Reasons for huge successful run chase

Kevin Pietersen on Twitter


Correct me if I’m wrong, but I’ve been thinking that historic chases in Test Matches are born out of a couple things:

1. There’s not that many great bowlers who can get the job done for their teams on day 4/5. Apart from a handful globally.

2. T20 cricket has taken all fear from a batter and actually instilled a very negative mindset for most bowlers as most of the year they’re just getting smashed all over the place.
Thoughts?

Another poster

Then there are specific team selections that prioritize batting over taking 20 wickets. Like India always choosing Jadeja in overseas tests assuming he can hit tons.
Result? No proper spinner and no runs either.

My own opinion

1. Too many all rounders in the XI, no genuine spinner. Attack wasn't balanced

2. 5 centurions and you lose the match ? Young Captain ? Needed more support ? Not aggressive enough ?

The turning point was Pant getting out after his century. Keeping in mind the first inning batting collapse, he could've curbed his exuberance a little more. India need a 400 plus, batting for another 10/20 overs to either win or prevent a loss

In reply to LBW375

How about India batting for time and longer in their 2nd innings, there by giving England less time to get a win??? After all, this is test cricket and a team has to be strategic over 5 days instead of scoring quickly and thinking the other team cannot do the same.
England’s strategy paid off! End of story!

In reply to StumpCam

Agree

Added to my post while you were posting

In reply to StumpCam

Was in a meeting when Duckett got out and my co-worker said "England going play for a draw".

I replied "this England team don't play draw cricket". When Stokes got out, he whastapp'd me, and I repeated what I said

Even if it's the tail, they will go for win.

Another poster

2 more things that I can think of:

1. Mentality of getting a result at any cost because of WTC; people now don’t play for a draw. They’re okay losing rather than getting a draw.

2. Poor fielding, leading to a few dropped catches, in the 4th innings due to pressure.


And.....

T20 cricket is the one which instilled belief that literally any score can be chaseable these days.

It’s also evident that bowlers who don’t play T20 cricket often are most successful in Test cricket like for example Anderson.

In reply to LBW375

Yes, that was plenty time for England to go for the WIN, given their recent history!
Both teams bowling is not what it used to be!
In addition India has a new captain, new coach and a fragile lower middle order.
Pant as talent as he is, has to realize the job is not done after getting a hundred. Has to bat longer.

The pitch was good for batting, Captain Gill inexperience showed, if a viewer did not know he was captain they would have thought that Rahul was captain. Duckett's inning in the 2nd inning was outstanding, the opening partnership with Crawley set up the win.

India finally has an abundance of options regarding bowling attacks, so much that they are confused.
Part of that confusion is bad decisions on which pacer/seamer to rest and when along with which play
which format. Unless injured or worn-out Shami should be India's Hazelwood and play every test.

In reply to LBW375

In general, the pitches are better. There was really nothing in that pitch on the 4th and 5th day.