India v South Africa, 3rd test, Kanpur, 11-15 April

I was only joking when I said the curator in Kanpur had been ordered to stop watering the pitch after the Indian first innings in the 2nd Test, but it seems I was actually right:


South Africa arrived in Kanpur expecting a desperate Indian administration to do everything in their power to win the third and final test match in order to square the series - but their first sight of the match pitch at Green Park on Wednesday did not live up to their expectations.

It was much worse than even they were expecting.

The entire square resembles the bottom of a dried out watering hole in the Kruger National Park. Large cracks have spread across the square and started to curl upwards leaving the impression that it last saw water weeks ago.

The match strip itself has already started to crumble giving it the look of a fifth day surface - almost 36 hours before the match even starts.

"We are calm about it because we have been talking about this possibility for a long time," said Proteas coach Mickey Arthur, "and it's the same for both sides. We are all going to have to bat on it."

The general consensus among both sides was that the game would struggle to last much beyond the third day and that, while South Africa's batsmen would have their work cut out against three spinners, India's top order would have the unpleasant prospect of facing a pace-trio capable of causing serious problems, not to mention injury, on a surface just as likely to 'kick' as keep low.

"It's certainly a result wicket, I don't think anyone could argue against that," commented India coach Gary Kirsten with a wry smile. "You have to be prepared to lose in order to win."

Opposite number Arthur concurred but chose a different way to express his thoughts: "It's a shocker, to be honest," he smiled. "It's gamble for India. They don't mind losing 2-0 if it gives them the chance of winning and squaring the series. The one thing they didn't want is a 'flat' wicket and the possibility of a draw, and that certainly isn't the case here. But we're 'up' for it," Arthur said.

TWO SPINNERS

South Africa may even employ two spinners when the deciding test match starts on Friday, with fast bowler Morne Morkel likely to stand down for left-arm spinner Robbie Peterson.

"We have the option of playing two spinners," Proteas' coach Arthur said.

"We'll watch the conditions a little longer and make the decision closer to the start of the match.

"Robbie did well when he replaced Paul Harris in Bangladesh and we won't hesitate to include him if we feel two spinners will hold the key on this wicket."

The toss will have a major influence on the match. The captain who has the right to choose will certainly bat first in an effort to get as many runs on the board as possible while the pitch is still in a reasonable condition.

To score runs on the last two days will certainly be hard.

A lot of people will have their heart in their throat when that coins goes up," Arthur said.

"Sometimes it's rather sad that the toss can be so crucial. That is why it can be a gamble for the home side to prepare a wicket of this nature."

India is a disgrace

LOL

S'funny how they whinged about the pitches in New Zealand but they don't mind preparing a pitch so blatantly in favour of their team. Double standards? Yeah, they're getting like Australia.

A rank turner will be more in favour of SA than us. But it's the BCCI and in their infinite stupidity they're capable of anything.

Or it could be a normal pitch, and Arthur's getting in his excuses early, just in case.

There's a picture of Graeme Smith 'inspecting' the pitch on cricinfo. It's not the best picture of the surface, but you can clearly see cracks in it already.

How will a rank turner benefit us more than India?

The difference in class between the Indian spinners and the Saffie ones will be almost non-existent then.

doremi wrote:The difference in class between the Indian spinners and the Saffie ones will be almost non-existent then.

maybe it's to try and make the Indian seamers look good.

bliksem wrote:KANPUR (REUTERS) - A strange 24 hour infestation of locusts, combined with a sweltering heatwave that is expected to subside 10 minutes before the toss is what the Kanpur curator has offered as an explanation for the grassless dustbowl on offer for the 3rd Test against South Africa.

Standing in front of 24 industrial strength sunlamps while his ground staff returned pitchforks and hairdryers to the storage room, he explained that the situation was completely out of his control. "Locusts came and ate all the grass on the pitch and then the sun just baked it silly," he said. "All we could do was stand by helplessly and cheer, er, I mean, watch."

Oh God, it's an outbreak of the dreaded Fuserium!!!

tac wrote:

Batman wrote:The bloody Indian team managemnet never learns this simple point. They should NOT play tests with 5 bowlers ever. Not even the ebst bowling sides play 5 bowlers. The last 2 years this experiment has only brought doom to India and we have never won test with a batsman short. We have either drawn or lost.

