Australia v India, 4th Test, Adelaide January 22, 2012

One crowded hour in Adelaide

Batting first is the way to go at the Adelaide Oval but the opening exchanges at the venue can be more influential on the outcome of a Test than almost anywhere else in the world
  shares 16

For about 60 minutes on the first morning of every Test match at the Adelaide Oval, a famously benign pitch starts its life with delusions of a green-top. Like a teenager experimenting with wilder things before settling into sensible adulthood, the surface is briefly open to the suggestions of the fast bowlers, and far less agreeable to batsmen raised on the assumption that Adelaide is a place for harvesting runs, not edging catches.

As the crowd files onto the Scoreboard hill and the members settle in their seats on the western side, the surface retains the merest trace of freshness left by the thoughtful ground staff, allowing the ball to briefly swing and seam. The pace and bounce off the pitch is more pronounced than at any other stage of the match. Given how placid the track can become for batsmen later on, once the dry heat of South Australia's desert climate has had its way with the remaining moisture, Adelaide's opening exchanges can be more influential on the final outcome of a Test than almost anywhere else in the world - ground lost in that first hour is seldom regathered without great, and sometimes futile effort.

Michael Hussey has experienced the oval's early life as an opening batsman for Western Australia, and also been called on to repair the damage it can cause from his berth in Australia's middle order. He agrees that in Adelaide, an early stumble when the seam stands up can take days to recover from, if it is at all.

"Yes I think so [the first hour is more important in Adelaide]," Hussey said. "It certainly does do a little bit in the first morning, maybe the first session, and then generally can be a very good batting pitch for a few days, so it is very important and England certainly exposed us in that respect. We started with a run-out but after that they got other quick wickets which put us under enormous pressure and stopped us getting to a good first-innings total. So it's certainly a crucial time in the game, if the openers can get through that then good runs can be had. It's a very crucial part of the game. I think any Test match, the first hour or the first session can shape how the match is going to go as well."

As Hussey recalled, Australia were reminded of this state of things in graphic fashion last summer, when it was possible to conclude that the second Test was lost to England inside the first 13 balls of its commencement. In that time the hosts lost 3 for 2, Simon Katich's run-out followed by fretful edges into the slips by Ricky Ponting and Michael Clarke at the hands of the artful fast man Jimmy Anderson. Both Ponting and Clarke pushed out firmly at deliveries that left them late, and would later stand solemnly in the field as nary another ball did quite as much for the rest of the match.

Ponting knew the importance of the first few overs of an Adelaide Test, having played so many, and at the toss before had observed: "Like Indian conditions sometimes a lot can happen late in the games here, so you have to make sure you play really well at the start of the game and keep yourself in the contest right up until the end." Australia's failure to do so after Ponting had given them first use of the pitch would haunt them for the remainder of the series, and now serves as a reminder of how important it is to be vigilant at the start of the Adelaide Test.

Initial curve and cut notwithstanding, there remains no question that the team winning the toss in Adelaide must bat. There are Englishmen who still cuss and mutter at the fateful decision made by Bob Willis in 1982-83 to insert Greg Chappell's Australians upon calling correctly. Needing a victory to regain parity in the series, Willis gambled on a surface that had shown signs of dampness in the lead-up, but watched disconsolately in the field as Chappell crafted a century and the hosts tallied 438 - the platform for an eight-wicket victory. Bowlers may have the narrowest of windows in which to strike, but with the help of decisive footwork and good early judgement the batsmen can settle themselves in for the day, or more.

Since Willis, the only other visiting captain to chance bowling first was Mohammad Azharuddin. India's arrival for the 1992 Test coincided with the first match on a relaid square, which promised to offer a little more help to those delivering the ball after a soporific sequence of six consecutive drawn Tests. Chasing a victory to keep the series alive, Azharuddin fielded, and rejoiced as Kapil Dev, Manoj Prabhakar and a young part-time seamer called Sachin Tendulkar fetched seven cheap wickets between them to rumble out an inattentive Australia for 145. This was a rare occasion on which the reverses of the first day were to be atoned for, as the hosts ground their way back into the contest and ultimately squeaked a 38-run victory.

Though the match was sullied by arguments about the respective lbw counts for both sides, and made notable by Allan Border's refusal to take the field on the final morning after learning that Geoff Marsh was to be dropped for the final Test, it was the start of a far more enticing run of results. Since then only three of 20 Adelaide Tests have been drawn, and on each occasion the offer of first morning assistance has provided a critical element to the ensuing drama. Whoever bats first in Adelaide on Tuesday will have reason to be watchful, and whoever bowls will have cause to be hopeful … for about an hour.

