowler friendly' then anything served up in Australia in 2003/04 or 04/05. Hell I reckon it was even harder to bat on then anything served up this summer in Australia as well. It favoured seam at the start, had extra bounce and began to spin later.
People have to be consistent. Either treat every test, whether it be in the sub-contientn or outside it, one by one rather than cradle it under the umbrella of "Oh its in Asia, its a slow low bouncing track, easy to bat on against pace bowlers", or if people are going to do that to criticise sub-continental players, then pay sub-continental fast bowlers more credit when they are successful on it. Otherwise its just a massive contradiction.
I don't think it's anything you can be concrete about. There are general trends, and players have to adapt to those trends. Batting against seam bowling in the subcontinent is generally easier because there is less bounce and rarely any significant seam movement, so you can get on the front foot without fear, and a lot of the precautions which batsmen normally take against the ball seaming around can be left out. But of course, playing on flat tracks outside of the subcontinent is much the same (aside from the bounce perhaps, which is where bowlers like Lee really fall down going to asia), and good fast bowlers in the subcontinent can still make life difficult, they just have to bowl in a different way. Guys like McGrath and Gillespie show that perfectly well. Therefore, the difference allows for adaptation, and bowlers like Vaas have made those adjustments and forged successful careers on the subcontinent. Vaas probably never would have found a successful test career if he was Australian, because his skill set is much better suited to slow, low pitches than Australian wickets, and likewise you'd say Brett Lee or Makhaya Ntini would have a much harder time if they were from Sri Lanka.
It's the same thing with playing outside of the subcontinent and bowling spin. There's no doubt that there is less naturally available for spin bowlers in Australia than in India or Sri Lanka, but guys like Warne have built their game around bowling on particular kinds of pitches. Warne manages to average almost the same amount when bowling in Australia as when bowling overseas, and it's only particular surfaces overseas which are helpful enough to overcome the fact that his game is built around Australian wickets. Warne will always get wickets on surfaces like Kandy '04 and Vaas will always do well on Darwin '04 type pitches, but generally they are better in their normal environments. However, other spin bowlers who are used to subcontinent wickets might come to Australia and struggle. It's really about what skills you possess as a bowler and how you develop your game over time.
Actually, given that Warne is a champion bowler and adapts pretty well that's probably not the best example, but you get what I mean.
The idea that there is more turn and less seam movement in the subcontinent and that batting is therefore easier is just based on trends, and you get wickets of both types in all countries at some time or another. And while those pitch stereotypes are generally true it doesn't set a concrete standard that certain types of players will be good and others won't. I'd say that certain batsmen who would fail if they played in England or South Africa generally manage to succeed in the subcontinent, but you also see perfectly capable batsmen who can handle swing and seam going to the subcontinent and struggling to make runs.
The very best players are those who can adapt their game to suit any surfac, and I'm sure everyone will agree on that. It doesn't really matter if we're talking about a flat wicket where the ball doesn't bounce above stump height in India or at the SCG, people just use the subcontinent pitches argument because it's easier to generalise than be specific.