Makes no sense . . . at all. Why would the best bowling sides want or need to play 5 bowlers?

I would love to see the stats on the results for teams that have taken 5 specialist bowlers into a Test match. I simply cannot remember too many occasions where this ploy has been used and proved successful, i.e. the team won and the 5 bowlers all contributed somewhat equally.

skully wrote:

tac wrote:

Batman wrote:The bloody Indian team managemnet never learns this simple point. They should NOT play tests with 5 bowlers ever. Not even the ebst bowling sides play 5 bowlers. The last 2 years this experiment has only brought doom to India and we have never won test with a batsman short. We have either drawn or lost.

Makes no sense . . . at all. Why would the best bowling sides want or need to play 5 bowlers?

I would love to see the stats on the results for teams that have taken 5 specialist bowlers into a Test match. I simply cannot remember too many occasions where this ploy has been used and proved successful, i.e. the team won and the 5 bowlers all contributed somewhat equally.

Indeed.

Surely the proviso of a 5-manner is that it allows one bowler not to perform? i.e. Hoggy,GBH,Fred,SiJo and Giles = Giles not performing.

You'd think on a track that gave so much assistance to bowlers, they couldn't help but perform. Even Michael Clarke took 6 wickets on an underprepared pitch.

Brass Monkey wrote:Surely the proviso of a 5-manner is that it allows one bowler not to perform? i.e. Hoggy,GBH,Fred,SiJo and Giles = Giles not performing.

But to cover your arse for fear of a bowler not performing leaves you a bit short in your batting.

tac wrote:

Brass Monkey wrote:Surely the proviso of a 5-manner is that it allows one bowler not to perform? i.e. Hoggy,GBH,Fred,SiJo and Giles = Giles not performing.

But to cover your arse for fear of a bowler not performing leaves you a bit short in your batting.

Gilo was a gun with the willow but.

England will play 5 when Rashid gets called up.

Fred
Rashid
Ambrose
Broad/Tremlett
Sidebottom
Hoggard/Panesar

skully wrote:

tac wrote:

Brass Monkey wrote:Surely the proviso of a 5-manner is that it allows one bowler not to perform? i.e. Hoggy,GBH,Fred,SiJo and Giles = Giles not performing.

But to cover your arse for fear of a bowler not performing leaves you a bit short in your batting.

Gilo was a gun with the willow but.

But we were talking about 5 frontline bowlers, skull, weren't we? England have never played 5 frontliners have they?

tac wrote:

Brass Monkey wrote:Surely the proviso of a 5-manner is that it allows one bowler not to perform? i.e. Hoggy,GBH,Fred,SiJo and Giles = Giles not performing.

But to cover your arse for fear of a bowler not performing leaves you a bit short in your batting.

When Fred could actually hold the bat, it didn't do too bad and with a gash spinner who's alright when the ball bounces, it covers all bases. To our selectors, they couldn't fathom which pacer wasn't going to perform - less so Flints, but the rest were mildly mercurial, then it did give us good bowling most days.

Lara Lara Laughs wrote:England will play 5 when Rashid gets called up.

Fred
Rashid
Ambrose
Broad/Tremlett
Sidebottom
Hoggard/Panesar

While that is 5 frontliners, LLL, they would only play 5 to cover for Fred. If Fred didn't havesuch a terrible history of injuries they wouldn't play 5, eh?

They probably would play 5 even if Fred wasn't injury prone. Why? Because Rashid has the potential to be a class batsman.

Fred, Rashid, Ambrose, Broad is a seriously strong tail. Sidebottom averages about 19 too!

Lara Lara Laughs wrote:They probably would play 5 even if Fred wasn't injury prone. Why? Because Rashid has the potential to be a class batsman.

Fred, Rashid, Ambrose, Broad is a seriosly strong tail. Sidebottom averages about 19 too!

If Fred + Rashid offer more than a top order batsman, then it's a decent option. But it seems overkill when you have a couple of dibbly dobbblers in the top order what can cover a few overs.

as long as its a result pitch

Ash wrote:as long as its a result pitch

Wasn't the 2nd test a result pitch?

taipan wrote:

Ash wrote:as long as its a result pitch

Wasn't the 2nd test a result pitch?

that is a rather unkind remark...our fellow Indian forummers have only recently returned to the forum