FB "A/T XI" Virtual Series, 3rd Test @ Bombay, 13-16 Nov 1952 (4-Day)

So off we go again. (Or possibly not.)

Another 20 years on from Test 2, and on a third continent.

Part of Pakistan's first Test series, and India's first Test series win.

The Third Test. Played at the Brabourne Stadium, Mumbai.

.............................................................

Info on conditions is hard to find, but the Wisden summary from the end of that year contains some hints of the conditions and how they might best be negotiated, so here is that report in full [with a few clarifications in brackets]:

At Bombay, November 13, 14, 15, 16. India won by ten wickets.

[Pakistan captain] Kardar won the toss for the first time in the series, and faced the unenviable task of deciding whether to bat on a pitch affected by sun following the early morning dew.

He chose [to bat] - and Pakistan made a bad start from which they never recovered. Waqar Hassan [with innings of 81 and 65] showed stubborn resistance, and on his second attempt, Hanif Mohammed [96] demonstrated during six hours at the wicket that he possessed the temperament for the big occasion, but these two apart, there was again a lack of skill against the turning ball. [Slow left-armer] Mankad and [right-arm medium pacer] Amarnath sent back the first six men for 60, and only the determination of Waqar Hassan prevented a complete rout.

Hazare proved invaluable to India when they batted on turf still far from easy. His steady and correct methods helped to demoralise the attack and, with the danger period over, he [built up a commanding position of 387-4 dec.with] Umrigar, who was less orthdox but equally effective, [hitting] one 6 and fifteen 4's in reaching his century in two and three-quarter hours. Hazare took half an hour longer over [his] 100 and [when Amarnath declared, was still batting on 146*,] after four and a quarter hours at the crease.

[added: After Waqar Hassan and Hanif were dismissed at 166 and 171, the Pakistan batting folded to Mankad (again) and legbreak-googly expert Gupte. The Indian openers Mankad and Apte knocked off the required 42 runs without loss.]

Questions to think about:

1. If your captain won the toss, what would he do? ( )

2. Which of the other eight batting lineups would you most / least like to face in this round?

3. Which of the other eight bowling attacks would you most / least like to face in this round?

4. Would you have any special strategies, instructions or tactics for your captain, or your captain for his men?

5. At the end of this third (Bombay) round of 36 Tests between the 9 selected XIs (making it a total of 108 Tests so far), which of the nine competing XIs would you back to win this leg of the garkingantuan FBVEATT Tournament?


(PS: Learning from experience, this time I will delay judgment on point 5 until Monkey has stuck his merrily garqin contrarian neck out.)

(Reminder of the teams:)

Baggygreen "tl;dr XI"

1. JB Hobbs 2. RB Simpson 3. WR Hammond 4. GA Gooch 5. IVA Richards 6. AR Border
7. IA Healy 8. Kapil Dev 9. WJ O'Reilly 10. MA Holding 11. WA Johnston. Sub. RT Ponting


Brass Monkey "Jazz" XI

1. VT Trumper 2.ML Hayden 3. FMM Worrell 4. GS Chappell 5. Javed Miandad 6. KP Pietersen
7. MJ Prior 8. Wasim Akram 9. RR Lindwall 10. M Muralitharan 11. AA Donald. Sub. DW Randall


Growler's "Growly XI"

1. GG Greenidge 2. MA Atherton 3. AJ Stewart (w) 4. JH Kallis 5. CH Lloyd (c) 6. AW Greig
7. TE Bailey 8. Abdul Qadir 9. DL Underwood 10. Waqar Younis 11. GD McGrath. Sub. PD Collingwood


Henry's "Mudgethon XI"

1. AN Cook 2. H Sutcliffe 3. R Dravid 4. BC Lara 5. SR Waugh (c) 6. VVS Laxman
7. Imran Khan 8. APE Knott (w) 9. RJ Hadlee 10. JC Laker 11. J Garner. Sub. AB DeVilliers


Paul Keating's "Lizard" XI

1. Hanif Mohammad 2. A Shrewsbury 3. C Hill 4. SJ McCabe 5. S Chanderpaul 6. WG Grace
7. TG Evans 8. AV Bedser 9. H Verity 10. IR Bishop 11. BS Chandrasekhar. Sub. CL Hooper


PeterCS XI

1. BA Richards 2. EJ Barlow 3. GA Headley 4. E De C Weekes 5. E Paynter 6. FS Jackson
7. PJL Dujon 8. AK Davidson 9. SK Warne 10. CEL Ambrose 11. AME Roberts. Sub. KC Bland


