Toss Innovations

[Richard]

That doesn't make sense to me - surely if your bowling attack is better than your batting line-up then it will be able to stand up to more pressure and thus you want your batsmen to bat under less pressure?

Anyway, I'd bat first in that situation.

You want your batsmen to bat under less pressure, indeed.
So you want them to bat after your attack has already restricted the oppo.
Instead of fearing failure, they then know that if they do fail they're only doing what the oppo have already done.

 

[Tom Halsey]

You want your batsmen to bat under less pressure, indeed.
So you want them to bat after your attack has already restricted the oppo.
Instead of fearing failure, they then know that if they do fail they're only doing what the oppo have already done.

The pressure will be at the end of the game (if it is remotely close). Unless they're an absolutely God-awful batting line-up (which, Bangladesh aside, no International side is), they shouldn't fear failure.

 

[Richard]

Ask Nasser Hussain about fear of failure.
It's more prevolant than you might think.
In any case - isn't it easier to bat, invariably, if your bowlers have already done the job?

 

[Tom Halsey]

In any case - isn't it easier to bat, invariably, if your bowlers have already done the job?

IMO, no.

First of all, your bowlers may fail.

Second, the batsmen will know that if they screw up, the bowlers can't get them out of the mess. If they bat first, there's always the chance their bowlers can get them out of it if they're good enough.

 

[Richard]

Why can't the bowlers get you out of a mess? If you get bowled-out for 120, the bowlers could bowl the opposition out for 100.
IMO saying "your bowlers may fail" is going in with a negative mindset and failing to back your strengths.

 

[Tom Halsey]

Why can't the bowlers get you out of a mess? If you get bowled-out for 120, the bowlers could bowl the opposition out for 100.

That is my exact point - I'd always bat first.

Your bowlers can't get your batters out of a mess if you bat second.

 

[Jamee999]

Why?

300 - 150- 120 - 271

 

[Richard]

Took ' words outta my mouth.

 

[Tom Halsey]

My point is that if you bowl the oppo out for 150, and then you slip to 100/8, the bowlers then can't get you out of the mess - their work is done. That's why I'd always bat first, even if my bowling attack is stronger.

 

[Richard]

We are talking about the two-innings game, are we not?
If you were on about the one-day game, I apologise, but the two-innings game was what I was on about.
In the one-day game I'd bat second unless the pitch will undoubtedly get slower, as you're always a better bet knowing what you need.

 

[Tom Halsey]

If you were on about the one-day game, I apologise, but the two-innings game was what I was on about.

Yes, I was, my mistake, I didn't mention that.

In Test matches, I'd still want runs on the board however, even if the pitch wasn't going to get significantly worse.