Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Jadukor
yep that is how i see the game and i see success in the cautious approach by watching people like Dravid, Chanderpaul play the game or even Anderson in the last innings. Anderson was like 5 runs out of 39 balls at the start of his innings and he is supposed to be a stroke maker. I believe the longer you bat you will see the ball better and will have a higher chance of executing your shots and so if you eliminate risks early in your innings you can give yourself a better chance of building a score. Good batsman can play a range of shots but they decide to play straight and in the V early in their innings.
|
Must be GREAT to be you, then. I wonder what kind of psyche results in such cognitive dissonance! This was my original response to your asinine post. The response clarified what "playing a ball according to its merit" means, not according to me, but what it actually means for a game with normative concepts. Here it is again, but I'm sure you're itching to have the last, pointless word in a sad and juvenile attempt to redefine those norms.
I'm outta here. Whining, clueless posters like you make BC deeply annoying cricket forum nowadays.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Sohel
Good batsmen do not take it "slow" or "fast" during tests. They try to play each ball according to its merit without premeditation, and execute high percentage shots while rotating the strike. The high percentage shots range from a good leave to a solid block to a nudge to a drive. That way they don't get bogged down.
The RR is less in tests because unlike the shorter formats, there are no restrictions tilting the game in the batsmen's favor, and that -- not some poorly formulated, archaic, ignorant and sissy idea -- is the reason why very few batters score quickly in tests.
|