Skully's "Homer" XI

1. WM Lawry 2. KC Sangakkara 3. PBH May 4. DCS Compton 5. RG Pollock 6. G St A Sobers
7. IT Botham 8. A Kumble 9. DK Lillee 10. CV Grimmett 11. CA Walsh. Sub. RA Harper


Taipan XI

1. L Hutton 2. SM Gavaskar 3. GA Faulknerl 4. KF Barrington 5. DI Gower 6. AD Nourse
7. AC Gilchrist 8. DW Steyn 9. H Larwood 10. FR Spofforth 11. SF Barnes. Sub. JN Rhodes


Tricycle "Four India" XI

1. GC Smith 2. DL Amiss 3. KS Ranjitsinhji 4. C Walcott 5. VS Hazare 6. A Flower
7. KR Miller 8. R Benaud 9. FS Trueman 10. FH Tyson 11. BS Bedi. Sub. ED Solkar

Toss- bowl

Special plan- Maharaja Jam Sahib of Nawnagar Ranji would force abandonment if my team doesn't win.

In such cases, it's tempting to think it was the blunder of the Pakistan captain to bat first that decided the match. But it could also be that the batsmen simply did not apply themselves adequately, with enough skill and/or temperament - or as the summary seems to imply, that they threw it away in the frist innings by going too hard at the bowling in still fresh conditions.

Similarly, Mankad's great success. Was it that the pitch developed quickly into a haven for F&G merchants, particularly SLA? Or was Mankad simply the most talented bowler on show - action irrelevant? Or did he bowl out of his skin on this occasion, even with good fortune?

I don't think you can entirely decide these, without a lot more evidence.


But it does seem that Pakistan caught themselves out on a drying pitch at first (the medium pacer and the SLA both finding a response).

And that patient accumulation - with no rushes of blood - may have been the best way to negotiate the bowling thereafter, especially the twirlers.

And that as the match progressed, the conditions increasingly leg spin as well. - Or was that just the particular leg spinner?


Warne, for example, was generally unsuccessful in India at first. But by his third tour there, his average was down to 30 runs per wicket. Is this a question of the Indian batting deteriorating during those years (hardly seems so), or a more likely suggestion that he developed more guile and variations later in his career. Amended his approach to the conditions.

As against "attacking the pitch" as had used to - that typical all-out aggressive style had brought him great (and most importantly, match-turning and match-winning) success, from Oz to SAf to England and probably elsewhere - but not on the often more benign pitches of India, which generally favoured a craftier approach. (One would think.)

Warne was recovering from serious injuries (shoulder) on a couple of tours. he did better later. India was still his worst Test venue as he faced the most spin-adept opponents there.

The shoulder would certainly help to explain it.

I would expect Danny also had a point, that most wickets in India would offer him little zip - which assists most in-your-face leggies. He would have to rely more on his array of variations.

Speaking of the other teams:

Trike's would be hard to beat, with all the local knowledge of 3+1 top players. His openers haven't fared that well in India (limited stats base though) ... on the other hand, his middle order did pretty well or better. Bedi and Benaud would be a very tricky spin duo, after opening and sporadic assults from the Typhoon and Fiery, with Miller to add.

Trike might win this round.

taipan's top 4 would be full of stamina and endurance, and probably do well.

But Faulkner's very handy leggies and Barrington's more occasional leggies apart, his team would be very dependent on a mixture of extreme pace and tricky pace. If the other teams could weather the battering of the two ultraquicks, slowed down by the pitch as it decelerated and decelerated after the initial dew, the bowlers themselves might get hot and jaded, and the batting might prosper.

Of course, any batting facing Barnes and Spofforth (as Fry tells us, "The Demon" not because he was especially fast, but crafty) would have to read bowling well, have confident footwork, and apply itself. Some of these all-star teams probably could.

Violet might be Skully's obvious trump card. Bowling av of 25 on home pitches in Tests. Against AT greeat oppositions though, would he turn it enough, or have enough variations?

Garry (hugely!) and Beefy were big in India, and in his 7 matches there, Courtney also prospered with the new ball (bowling av 18 - sweet, if off a limited base. Batting, as usual, nowhere ). Those are three potential aces.

Screaming Bill would be able to last as long as his technique, and attempt to bore the oppositions into submission (av in India 43, not bad at all). Sanga hasn't done that famously in India - perhaps partly worn down by being the gloveman too, as woudl be the case here.

