As expected, a draw.
Contrary to Andy Moles' spin on the proceedings, the fact remains that New Zealand spent 180 overs on the field for 4 wickets at the cost of 476 runs. Or, if one wants to be really cruel, 273.5 overs for 14 wickets at the cost 781 runs. No victory that, even of you are into fuzzy math ("Cricket is a momentum game," Andy Moles, their coach, said. "It was a good win last night. Of course the Indians will say that they won the series. That's fine. Our answer is there have been six games of cricket, they have won three, and we have won three. So we are level going into the [Test] series.)
3 days of rest and then the Third Test begins. And while both sides have issues with their bowling compositions, New Zealand face the added quandary of the type of wicket to be rolled out at Wellington in a must win game. Roll out a green top and lose the toss and there go the Kiwi chances of leveling the series. Roll out another Napier and lose the toss and the bowlers will be more than happy to murder Harry Potter.
Paul Lewis thinks that the flat tracks on offer are because of BCCI's clout. I believe the flat tracks on offer are because all Boards concerned and the TV networks involved want the Tests to be stretched into the final session of the final day - this way revenues can be maximized ( through gate reciepts and ad spots). I also believe that flat tracks are New Zealand's best chance of containing India. Vide Napier!
The Kiwi commentators try. They really do.But being obnoxious does not come naturally to them. Irritating at times, for sure, but the general sense I get from hearing messieurs Doull, Richardson, Crowe,McMillan and co is more along the lines of a bunch of guys trying to big up the underdog rather than a bunch of one eyed xenophobes or patronizing boors.
Jesse Ryder. You pick the bar, I pick the tab. Anytime.
Monday, March 30, 2009
Test 2 - Final thoughts
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
18 comments:
good call, as expected.
Did Achettup take you up on this?
Gng by Vettori's way, Patel will go, he usually gets one game a series, and they'll pack in the pacers.
Think Mishra might have to sit out again.
Contrary to Andy Moles' spin on the proceedings, the fact remains that New Zealand spent 180 overs on the field for 4 wickets at the cost of 476 runs. Or, if one wants to be really cruel, 273.5 overs for 14 wickets at the cost 781 runs. No victory that, even of you are into fuzzy math
Way to turn defeat into victory Homer. The only reason NZ spent 273.5 overs in the field is because they forced India to follow on.
NC,
No.. Raj had challenged me, I chickened out :).
Not sure of Mishra either.. If they roll out a flat deck, we might just go in with 5 bowlers.
Cheers,
Ben,
Those who don't learn from history are condemned to repeat it.
I would have thought the lessons of 2001 would have given captains pause before enforcing the follow on. Especially when you are dealing with the same team that made such a mockery of the follow on then.
The general feeling amongst the Indians I know was that the Kiwis would bat third, pile on a huge score and put the match out of reach for India. And given India's record in the 4th innings in a match they cannot win, that presented the Kiwis their best chance.
But then again, we had not counted on Andy Moles' wisdom.
At the end of it all, it is New Zealand that has to deal with leg weary bowlers. And it is the bowlers who will have to deliver the 20 wickets. And they have 3 days of recovery time before they have to do it all again.
Some victory that!
Cheers,
Homer, oh that was my convoluted attempt to un-jinx India from your prediction because if I think of a result, it usually turns out to be correct but the moment I put it down on paper or tell it to someone, the opposite result usually happens - hence my attempt to unjinx by putting down as unattainable the result I wanted - well, atleast I dont have to open a blog now so thankful that you didnt accept the challenge!
Ok Homer, I am going to side with Ben and say that it is a moral victory for NZ - and just watch out for the 3rd test - boosted by their moral victory, NZ will come out and bulldoze India over or atleast outlast India over the distance and square the series.
Raj,
You are being kind.. You could just as well have rubbed it in but chose not to. And I am thankful for that.
As regards the third test,too early to make a call.. There has to be atleast one session of Test match cricket before any trend can be spotted.
Cheers,
I guess NZ bowled themselves to a near death experience. It is very likely to show in the next test. Really, it's just plain foolhardy and nothing else to impose a follow-on in these days of test matches sans a rest day - and in any case its not like people play just 50 days of international cricket a year these days either.
And "Moral victories" be damned.
And Raj's second comment is extremely funny.
I find the Kiwi commentators bipolar; one moment they are gushing over Sachin and Dravid, the next moment they are talking of the so-called "pecking order" in the Indian cricket team...
Oh well.
Those who don't learn from history are condemned to repeat it.
One match is not history. And it wasn't repeated anyway.
You can take a moral victory from the final two days if that is the way you see the match, but that ignores firstly the way New Zealand middle order toyed with the Indian bowlers, secondly the way India's vaunted batting line up was made to look ordinary and thirdly the fact that India was forced to fight for survival for two whole days.
I find the Kiwi commentators bipolar; one moment they are gushing over Sachin and Dravid, the next moment they are talking of the so-called "pecking order" in the Indian cricket team...
There isn't necessarily a contradiction there though. If Sachin and Dravid are gushworthy, then they must be at the top of the pecking order :).
True Ben.. but they make it sound so negative. Like OMG, who has the bloody nerve to send in Sachin (for he is so high in the pecking order)-- so they send in a nightwatchman.
Or oh yeah Dravid has taken sooo many catches in the slip, because he is a senior and wouldn't care to field anywhere else. Plus who would tell him otherwise.
I know I could be more articulate in proving my point, but I am supposedly on a break from blogging.. that is my excuse!
Like OMG, who has the bloody nerve to send in Sachin (for he is so high in the pecking order)-- so they send in a nightwatchman.
What a bunch of idiots. I generally follow the commentary on the radio, which is less idiotic, though tediously uni-polar - only gushing.
Naresh,
The had their moral victory. And they are the ones ringing in the changes - have victories been any hollower?
Cheers,
lol Leela :).. Bipolar indeed!
Cheers,
I agree to all of that Ben.. But here is the thing - middle session of Day 1, I called the match a draw. Working on that premise, the follow on was a self goal, if you will.
I don't take moral victories - they don't seem to show up on the ICC rankings. What I do take is that the second test is a Pyrrhic victory for the Kiwis - in a match they dominated from the outset, they could not close. They have leg weary bowlers and now find themselves in a real bind on the way forward in a must win game at Wellington.
Cheers,
I do think it'd have been a smarter move for NZ to have batted again. Even if they'd been bowled out for 175 going for a tonk, they'd have set India almost 500 to win, and their bowlers could have come out a bit fresher.
samir,
That seems to be the consensus amongst most Indians I speak to :)
Cheers,
Post a Comment