Daniel Brettig is an assistant editor at ESPNcricinfo. He tweets here

Comments have now been closed for this article

  • POSTED BY iluvcricinfo on | January 23, 2012, 18:19 GMT

    India has the habit of losing the toss at crucial matches, so Clarke is going to win the toss and take the full advantage of the first hour. From then onwards its a catch up game for India. Don't expect any miracle in this match too otherwise you would get disappointed. Indians are not showing any aggressiveness or enthusiasm to win again Australia which is very much needed. May be too much cricket played by India causing the problem.

  • POSTED BY SRT_GENIUS on | January 23, 2012, 7:44 GMT

    Trying to create FUD in doubts of Sehwag ? I don't think he is reading this before the match!

  • POSTED BY rahulcricket007 on | January 23, 2012, 6:54 GMT

    WHETHER PITCH GIVE HELP TO BOWLERS OR NOT BUT I M SURE INDIAN BATSMEN WILL HELP AUSSIES BOWLERS TO GET WKTS BY PLAYING RUBBISH SHOTS .

  • POSTED BY on | January 23, 2012, 6:24 GMT

    India mustl win this one or else they will be battered in the one dayers also

  • POSTED BY on | January 23, 2012, 6:13 GMT

    Knowing Indians openers watchfulness at the start of the innings, its better that Australia faces that first hour of play. Zaheer have already troubled both Warner and Cowan.

  • POSTED BY Hamidf on | January 23, 2012, 2:58 GMT

    Go team India this is your chance. Home like conditions

  • POSTED BY zenboomerang on | January 23, 2012, 2:51 GMT

    @Daniel Brettig... Thanks, I needed reminding that Watson ran out both Katich & Hughes in that series :P... Considering the circumstances, Watsons actions were brain fades in the 1st over & contributed greatly to Oz lossing the Adelaide Test match - he should bat below Siddle... Also Ponting & Clarke were out chasing the ball away from their bodies, instead of defending their wicket - just dumb cricket at that stage of the match... Another reason why Clarke should never be a no. 3 or 4...

  • POSTED BY r1m2 on | January 23, 2012, 2:44 GMT

    Adelaide produces boring tests, that's it. Only way to revive a test at Adelaide is for someone like Sehwag to revive with a quick fire big one. With quick fire batting at Adelaide a team can give themselves extra time to have a crack at the opposition. And that is the only way that can work there. I am surprised season after season they cannot produce a sporting wicket at Adelaide, why must everyone be treated to a batting borefest there? To me normal speed centuries scored here are useless as they don't contribute to the betterment of cricket. A Laxman / Dravid / Ponting / Tendulkar / Hussey / Gambhir century here means nothing. Only Sehwag / Warner century(ies) will tilt the match one way or the other.

  • POSTED BY Meety on | January 23, 2012, 2:40 GMT

    I wonder how many times over the 5 days (assuming it lasts that long), will the Channel 9 commentry team mention how good the old scoreboard is? And, specifically mention that it "...has all the information you need..."?? I reckon it will be mentioned at least once a day over the course of the match!

  • POSTED BY MandarSathe on | January 23, 2012, 2:37 GMT

    Looks like India will be 25 for 2 yet again! :( All hopes on the great trio to save from collapse.....

  • POSTED BY iluvcricinfo on | January 23, 2012, 18:19 GMT

    India has the habit of losing the toss at crucial matches, so Clarke is going to win the toss and take the full advantage of the first hour. From then onwards its a catch up game for India. Don't expect any miracle in this match too otherwise you would get disappointed. Indians are not showing any aggressiveness or enthusiasm to win again Australia which is very much needed. May be too much cricket played by India causing the problem.

  • POSTED BY SRT_GENIUS on | January 23, 2012, 7:44 GMT

    Trying to create FUD in doubts of Sehwag ? I don't think he is reading this before the match!

  • POSTED BY rahulcricket007 on | January 23, 2012, 6:54 GMT

    WHETHER PITCH GIVE HELP TO BOWLERS OR NOT BUT I M SURE INDIAN BATSMEN WILL HELP AUSSIES BOWLERS TO GET WKTS BY PLAYING RUBBISH SHOTS .

  • POSTED BY on | January 23, 2012, 6:24 GMT

    India mustl win this one or else they will be battered in the one dayers also

  • POSTED BY on | January 23, 2012, 6:13 GMT

    Knowing Indians openers watchfulness at the start of the innings, its better that Australia faces that first hour of play. Zaheer have already troubled both Warner and Cowan.

