[nilanjanray]

Very impressed with the guts shown by our players. I am sure Kohli and co will learn from this trial by fire and emerge stronger.

Our players faced bouncers, got hit, and smiled. The SA team was happy to run off.

I happen to agree with Gavaskar. The English and Aussie press gives us too much flak, and plays with words to make snide comments. The English team - if they had been playing instead of India - would have been whining like a tied up poodle by now. And giving excuses about doctored pitches.

This team takes it on the chin and fights on. Whatever the silly decisions re team selection, I have to admire Kohli's fiery influence on the team.

[NPV]

I don't think the south African teams in the past have shown any signs of being unsportive and I hope that continues to be the case.
India has endured the pitch conditions to play out 2 full innings and it's only fair that south Africa also do that. Saying this since the pitch has not really deteriorated, rather been like that from day 1, so why not continue ? If there are signs of the ball rising unpredictably from good length areas and does pose a danger to batsmen, there shouldn't be any doubt in calling it off. Lives of players are obviously more important than just a game.

[Arjun Reddy]

I do not get it. What is offering the dangerous situation to the batsmen?

Either the umpires are stupid or the rules are.

If the umpires deem that a pitch is dangerous to play they just need to communicate it and call off play.

So now we have a situation where the Indian team continued to play through a deemed dangerous condition and the South Africans do not want too.

[Sawyer]

So the match will continue. I confess to mixed feelings about that, but the good thing is that this is purely a match referee/umpire call as it should be. I hope we don't see any serious injury today, as I hoped all of yesterday. I expect a recurrence of these events today and I hope that the umpires/match referee then do not pass on the buck to either captain and put them in a difficult position by doing so, but take an appropriate decision on their own.

As to the overseas press, it is never a good idea to generalise on the basis of the opinion of the worst or even of the majority. The example that comes to mind that is never forgotten is of Peter Roebuck - an ex English Aussie - who startled everyone in 2008 after the Australian test win over India at Sydney by writing in his column in the Sydney Morning Herald the next day that the captain, Ponting, then at the peak of his powers, should be sacked for bringing the game into disrepute. And even today, there are many Australian journalists that are fiercely critical of the sledging that their team uses as a tactic, and there are many Australian fans that express concern over this, including the example it sets for the next generation. The England team also has its critics for sledging and other examples of boorish behaviour.

I do not believe that holding your own team and even country to a higher standard of behaviour than the lowest common denominator anywhere else is wrong, leave alone have that open up the question of patriotism. As the most powerful cricketing economy in the world by far, we should be setting examples for the world. And we should be beating Australia in Australia without descending to their level of behaviour. If the South Africans can do this, so can we.

For all the excellent things that Kohli brings to the table, all of it also reinforces the feeling that he and India will be served by a better coach/advisor than Shastri. It is the classic corporate conundrum - do you want a Chairman of the Board that is just a yes man to an all powerful CEO to rubber stamp what he does and do the legal compliances behind him? Or do you want someone that will provide advice/support from a different point of view while also fulfilling the checks and balances function?

[msdivy]

Excellent fight back by India. This must have been the batting unit for 1st test. Shikar Dhawan and Rohit Sharma are mistakes, sitting out Bhuvi in 2nd test was a blooper.

BTW, the captain being supremely talented might not need practice matches. But rest of the normal folks need it, to get adjusted to the bouncy pitches, to judge carry of the ball.

In Indian conditions, even India B team will give tough fight on rank turners, dust bowls and might win too against the visiting teams. My advice or request to selection committee is, select the team that can handle bouncy pitches of Australia, SA and swing in England, NZ and let them play in Indian conditions. I am sure they will do well. This will eliminate players who are lions at home and lambs overseas.

[Sawyer]

Originally Posted by msdivy

My advice or request to selection committee is, select the team that can handle bouncy pitches of Australia, SA and swing in England, NZ and let them play in Indian conditions. I am sure they will do well. This will eliminate players who are lions at home and lambs overseas.

How do you get such players to start with, when their game has been developed from young in present Indian conditions?

Far better to make Indian pitches more sporting, and gain the desired benefit of making test cricket in India much more entertaining than it is today. One can't import the swing everywhere that England/NZ weather confers, but pace and bounce is very doable. Test cricket globally will die if it does not command Indian spectator interest. Which it will only if it is not as boring/predictable as it usually is in India, and if India wins much more often abroad. Bettering Indian conditions will do both things.

[Sawyer]

On the other hand, there is the IPL and with the auctions today, an interesting article I came across while looking for third party comment on the pitch issue - of which there is none, ironically enough. There is much more global interest in the auction:
http://www.smh.com.au/sport/cricket/...26-h0opxl.html

Certainly the most successful Made in India initiative of the last fifty years in any sphere. Those of us that don't much care for it must be a shrinking minority, and what the IPL has achieved is a major miracle of management. Hats off to the much maligned BCCI for this one.

[nilanjanray]

Originally Posted by Sawyer

The example that comes to mind that is never forgotten is of Peter Roebuck - an ex English Aussie - who startled everyone in 2008 after the Australian test win over India at Sydney by writing in his column in the Sydney Morning Herald the next day that the captain, Ponting, then at the peak of his powers, should be sacked for bringing the game into disrepute. And even today, there are many Australian journalists that are fiercely critical of the sledging that their team uses as a tactic, and there are many Australian fans that express concern over this, including the example it sets for the next generation. The England team also has its critics for sledging and other examples of boorish behaviour.

Roebuck was an outlier. Not easy to find fair minded connoisseurs of the sport like him among current Anglosphere journalists.

Steve Smith (brain fade) vs Kohli incident. Anderson vs Jadeja incident. The bias is pretty apparent.

