and why it wont impact India as much as has been written.
I watched all of yesterday's play between England and the West Indies and saw the Windies climb back from 229/9 to 287/10 on the back of Shivnarine Chanderpaul's century.
And I watched the ball swing, in and out. And here is the thing - if you dont get it right, you are cannon fodder.
Pitch the ball short and the ball will sit up to be hit. Pitch it up a bit too much and thats a half volley waiting to be driven.
If the ball swings too much away from the batsman and you are offering him width. Too much into the batter and there is every possibility of drifting onto the pads.
And thats the last thing you want to do as a bowler when facing India's batsmen.
Now, in the swing stakes, we have Ranadeb Bose, Zaheer Khan, S. Sreesanth and R.P. Singh.
Given the performance of the English batsmen against the West Indies, I am optimistic that swing will be a non factor in deciding the series.
Monday, June 18, 2007
The swinging ball
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
12 comments:
Quite right, Homer. I also feel our bowlers, from the recent evidence, would be a handful.
So, just like SA tour, it may come down to which batting lineup is more gritty to battle it out for long enough. We are not going with many out of form batsmen, but neither are England (even Strauss has come back to some form). So...it is too close to call, IMO.
By the way, about your comment on getting the swing right...well...you're right about it. But remember...all it takes it for one bowler, with a semblance of support from other end, to get it right for just *one* good spell...and that is enough to permanently swing the match in his team's favour. And this applies against most batting lineups, barring the Aussies.
Worma,
I agree that it takes one spell to change the complexion of the game. That said, I do not believe the English bowlers have an advantage over us in that aspect.
Our bowlers are equally adept at exploiting the conditions as the Poms are.
And our catching and ground fielding is better than the Windies.
The series will be decided by the team that is more patient.
And I have a nagging feeling that this series will define Rahul Dravid as captain of Team India.
Cheers
homer
i stuck my neck out here...
i think sidebottom (!!!) will be a threat in conditions aiding swing.
we have not played consistently a left armer who inswings a bit and out top order will be tested here.
one may point out presence of RP & ZK for net practices but i still feel he will be hand full specially early on.
i would also add that given our top orders not so good record in rececnt past against left are spinners (remeber paul harris in SA to which Ravi shastri said paul harris was given rescpect like lord harris or something of this sort) our top order will have to show positive intent right from start so there will be a reasonable platform when monty will be called upont to ball.
i feel we have developed a tendecy to stagnate a bit in middle of inning recently and in this light i will specially be watching how sachin and saurav will pace thier innings coz i feel we will win or lose in this count...again stuck my neck out here!!;)
Hi,
My first ever comment on your blog.
I agree with straight point. Sidbottom will be more than handy in English conditions. We can ignore him only at our own peril.
Our bowlers have usually done well in seaming conditions. I am more worried from batting point of view.
Remember this is a only a three test series and Indians aren't good starters. Lose the first match and we are effectively out of the series.
Our bowlers need the help - because they have little else going to them - none of them are exceptionally tall or exceptionally quick, and none of them are metronomically accurate.
For India to have any chance to win, the fast bowlers have to have some help - Kumble alone will not win it for India like he does in India.
I agree that Sidebottom is really looking good over here and with Hoggard back, they are a useful pair in most conditions.
Kumble has never troubled England in Endland as much as Murali and Warne and they are evn playing them better these days.
I think it will be down to who plays well under pressure and wins the crucial sessions.
But Kumble has never played in England during a time when he was successful overseas. Kumble's revival as an away bowler was at Headingley in 2002 where he took 7 wickets after which he had a poor home series against New Zealand and then had 2 great series in Australia and Pakistan in the season after that.
Even so, i don't see him being a one man demolition squad.
"By the way, about your comment on getting the swing right...well...you're right about it. But remember...all it takes it for one bowler, with a semblance of support from other end, to get it right for just *one* good spell...and that is enough to permanently swing the match in his team's favour. And this applies against most batting lineups, barring the Aussies."
Agree with Manish completely here. Also it'll be interesting how Sachin handles an inducker from a left arm swing bowler!
Say what you want but didn't Hoggard turn the match at Mumbai, bowling below 80mph and getting swing there?
hoggard is a quality bowler while Sidebottom is the form bowler. Both can trouble the Indians!
Straight Point, Cricket Guru,Kartikeya, Chandan and Rashmika,
Thanks for your comments.
I agree that Indian batsmen struggle against the moving ball. It is equally true that Indian bowlers do better than most in conditions conducive for fast bowlers because of the discipline they bring to the game.
Yes, Indian bating will have a rough time. But will that be a sufficient leg up for the Poms?
If their bowlers can get stuck into our batters, we have the werewithal to match them in the bowling stakes.
In the series with the Windies, the bowler that has been most effective is Edwards because he had genuine pace. All the others have looked ordinary unless they get movement with the ball, so Indian bowlers will either need pace or swing the bowl to be effective.
The batsmen will cope with the moving ball. In my view issue is not whether the batsmen will cope, but whether the bowlers will perform well enough to allow them to be competitive.
Take the England - West Indies series - the West Indies bowlers were consistently poor and almost always conceded 50-100 runs per innings more than might have been considered par for the conditions. West Indies conceded
553/5, 570/7, 370 and 400 as first innings scores. If India concede that, then England will have to bowl badly for India to escape with draws - any side will because there is always just enough in the conditions to keep the bowlers interested at all time.
On the last tour, the reason India won at headingley was because the bowlers were able to build on the pressure of runs. Otherwise, in 3 of the 4 tests, India conceded 487, 617 and 515 as first innings totals.
So lets not kid ourselves - it is fashionable to complain about the batting because expectations from the big name batsmen are high, but Test cricket is decided by bowlers and if first innings totals of this magnitude are consistently conceded, then England will win (and England have a better line up in 2007 than they did in 2002).
"So lets not kid ourselves - it is fashionable to complain about the batting because expectations from the big name batsmen are high, but Test cricket is decided by bowlers and if first innings totals of this magnitude are consistently conceded, then England will win (and England have a better line up in 2007 than they did in 2002). "
Agree fully with this thought!
Post a Comment