India v South Africa, Second Test, Calcutta

[Maranello]

Surprising that no one has yet opened a thread on this interesting match on either the SA or Indian forums.

Maybe its a case of once bitten, twice shy - the first Test received some interest but was a boring snore-a-thon.

This one might be no different, only 227 runs were scored by SA on the first day, for the loss of five wickets.

Highlights of the day:

- All five wickets taken by Indian seamers (Pathan: 3 for 61, Khan: 2 for 46). Harbhajan yet again ineffective when the pitch did not aid him, and Kumble toiled away for no reward.

- Kallis scored a brilliant century - his 17th overall, and first in the sub-continent. He is 103 n.o. at stumps.

- Smith played despite the injury scare yesterday (his taxi had run over his foot) - he was caught behind on the second ball of the innings for a duck.

Some articles:

- Smith quotes here

- Kallis - from receiver to giver (cricinfo)

[Mike]

I'd like to know whether slow wickets produce as many results as good wickets. In any case, it seems slow wickets disadvantage the better side. If India produced good wickets at every venue I wonder if their home dominance would come to an end?

[Maranello]

By good wickets, do you mean good batting tracks (eg the one for the first Test of the India-SA series) or good overall cricketing wickets?

I would say slow wickets, especially those that crumble after a couple of days produce results quite regularly since batting is difficult. The Bombay pitch, most recently used for Ind v Aus, 4th Test, is a classic example. Another example was during the historic India-Pakistan series of 1987. The first four tests were played on good batting tracks and were boring draws. The fifth Test in Bangalore was on a slow turner, and Pakistan won with plenty of time to spare.

India would not be dominant at home if their pitches were not spinner friendly. Having said that, Pakistan have historically been much more dominant than India or any other cricketing nation, and did rely earlier on , on ultra-slow pitches helping the spinners and the reverse swing fast bowlers.

[Mike]

As a spectator I like to see a good contest between batsmen and seamers early in the match followed by a good contest between batsmen and spinners later in the match. I like to see batsmen get out playing a positive shot. I expect more defensive play from the tailenders as they doggedly try to extend the innings but I want to see attractive shot-making from the stroke-players. Serving up three spinners on a dustbowl extends the tail from number 3 onwards!

[Maranello]

Precisely my thoughts Mike - this is why pitches such as the one in Bombay (Ind v Aus, 4th Test) and the one at Kanpur (Ind v RSA, 1st Test), in entirely different ways, make for boring or negative cricket.

One is a spinners' paradise where batsmen cannot play their shots and even quality bats end up looking like Courtney Walsh. The other is the exact opposite - a dead pitch offering no assistance to any seam bowler or spinner, where make-shift openers such as Hall can grind out big hundreds and the match ends in a predictable draw.

[Mike]

I can't blame SA for such a poor run-rate. You have to be more watchful against the spinners and have to work the ball harder to get runs. It's very energy sapping stuff. SA will do well to save this match.

[vvvrulz]

Its good to see Pathan back in action, and picking up wickets. India tend to rely too much on their spin attack, and simply fold if the likes of Harbhajan and Kumble don't peform, its good to see the seamers taking some initiative.

[Zainub]

I'm afriad that India's ultra cautious approach via preparing pitches which have potentially ensured they will probably not lose this test series on the back of that loss to Australia has declined my personal interest considerably in this series. Albiet it was good to hear about Zeheer Khan and Irfan Pathan amongst the wickets and bowling with such venum, wondering though how many times we see all the wickets in day of test cricket in India falling to seamers. Well played to Kallis as well.

[Maranello]

I agree about India's ultra cautious approach. This pitch is a throw back to the Indian and some Pakistani pitches of the 1970s and 1980s. Team 1 scores 500 for 8 dec... Team 2 gets 600 for 9 dec... Team 1 has 10 overs left to bat... Match draw.

However, in this case, even a draw will be an interesting result, since it will be as good as winning for SA. As long as they avoid defeat, I think they would have done very well, and India would have missed yet another opportunity.

[Maranello]

Originally Posted by Mike

I can't blame SA for such a poor run-rate.

Mike, it seems the South African batsmen are at least as much to blame for their slow run-rates as the pitch, if not more. They are approaching batting with a very negative mindset; some quotes from Dileep Premachandran on cricinfo:

This South African team appears to think that words like acceleration and impetus are best left to car manufacturers and dictionaries, and the 78 runs they eked out in 38 overs were disturbingly reminiscent of the late 1950s when teams almost killed off Test cricket with disgracefully negative tactics.

Occupation of the crease is a fine mantra to have, provided you make that occupation count with runs. The greatest rearguard actions in modern-day cricket – Ian Botham at Headingley in 1981, VVS Laxman and Rahul Dravid at this very ground three years ago – weren't engineered by unimaginative cowardly play, they were inspired by men who backed themselves to surmount incredible odds. All that South Africa did this morning was provide India with further evidence that they don't have the heart to make a concerted push for victory, not even with the advantage of the toss behind them.

The saddest aspect of it was the fact that Jacques Kallis and Shaun Pollock, two men who have been around long enough to know better, set such a poor example.

Full article here.