[harry10]

Originally Posted by nilanjanray

Roebuck was an outlier. Not easy to find fair minded connoisseurs of the sport like him among current Anglosphere journalists.

Steve Smith (brain fade) vs Kohli incident. Anderson vs Jadeja incident. The bias is pretty apparent.

True that. I still remember the uproar against him for his honest views by his own country men at that time.
For me we have already won. The grit showed by our team yesterday was simply amazing.
Yes, we had people like Kapil dev bowling with pain reducing injections during a world cup, kumble bowling with a broken jaw, yuvraj singh vomitting blood but still playing through world cup. But, we never had a whole team displaying such determination and resilience overseas. You can see it in their body language how badly they want this win.

SA is confused. They don't know what to do. If they continue they know 90% chance is losing the game. If they don't agree to continue the world will term them cowards in their own backyard on a pitch which they themselves requested. Not their fault but that's how it is.

Personally, I would love to win this but I don't want any serious injury to anyone. Hopefully, citing this example ICC can do something about neutral pitch curators or giving the toss choice to visitors to take out pitch issues once n all.

[Sawyer]

Originally Posted by harry10

SA is confused. They don't know what to do. If they continue they know 90% chance is losing the game. If they don't agree to continue the world will term them cowards in their own backyard on a pitch which they themselves requested. Not their fault but that's how it is.

It isn't just SA; Kohli also ought to be in a difficult place. What happens if he insists on playing and some one is seriously hurt? Who would want to carry that burden of guilt? I don't know if he is thinking on these lines of course, but that is irrelevant to the point: that this simply cannot be left to the captains. It is the match officials job to take the appropriate call with full responsibility for the consequences, and they should not shirk the responsibility by passing the buck to either or both captains.

[harry10]

Originally Posted by Sawyer

It isn't just SA; Kohli also ought to be in a difficult place. What happens if he insists on playing and some one is seriously hurt? Who would want to carry that burden of guilt? I don't know if he is thinking on these lines of course, but that is irrelevant to the point: that this simply cannot be left to the captains. It is the match officials job to take the appropriate call with full responsibility for the consequences, and they should not shirk the responsibility by passing the buck to either or both captains.

Agreed. But, as per the cricket law match referee is bound to ask both captains if they are willing to continue. If both agree they will continue. So, kohli and Faf will be in a tough position all day today. Its unfair to them. First few overs will show what's gonna happen today.

[Sawyer]

Is it continue if both agree or discontinue if both agree? I suspect it is the latter, but in any case, it is not fair to expect the captains to decide.

[Chetan_Rao]

Relevant bits of rules. Given captains aren't explicitly mentioned, I tend to think the officials need to agree on conditions unanimously, then ask both captains to resume play. If one or both of them refuse, they'll decide on a suitable result accordingly.

6.2 Fitness of pitch for play

The umpires shall be the sole judges of the fitness of the pitch for play. See Laws 2.7 (Fitness for play) and 2.8 (Suspension of play in dangerous or unreasonable conditions).


2.7 Fitness for play

2.7.1 It is solely for the umpires together to decide whether either conditions of ground, weather or light or exceptional circumstances mean that it would be dangerous or unreasonable for play to take place.

Conditions shall not be regarded as either dangerous or unreasonable merely because they are not ideal.

The fact that the grass and the ball are wet does not warrant the ground conditions being regarded as unreasonable or dangerous.

2.7.2 Conditions shall be regarded as dangerous if there is actual and foreseeable risk to the safety of any player or umpire.

2.7.3 Conditions shall be regarded as unreasonable if, although posing no risk to safety, it would not be sensible for play to proceed.

2.7.4 If the umpires consider the ground is so wet or slippery as to deprive the bowler of a reasonable foothold, the fielders of the power of free movement, or the batsmen of the ability to play their strokes or to run between the wickets, then these conditions shall be regarded as so bad that it would be dangerous and unreasonable for play to take place.

2.8 Suspension of play in dangerous or unreasonable circumstances

2.8.1 All references to ground include the pitch. See Law 6.1 (Area of pitch).

2.8.2 The Umpires shall immediately suspend play, or not allow play to start or to recommence, if either umpire considers that the conditions of ground, weather or light, or any other circumstances are either dangerous or unreasonable.

2.8.3 When there is a suspension of play it is the responsibility of the umpires to monitor conditions. They shall make inspections as often as appropriate, unaccompanied by any players or officials. Immediately the umpires together agree that the conditions are no longer dangerous or unreasonable they shall call upon the players to resume play.

[Sawyer]

Right; it means that if the officials decide that it is safe to play, then the captains have a say based on which the next steps can be decided, including the outcome of the match. I wonder what happens if both disagree. If only one disagrees, he forfeits the match, but if both disagree?

But the job of deciding if it is safe to play is solely that of the umpires. That is what I understand from the quoted rules. If the umpires decide that play is unsafe, the matter ends there.

And here is a quote that describes how the umpires have painted themselves into a corner:

"But at this point, it has become about being seen as impartial for the match officials. They didn't pull the players away when M Vijay was taking a battering, from balls that jumped off a length. They didn't stop the match when South Africa were bouncing India's tailenders. Now they're past the point of no return and as a result South Africa have to deal with a hard new ball that is no one's friend right now".

[Chetan_Rao]

I'd think it would be abandoned as a draw if both captains refuse to play, or conceded to the opposite captain if one pulls out.

Anyway, if the pitch isn't safe, yesterday's inaction shouldn't be used as justification to play today. Any accusations of incompetence will pale into insignificance compared to someone getting hurt or worse. 'But nothing happened!' is akin to riding without a helmet.

In hindsight, it appears this match should've been stopped in the first session yesterday, irrespective of what the captains wanted.