To toss or not to toss...that is the question

HonalD

Thinking about the recent demolition of Bangledesh in their Test Series, is it an idea that the weaker nation in a Test Match/ODI automatically wins the toss? I feel that if the better teams could easily cope with being put in on a dodgy pitch whereas for example look what Australia did to us in the World Cup! What do you think?

kensutz

They'd hardly break with tradition of the coin toss and allow the supposed weaker team get an option to what they want to do first.

TrueDub

Wouldn't imagine this would be considered for a minute - the toss is enshrined in the laws for a start, and it wouldn't be that much of an advantage to a supposedly weaker team. Where do you draw the line on the "weaker" side of things too?

HonalD

I take the points made, I am not in favour of it....but....if Ireland were to play ODIs and/or test matches against strong teams, our best bet is to play with the best of the conditions. I'm thinking along the lines of closing the gap between the "super" nations and others. The recent Bangledesh scores were embarrassing and would have set them back a bit.

Washout

Its a suggestion that wouldnt work.

You can not be fair on one team over another and where do you draw the line.

look at the current west indies set up. should they be given preferential treatment if they are playing the Aussies?

The Aussies pretty much crush everyone they play but should every other team be automaticaly given the toss against them?

HonalD

Interestingly, during the commentary today on Sky Sports, Nasser Hussain raised questions about re-examining how the toss works. I think it was motivated that England were blaming the toss for being comprehensively beaten by a quality side! Anyway, thinking about it again, how about one toss for the First Test and then for each test in the series, the choice alternates between the teams. That might take some of the luck of the toss out of the game (and given English commentators less excuses...poor Prior he is going to get a roasting!)

Bukman13

yea the alternate system seems fair enough although its still flawed in some aspects, but i think the idea of giving the weaker teams the advantage is absolutely ridiculous that defeats the purpose of competition...

And yea Prior will find himself very lucky if he's still on the team come the next tour, he's dropped big catches at important moments, and has started to become sloppy in terms of the amount of wides conceded (although some of the blame must be directed at the fast bowlers). its still not good enough considering he's done nothing with the bat since his debut...

Washout

HonalD wrote:

Interestingly, during the commentary today on Sky Sports, Nasser Hussain raised questions about re-examining how the toss works. I think it was motivated that England were blaming the toss for being comprehensively beaten by a quality side! Anyway, thinking about it again, how about one toss for the First Test and then for each test in the series, the choice alternates between the teams. That might take some of the luck of the toss out of the game (and given English commentators less excuses...poor Prior he is going to get a roasting!)

nahhh i would disagree. a toss of a coin is 50/50 and over the long term will be 50/50 for all teams...its the fairest method.

if england had won the toss at trent bridge and here at the oval then we would be hearing about how badly india played compared to the toss. its called propaganda of the local team.

Bukman13

Washout wrote:

nahhh i would disagree. a toss of a coin is 50/50 and over the long term will be 50/50 for all teams...its the fairest method.

if england had won the toss at trent bridge and here at the oval then we would be hearing about how badly india played compared to the toss. its called propaganda of the local team.

i agree with you that it works out 50/50 over a long period.

also changing the toss is pointless as your going to come across the same situations with one team getting an advantage.

but i do also have to say that england outplayed india in the first test and were unlucky not to win, and in the 2nd test the toss was vital (which india won)...and the 3rd test is proving that way too (which india won)

India have been lucky in this series theres no doubt, but thats cricket, although it dosnt help england, but over time the advantage will even itself. out.

Washout

as a matter of interest how many feel the toss was crucial in the final test?

the pitch is still very little to the bowlers.

Bukman13

Washout wrote:

as a matter of interest how many feel the toss was crucial in the final test?

the pitch is still very little to the bowlers.

i still think the toss was important, but not as crucial as first suspected...

The condition of the pitch now seems to be the deciding factor, its obviously much more of a batting pitch, and it looks like its going to be a draw....

If england won the toss and chose to bat they possibly could of had the chance to try and bowl india out in the last innings, so in that way the toss kinda ruined england chances of winning, but by no means did it guarantee them a win it just gave them a better chance to do so....