There was a lot of discussion in the match thread about about Cummins' decision not to enforce the follow-on in the Second Test.
I was surprised by the lack of opinion pieces on the subject.
Many can say this was moot - you do it in order to have enough time to bowl out the opposition a second time and they had this.
172 overs was enough to bowl out Pakistan and if they couldn't do it, fair play to Pakistan.
But what if the reason Pakistan batted a lot better the second time round was because the follow on wasn't enforced? I think mentally they were on the ropes. They were down and out and having to bat again would have left them exposed.
This isn't monday morning quarterbacking - At the time I thought it was a dud decision.
They'd only bowled 53 overs and only 17 were bowled thereafter on Day 3.
Did they not enforce it because Cummins and Starc had both bowled 13 in the 53 over innings and wouldn't be able to bowl another 5/6 with the new ball?
What many forget about Kolkata was that the chase was an unrealistic 384 from 70 overs. I think the pursuit of the winning streak made them think they could get it as opposed to batting for a draw.
Either way, Id prefer for there to be more analysis from the press. I don't trust them since sandpapergate and this just reinforces it.
I was surprised by the lack of opinion pieces on the subject.
Many can say this was moot - you do it in order to have enough time to bowl out the opposition a second time and they had this.
172 overs was enough to bowl out Pakistan and if they couldn't do it, fair play to Pakistan.
But what if the reason Pakistan batted a lot better the second time round was because the follow on wasn't enforced? I think mentally they were on the ropes. They were down and out and having to bat again would have left them exposed.
This isn't monday morning quarterbacking - At the time I thought it was a dud decision.
They'd only bowled 53 overs and only 17 were bowled thereafter on Day 3.
Did they not enforce it because Cummins and Starc had both bowled 13 in the 53 over innings and wouldn't be able to bowl another 5/6 with the new ball?
What many forget about Kolkata was that the chase was an unrealistic 384 from 70 overs. I think the pursuit of the winning streak made them think they could get it as opposed to batting for a draw.
Either way, Id prefer for there to be more analysis from the press. I don't trust them since sandpapergate and this just reinforces it.
