The Hangover: Was drawing against India all that good?
A reader writes, plus some BYC banter and the Midweek Book Club
There was some good cricket chat in the inbox after yesterday’s test special post.
This one from William Thomson (edited for clarity) caught my eye and warrants a detailed, annotated response. My notes are in italics.
“I’d like to present an alternate perspective of the recently finished test draw. We encountered a Kanpur track unlike most - it had few spinning demons - but we never looked to win.”
I’m not convinced New Zealand never tried to win, but I do think they started with a mindset of ‘let’s try to take this test deep’, rather than ‘let’s try to knock these guys over’. As for the pitch, it turned but it did so slowly and it did so lowly.
“Over the entirety of the test we had the second-slowest run rate in India, ever. First innings was an exercise in taking time out of the game - 142 overs for 289.”
This is correct re the run rate and it will become important later, though I’m not sure that it was solely to take time out of the game. Will Young was quite positive but once we lost a couple, it was difficult to up the ante. Remember, these guys had no preparation for red-ball cricket in these types of conditions.
“We had India 51-5 with a lead of 100 and operated with spinners at one end with no catchers, pacers with no extra catchers. After lunch at 100-5 first over was from Rachin Ravindra, the third-choice spinner, and he bowled a spell. Southee and Jamieson didn't bowl in tandem until they had a 200-plus lead. Containment.”
I find it hard to argue against this assessment. While it wasn’t quite the brainfart that bowling Tom Blundell at the MCG after lunch was, I do wonder if Kane Williamson missed a trick here. It was almost as if they were subconsciously scared of chasing a 190 to 220-type target.
“At 84-1 at lunch on the final day, 200 from 60 overs at 3.3 runs per over needed, followed by a session of under two per over. Shut up shop very early - was Somerville’s wicket the reason?”
Straight up, the target was never realistic IMHO. India would never have ever declared if they thought it was, either. This is the crux of the game here and I think people here are underestimating the scale of the task. India held all the cards. If New Zealand batted well and got themselves into a position to attack, they could have slowed the tempo, set defensive fields and squeezed the life out of it.
The key here was the low bounce. Balls were frequently skidding through at shin height. That makes it impossible to attack with confidence off the back foot. If you can only up the tempo driving and sweeping, that’s easy to set fields for.
Somerville’s wicket wasn’t the reason they called off any pretence of a chase - he was a bonus - it was Tom Latham. If a guy who has faced 142 balls and knows the pace of the pitch better than anyone can drag one of the worst balls Ravichandran Ashwin has delivered onto his stumps, what chance of starting from scratch?
Remember, Williamson got himself in and took Axar Patel over the top and scored another boundary soon after with a delightful late cut so there was still a glimmer, but I do honestly believe Latham’s mistake spooked them out of it.
“I understand and appreciate the magnitude of even drawing here in the first test of a series, and setting up for Mumbai and a series win, not to mention the spectre of the WTC and playing tournament cricket, but I also think there’s room to be a tad disappointed in the lack of ambition and intent at key times in this game. As a result of these guys being a top-tier cricket nation, should we just bask in what our usual expectations are, or start to expect a little more of our world-class players? Don't they say that is what has kept the ABs at the top of the pile?”
Again, this is a valid point, well made. There is a chance the sheer drama of the final session clouds the thinking and makes it harder to objectively view the previous 14 sessions. The major problem with the All Black analogy is conditions and test-cricket framework. You play rugby anywhere in the world and the grass is the same. Also, with WTC points on offer, a draw is meaningful.
“I’m stoked at the result - but there’s a nagging feeling of a missed opportunity.”
There were missed opportunities, I agree, but not on the last day. There was a chance to really build a big total from 197-1 in the first innings and it never happened. There was a missed opportunity at 51-5, though I would hasten to add that Shreyas Iyer batted like a genius.
All in all though, a cracking note thank you William.
BYC GOODNESS
We discuss the sheer beauty of test cricket. Paul Ford offers little to no explanation for his decision to drop Tim Southee for the first test (thank heavens that for the first time ever, Gary Stead didn’t listen to us). Jason Hoyte gets super worked up by Ravi Ashwin and Sunil Gavaskar, while one of us is moved to write poetry.
OLDER, NOT NECESSARILY WISER
Around this date, every year it seems, another quick single is added to my scorecard. While some fear getting older, the alternative has always seemed worse to me. If you’re embarrassed that you forgot to get me a gift, I’m here to tell you that for as little as the cost of a packet of vegan sausages per month you could be a fully paid up subscriber to The Bounce, which affords you such meaty treats as yesterday’s post.
If you’re not convinced, that’s fine too, but please consider sharing it with friends, family or colleagues who might be interested.
Out of curiosity, I plugged into one of those sites that tells you what the No 1 single was in New Zealand when I was delivered into this world. It’s not the worst.
NB. I solemnly promise not to indulge myself like this every year.
MIDWEEK BOOK CLUB
What is it? Rammer Jammer Yellow Hammer
Who wrote it? Warren St John
Publisher: Crown (2005)
Genre: Sports travelogue
Reviewer: Dylan Cleaver
I was remarking to a US-based friend once that I just didn’t get the obsession with College Football.
He sent me a copy of Rammer Jammer Yellow Hammer. I still don’t “get it”, but I have more understanding of it and even a little jealousy that we don’t have anything remotely comparable in New Zealand.
The title comes from the chant Alabama Crimson Tide fans sing after wins against the main rivals, like Auburn for example in this clip (apologies for the advert at the start), taken from the 101,000-seat Bryant-Denny Stadium.
Rammer-Jammer was the student newspaper and the yellowhammer is the state bird.
Which is all very interesting but in fact nowhere near as fascinating as the people who follow the team obsessively in the RVs every season; who turn up to Saturday games on a Wednesday and spend those interim days eating meat and drinking beer with the same people week after week.
St John gets among these people. It’s hilarious, endearingly sweet and a little disturbing all at once.
If it all sounds a bit low-brow then it’s a clever ruse: RJYH is actually an insightful cultural anthropology that gets closer to the heart of the following question than most academic studies on the same subject do: what is it about sports fandom that turns otherwise normal people into logic-defying nut jobs?
All fans of sport who sometimes question their sanity should read RJYH at least once. It’s strangely life affirming.
THIS WEEK
Look out for an interview with a great New Zealander looking to make an intriguing career shift later this week. A hint to his identity: if you cross a Colt-like fullback with a library, what would you get?