  • POSTED BY Hamidf on | January 23, 2012, 2:58 GMT

    Go team India this is your chance. Home like conditions

  • POSTED BY zenboomerang on | January 23, 2012, 2:51 GMT

    @Daniel Brettig... Thanks, I needed reminding that Watson ran out both Katich & Hughes in that series :P... Considering the circumstances, Watsons actions were brain fades in the 1st over & contributed greatly to Oz lossing the Adelaide Test match - he should bat below Siddle... Also Ponting & Clarke were out chasing the ball away from their bodies, instead of defending their wicket - just dumb cricket at that stage of the match... Another reason why Clarke should never be a no. 3 or 4...

  • POSTED BY r1m2 on | January 23, 2012, 2:44 GMT

    Adelaide produces boring tests, that's it. Only way to revive a test at Adelaide is for someone like Sehwag to revive with a quick fire big one. With quick fire batting at Adelaide a team can give themselves extra time to have a crack at the opposition. And that is the only way that can work there. I am surprised season after season they cannot produce a sporting wicket at Adelaide, why must everyone be treated to a batting borefest there? To me normal speed centuries scored here are useless as they don't contribute to the betterment of cricket. A Laxman / Dravid / Ponting / Tendulkar / Hussey / Gambhir century here means nothing. Only Sehwag / Warner century(ies) will tilt the match one way or the other.

  • POSTED BY Meety on | January 23, 2012, 2:40 GMT

    I wonder how many times over the 5 days (assuming it lasts that long), will the Channel 9 commentry team mention how good the old scoreboard is? And, specifically mention that it "...has all the information you need..."?? I reckon it will be mentioned at least once a day over the course of the match!

  • POSTED BY MandarSathe on | January 23, 2012, 2:37 GMT

    Looks like India will be 25 for 2 yet again! :( All hopes on the great trio to save from collapse.....

  • POSTED BY dsig3 on | January 23, 2012, 1:53 GMT

    Adelaide is an average wicket for an average town. For years it has been a bowlers nightmare. Its nearly destroyed SA cricket by being too easy on their batsmen. Ferguson is the latest, but Cosgrove and Blewett are also examples. Underachievers. Ryan Harris had the right idea. Hobart should be chosen ahead of Adelaide in a 5 match series.

  • POSTED BY on | January 23, 2012, 1:11 GMT

    go ausi go u can do it . Ind only win in their home ground. Thats y they r not truely num 1 team. Only ausi won anywhere. Go ausi go

  • POSTED BY on | January 22, 2012, 22:39 GMT

    true , but India on winning the toss would be wary of batting first as they have lost most tests in the first three to four hours when the seam and swing rules.

    I feel australia sure to bat first if they win the toss & India would surely insert them in , so in short australia batting first mates

  • POSTED BY SmartStrategy on | January 22, 2012, 20:31 GMT

    In all the games so far in this series, Indian batsmen have suffered in the very first session and exposed middle order to seam and swing. INDIA MUST CONSIDER BOWLING FIRST IF THEY WIN THE TOSS! Aussie bowling is top class and they can take advantage of that first session to run through fragile Indian batting order. Indian bowlers have to bowl very good line and length in the first session to cause a similar damage to equally fragile Aussie batting order.

    If India is batting first, they should send Dravid and Gambhir (who should not poke outside off) as opener, Laxam first down, Tendulkar followed by Sehwag, Kohli and Sharma. Sehwag can be devastating in this pitch if he escapes early seam and swing. If India can pose 500+ in first innings, they can exploit the conditions to win the solitary match in the series and claim happily that the series atleast wasn't a repeat of English tour earlier. Com'n India, believe in yourself, and play your natural game and don't go into your shell.

  • POSTED BY Potatis on | January 22, 2012, 13:37 GMT

    Well if India bat first, it doesn't sound like it will be any different to the first hour of their other innings so far. I'm so disappointed that I haven't had any decent cricket to watch, I feel the whole Summer has been wasted. I really hope it's just a 2 test series against India next time. If only India could show some fight.

  • POSTED BY dunger.bob on | January 22, 2012, 11:07 GMT

    Beautiful summary of the place as far as I can tell. If you win the toss, you gotta bat because you don't want to be batting 4th on this pitch. Just the same, you gotta bat well in the first session. More than 4 wickets down and you know you have started to dig a grave for yourself. The key here is timing. Bat when its good and bowl when its not. If you have to bowl first, take early wickets or you will make life very hard for yourself. .. It might sound too dependent on the toss, but believe me history shows that the best team usually wins. This is a wonderful pitch that rewards excellence and punishes mediocrity in batting and bowling. .. Good chance for Indias batting to finally shine, if they are up to it. .

