The records published by CricViz’s Srinivas Vijaykumar show that the South African pace attack in the recently completed series against India had a release point 17 cm higher than that of the Indian bowlers on average.
Wanted to say first that your work is brilliant - stumbled into it by chance - have enjoyed reading this blog and hearing you on 81 all out subsequently. So do you think we should have bowled first so we still would have had some advantage in the third innings?
I'm sorry I missed your comment. I just read it while compiling a thread about all my control related writing.
I'm not sure that the effect of height could be overcome by switching innings. It's rarely the case that tinkering (what is typically described as 'tactics') can overcome structural disadvantages.
Also, it seems like luck is a part of it. 1. First innings and fourth innings rate of false shots is similar but SA second innings average >> India first innings average. 2. What was so different in Centurion where second and fourth innings were almost identical? 3. CricViz 2nd test analysis shows similar false shot frequency and xAvg in all innings but fourth innings has off the charts false shot per wicket ratio.
These are excellent points about SA bowler's point of release etc..That is half the battle..the other half is the batsman's technique..The batting does get easier when the ball got old..so middle and lower order were there at this point to play properly..rather expansive drives resulted in getting themselves out..
I doubt its the case that they didn't play "properly". Its easy to say that a Test player's technique is at fault when they get out for a low score. Its also never true.
Wanted to say first that your work is brilliant - stumbled into it by chance - have enjoyed reading this blog and hearing you on 81 all out subsequently. So do you think we should have bowled first so we still would have had some advantage in the third innings?
I'm sorry I missed your comment. I just read it while compiling a thread about all my control related writing.
I'm not sure that the effect of height could be overcome by switching innings. It's rarely the case that tinkering (what is typically described as 'tactics') can overcome structural disadvantages.
Also, it seems like luck is a part of it. 1. First innings and fourth innings rate of false shots is similar but SA second innings average >> India first innings average. 2. What was so different in Centurion where second and fourth innings were almost identical? 3. CricViz 2nd test analysis shows similar false shot frequency and xAvg in all innings but fourth innings has off the charts false shot per wicket ratio.
These are excellent points about SA bowler's point of release etc..That is half the battle..the other half is the batsman's technique..The batting does get easier when the ball got old..so middle and lower order were there at this point to play properly..rather expansive drives resulted in getting themselves out..
I doubt its the case that they didn't play "properly". Its easy to say that a Test player's technique is at fault when they get out for a low score. Its also never true.
Do you see any validity to my earlier points? Or am I missing something?