India v South Africa, 3rd Test, Kanpur

Sanjay Manjrekar: 'Harbhajan's performance was heartening'

April 14, 2008

Sanjay Manjrekar analyses India's victory in the third Test in Kanpur and says that while the pitch will take a lot of credit for India's victory, South Africa should be very pleased with what they have accomplished on this tour

 Read Comments (62)

Comments Top ^

Comments have now been closed for this article I do not agree with Sanjays comment. Pray tell me what does he mean by a "fair" wicket. The reason Test cricket is known as "Test" is that it Tests the skill, all round ability and doggedness of a player to succeed against all types of opposition in all types of conditions. Thats the reason why Clive Lloyds team succeeded in India even though they did not have any spinner of great repute. But their fast bowlers were good enough to get the better of the opposing batsmen. As far the Aussies were concerned who won in 2004 in India although they had Warne in their ranks but it was McGrath, Gillespie and Kaspers who performed brilliantly with superb field placements and strategies. The Proteas lost in Kanpur because their pace battery was not able to separate the tailenders Ishant and sreesanth and allowed them to post a significant lead. Lets face it that our best bowlers are Kumble and Harbhajan although Ishant has been simply outstanding during the last couple of months. When we go abroad we are given green tops because it suits the home teams. So why should we not prepare pitches to suit our strengths? I agree that at the domestic level players should be encouraged to play on bouncy swinging tracks but when it comes to Test cricket depending on the composition of our Team we should prepare wickets to suit us. Posted by guptavipulv on April 15 2008, 03:11 AM GMT I tend to agree with Sanjay with the fact South Africa should be proud and pleased with their performance while India should be disappointed with 1-1 result. There were more positive for South Africa on this tour than India. Having said that i still am of opinion that no matter which sports it is, you should play to your advantage. However like Sanjay i feel it would be most satisfying if India had won the test on neutral or seaming pitch. Just as i value India's victory at Perth as India's best test victory ever. You beat the best in world in his own backyard. Posted by ManDee on April 15 2008, 01:06 AM GMT Beating India on such pitches would be like beating Australia in Perth or SA in Durban...we need such challenges to keep test cricket going... the std formula looks good, assist seamers and batsmen the first 2-3 days and then spinners come in...but we get to see amazing inns like the one by Ganguly here, Dravid in Jamaica, Gavaskar in Bangalore and Vishwanath in Chennai...Laxman and Sachin in Mumbai(04)...I guess this would count as one of the holy grails of cricket like beating Aus in Perth... . Posted by vaidyar on April 15 2008, 00:46 AM GMT It's nothing wrong if the pitch is prepared to suit the home conditions. It's a common practice everywhere. On the other hand, I feel the South Africans failed to capitalize on batting first and being at 152/1 at one stage. It was a stage when the pitch played the best. The loss of 9 wickets on the first day to the spinners must've been at the back of their mind when they batted again. Though the spinners claimed most wickets, the uneven bounce was the reason for the difficulty in batting on the wicket. The wickets of Dravid in the first innings, Boucher in the second and some deliveries by Sreesanth showed that the uneven bounce could be used to advantage even by the pave bowlers. The South African's were not allowed to score freely in the second innings and had a mental block of facing the spinners as the pitch was getting more difficult. Hence they could not adapt to the conditions easily. Good job team India. Posted by heyjugsy on April 15 2008, 00:40 AM GMT I think we are missing a very important thing in here and that is the quality of cricket in a match. I don't know about others but I would take a three day intense contest like this on any day in comparison to a dull draw of Chennai. The real test of a crickter is on "demanding conditions" and that's the Test cricket is all about. Every single ball in this match was so important and intresting that you really have to make a special effort to take a breather. So, ultimately we want to see a quality cricket and if a dusty track like this can provide it then why not? Moreover, this track was not only condusive for spin but also fast bowlers like Morkel and Ishant got lot of assistance. And I think that is the reason south africa had equal chance in winning this match. However, having said that India played better cricket in 7 sessions out of 9. Posted by Saurabh_UScrick on April 15 2008, 00:12 AM GMT I am not sure if Manjrekar understands what it means to tour countries and have other countries tour us. The important thing here is variety and one of them thing that's different in every test playing country is the kind of pitch that the host nation has to offer. So we better prepare where home team has advantage. Let other nations play on a spin track when we go out there and play on their bouncier and hard tracks. Posted by Lavya on April 14 2008, 23:36 PM GMT Mr. Manjrekar surprised me by saying that he hopes India wins by playing proper cricket in proper pitches, just because the pitch ended up supporting spinners one cannot dismiss it as improper pitches, in that sense all the matches we lost overseas will end up being played on in proper pitches, since they do not support spinners. Both teams played on the same pitch and we won, so one cannot undo all the hardwork from our players. Posted by Manojdey on April 14 2008, 23:20 PM GMT It is ironic how Manjrekar was quick to criticise the pitch when the pitches in India during the 90's were even more suited for the spinners. I don't see how the bouncing Perth or the swinging England pitches are any more proper than the Indian turners. Posted by Gizza on April 14 2008, 22:28 PM GMT I totally disagree to Sanjay Manjrekar! I think the term "Proper Cricket" is vaguely used here. Underprepared pitches are not good for conventional cricket but what happened during the first test was there for everyone to see. Anyone would agree that both teams went into the third test with a challenge. It was a tough one to play on, no doubt about that. But the team which made the most use of it won. Saying that India should make pitches for proper cricket clearly undermines this credibility. anything could have happened on a pitch like that. And the nature of pitches in Australia are one kind thats pretty difficult to play on as well. No one tell them to make pitches for proper cricket. What does Sanjay mean by Proper cricket then? Posted by NeoMac on April 14 2008, 22:12 PM GMT I admire Sanjay manjrekar for making a comment on Sachin when he was not playing well but I have to disagree with his comments in this column, India won matches in South africa, Australia and England on bouncy pitches. Is south africa going to prepare spin pitches in their country (I don't think so), India does prepare a mix which sometimes favour fast bowlers and mostly spin bowlers, I don't think even Austrlia prepare pitches that favour the visiting teams, traditionally these countries make bouncy tracks, similarly traditionally india make spin tracks, it is as simple as that, one got to understand that the pitch conditions are same for both the teams, international teams should be prepared technically to play in all conditions with out complaining about pitches, rightly so, Grame Smith and Kumble never complained about pitches. Posted by chembu on April 14 2008, 21:17 PM GMT Read all 62 Comments  Top ^