  • No featured comments at the moment.

  • POSTED BY dunger.bob on | January 22, 2012, 11:07 GMT

    Beautiful summary of the place as far as I can tell. If you win the toss, you gotta bat because you don't want to be batting 4th on this pitch. Just the same, you gotta bat well in the first session. More than 4 wickets down and you know you have started to dig a grave for yourself. The key here is timing. Bat when its good and bowl when its not. If you have to bowl first, take early wickets or you will make life very hard for yourself. .. It might sound too dependent on the toss, but believe me history shows that the best team usually wins. This is a wonderful pitch that rewards excellence and punishes mediocrity in batting and bowling. .. Good chance for Indias batting to finally shine, if they are up to it. .

  • POSTED BY Potatis on | January 22, 2012, 13:37 GMT

    Well if India bat first, it doesn't sound like it will be any different to the first hour of their other innings so far. I'm so disappointed that I haven't had any decent cricket to watch, I feel the whole Summer has been wasted. I really hope it's just a 2 test series against India next time. If only India could show some fight.

  • POSTED BY SmartStrategy on | January 22, 2012, 20:31 GMT

    In all the games so far in this series, Indian batsmen have suffered in the very first session and exposed middle order to seam and swing. INDIA MUST CONSIDER BOWLING FIRST IF THEY WIN THE TOSS! Aussie bowling is top class and they can take advantage of that first session to run through fragile Indian batting order. Indian bowlers have to bowl very good line and length in the first session to cause a similar damage to equally fragile Aussie batting order.

    If India is batting first, they should send Dravid and Gambhir (who should not poke outside off) as opener, Laxam first down, Tendulkar followed by Sehwag, Kohli and Sharma. Sehwag can be devastating in this pitch if he escapes early seam and swing. If India can pose 500+ in first innings, they can exploit the conditions to win the solitary match in the series and claim happily that the series atleast wasn't a repeat of English tour earlier. Com'n India, believe in yourself, and play your natural game and don't go into your shell.

  • POSTED BY on | January 22, 2012, 22:39 GMT

    true , but India on winning the toss would be wary of batting first as they have lost most tests in the first three to four hours when the seam and swing rules.

    I feel australia sure to bat first if they win the toss & India would surely insert them in , so in short australia batting first mates

  • POSTED BY on | January 23, 2012, 1:11 GMT

    go ausi go u can do it . Ind only win in their home ground. Thats y they r not truely num 1 team. Only ausi won anywhere. Go ausi go

  • POSTED BY dsig3 on | January 23, 2012, 1:53 GMT

    Adelaide is an average wicket for an average town. For years it has been a bowlers nightmare. Its nearly destroyed SA cricket by being too easy on their batsmen. Ferguson is the latest, but Cosgrove and Blewett are also examples. Underachievers. Ryan Harris had the right idea. Hobart should be chosen ahead of Adelaide in a 5 match series.

  • POSTED BY MandarSathe on | January 23, 2012, 2:37 GMT

    Looks like India will be 25 for 2 yet again! :( All hopes on the great trio to save from collapse.....

  • POSTED BY Meety on | January 23, 2012, 2:40 GMT

    I wonder how many times over the 5 days (assuming it lasts that long), will the Channel 9 commentry team mention how good the old scoreboard is? And, specifically mention that it "...has all the information you need..."?? I reckon it will be mentioned at least once a day over the course of the match!

  • POSTED BY r1m2 on | January 23, 2012, 2:44 GMT

    Adelaide produces boring tests, that's it. Only way to revive a test at Adelaide is for someone like Sehwag to revive with a quick fire big one. With quick fire batting at Adelaide a team can give themselves extra time to have a crack at the opposition. And that is the only way that can work there. I am surprised season after season they cannot produce a sporting wicket at Adelaide, why must everyone be treated to a batting borefest there? To me normal speed centuries scored here are useless as they don't contribute to the betterment of cricket. A Laxman / Dravid / Ponting / Tendulkar / Hussey / Gambhir century here means nothing. Only Sehwag / Warner century(ies) will tilt the match one way or the other.

  • POSTED BY zenboomerang on | January 23, 2012, 2:51 GMT

    @Daniel Brettig... Thanks, I needed reminding that Watson ran out both Katich & Hughes in that series :P... Considering the circumstances, Watsons actions were brain fades in the 1st over & contributed greatly to Oz lossing the Adelaide Test match - he should bat below Siddle... Also Ponting & Clarke were out chasing the ball away from their bodies, instead of defending their wicket - just dumb cricket at that stage of the match... Another reason why Clarke should never be a no. 3 or 4...