Many of the others never played in India, which might be a slight liability?

Clarrie's slow-and-high-slung "mills bomb" delivery (if you've seen it, it is delivered as if out of a trench) might do better here than Tiger's medium-pace assaults. Or might be readable ....

Skully's lot would do well if most of this happens: Beefy avoids scrapping with his teammates, Kumble hits some cracks to assist his limited turn, Walsh can strike early, Clarrie is in mysterious wizard form, and above all, if the great Sobers shines.

I'd expect they would be in the top half of the table, maybe challenging.

Clarrie in slo-mo

http://www.britishpathe.com/video/theyre-well-after-those-ashes-aka-australian-crick/

PK's Chandra and Verity might be a deadly combo. And that batting lineup has dourness to burn. Although, how many runs they might make in the disorientating situation for most of them, of playing on an unfamiliar continent against all those dusky chappies as equals, who knows? - They might have to take a lead from Hanif, who would be valuable (if completely unavailing) if he played as in the second innings of the actual historical match - or else, the start of a long slide if he threw it away as in the first.

A worrying aspect is the lizard length of that tail. Geoffrey was outstanding behind the poles, but by rights more a Number 9 than a 7. Punts would have to hope little was needed of his last five bats. And Grace down at 6?? Good grief!! He would be furious at that outrageous affront, throw the bat in a thunder of fury, be castled, and demand to be reinstated.


Trevor has two highly reliable "home" batting stars of top quality, and at least one more doughty stickler who was good in India, in Waugh. Lara wasn't at his best in the country (albeit not many Tests to judge on). Cook might hit or miss, Sutcliffe could be trusted to show well-kempt, fastidious Yorkie Tory application at least.

Imran's bowling was variable (sometimes very good) on the old enemy's grounds, but Trev would be hoping SIr Dick would come up trumps as he tended often to do there. Unless you include Lara, who very rarely bowled at all (and a FC bowling av of over 100), there's only one spinner anywhere in sight: though admittedly Laker could be a killer, especially on the wet or drying pitches that are so typical of India (ahem). He never played a Test in India, so it's hard to say. Also, apart from Hadlee in his late-career coasting mode, there's only Waugh to turn to for any medium pace. And he was reluctant to bowl.

Hence - even more than the rest of us - Hen would have to hope his quicks broke the back (neck and hips) of oppositions while the dew was wet. And then that his batsmen could rack up sufficient piles of runs fast enough to give those quicks the chance to claim 20 enemy wickets in the four days this Test was allotted.

If I dared to have an opinion, it would differ to Peter's. So, I'd best leave it alone.

So. You're running scared of opinions now?

The world is coming to an end.

This is the end, my friend. The exit Doors.

I just don't want you to call me constipated again.

For Growler, Clive Hubert God would probably be the lynchpin, supported by Kallis and Greig. Greenidge might make a good score .But especially if batting first, could just as easily go out in a blaze of single-score infamy.

The bowling would be a bit of a problem. Pidge would have to strike, Greig would have to take wickets, - Underwood was fairly good in India but hurrying it through wasn't quite the factor it was elsewhere. And Qadir and Waqar (limited base, it's true) had bowling averages at 70 or more. Not sure who else would come to the rescue.

As for Brass .... in "saving cricket" (team motto), Hayden, Wasim, and perhaps Kev too would jazzhands it all the way to the bottom of the table. Trumper might be a brick, Worrell would do okay, Prior would probably brass it out for some sort of score (as today) .... a lot would depend on the middle Chappell. Bowling-wise, I don't know. I don't know at all. Murali would get himself sent off most likely. The Blitz from Bloemfontein would get a good few strikes if he got on early in the day, Lindwall would acquit himself manfully and take wickets. But the Jazzhandlers would be on a wing and a prayer not to undercut whatever their opponents scored - much as it pains me to say it.

I'n sure The Bags would be competitive. Lots of spinning options, a seamer who knows all about how to make seam work in India ..... probably lose in the final to Trike.


No, in this pertickler part of our tinternet tourney, with Hazare, Ranji and Bedi on board, I would hazard a groat that this third cycle would go the way of tricycle.

The clue is in the name. After all.

I said "consummated".

So I'm a clear soup now? F*ck off.

Hamlet did NOT say

"'Tis a consommé (clear soup) devoutly to be wished."

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5JgKa9hBWvU

Was he brothelised?