‘Two-Day’ Test: Both pitch and batting in spotlight
Victorious India and dejected England players took a rest Friday on what should have been the third day of a key five-day clash, with warnings that the speed of the result had tarnished the Test format.
While debate continues over the state of the Ahmedabad pitch and whether it is suitable for Test cricket, many also lambasted the batting on both side.
On the other hand, former Australia opener Matthew Hayden said India have shown the ability to rally against odds in all conditions, doing well both at home and overseas.
"India have shown that they are a modern team who can not only fight it out but win against the odds in all conditions. This is a mark of all the great teams in history. The ability to win both at home and away," Hayden told the Press Trust of India.
But many commentators said Test cricket had been damaged by its 22nd two-day match in history as the longer format fights the mounting popularity of Twenty20. "Finished in two days. Not sure if that's good for test cricket," said former India batsman Yuvraj Singh on Twitter.
Former England skipper Michael Vaughan expressed fears for cricket's crucial broadcasting revenues. "Will they bid the next time?," wondered Vaughan if broadcasters would put money on featuring Test cricket in future.
Another former England captain Nasser Hussain said that the two-day end to the Pink-ball Test was a glaring example of where the current England Test team stands when it comes to playing in sub-continental pitches.
"For batsmen on both sides and don't forget India were bowled out for 145 it was an exhausting business. It was fun to watch, but probably less fun to play. And let's face it: if Joe Root is taking five for eight, you can hardly say the pitch is a belter.
"Having said all that, England should expect little else when they come to India. And they ought to have done better after winning the toss. Above all, this game told us a lot about where England are as a Test side in these conditions," Hussain wrote for the The Daily Mail.
England great Geoffrey Boycott also agreed that his country could not blame the pitch for their humiliating defeat. "There is nothing in the rules that says what type of pitch should be prepared," Boycott wrote on Twitter. "We had first choice of the surface and they were better than us. Simple."
Former English cricketer David Lloyd, however, joined others in questioning the nature of wicket and has demanded answers from International Cricket Council (ICC).
Lloyd in his column in Daily Mail said, "I gave this pitch the benefit of the doubt on the first day but, I'm sorry, it was just as bad as the last one. And the big question has to be asked again of the ICC. Is this how you want the game to go? Tests finishing well under time, this one not even lasting two days? We need answers from Dubai but I'm not expecting to get a single one."
India opener Rohit Sharma attributed his sublime first innings half-century to the positive intent that he displayed by not just trying to survive on an "interesting" but "normal" Indian wicket where England got thrashed by 10 wickets.
He, however, admitted tackling spinners in pink ball games is an area that would need some work as far as batsmen are concerned.
"I think it (pink) came to the bat a little faster than normal red ball. I guess it has a lot to do with the conditions in the evening. The temperature goes down and plus dew factor. Whenever we play pink ball in India, it's going to behave like that, lot more grass on the pitch," he added.
The fourth Test begins March 4 at the same venue.
Comments