Sanjay Manjrekar: "Sourav Ganguly was the stand-out batsman in this Test" © AFP

Sanjay Manjrekar: India managed to win the final Test and level the series [1-1]. Had South Africa beaten India at home, it would have been slightly humiliating for an in-form Indian team. So that embarrassment was saved. But I wonder deep down, if the Indian team will be really happy and satisfied with their performance in this series. If you look at it, the win was achieved with a lot of help from the curator in Kanpur and I wonder whether India could have won the Test on a fair pitch. Those are the questions that come up.

There is also an argument when we start talking about pitches that favour the home side - the pitch is the same for both the sides but India happen to play better on those kind of pitches and that is the reason they came out on top. A lot of people believe, when they see a pitch like this, that spinners make the difference. South Africa didn't quite have the quality of spin that India had. For me, when you have a pitch like the one in Kanpur offered to the Indian team, they become a very difficult team for any overseas team to beat. It is purely because of the batting [strength] that India has; their batsmen generally do better than the overseas batsmen. The reason for that is the lack of bounce that you get on pitches like in Kanpur.

Yes the pitch was dry; it was turning, but it was the bounce that allowed the Indian batting to be superior. Even if the pitch is really bad and under-prepared, the Indian batsmen generally put in a better performance than the overseas team and that is where they score when it comes to playing Tests on pitches like this.

We had a similar scenario in the 1990s when we had a great record at home on pitches like this because overseas batsmen struggled more due to playing on them, than the spinners making life difficult for them. The Indian batsmen usually came through and sometimes got scores in excess of 200 on pitches like this. So this is where India scores.

Sourav Ganguly was the standout with the bat in this Test. A lot of times the bowlers do not get credit for whatever they do on a pitch like this - the batsmen usually get more attention because they have done something that was not expected. High scores are not expected on this pitch.

Just an overall look at this series and I thought that Harbhajan Singh's performance was heartening for India. He bowled consistently well right through the Tests. They [India] can still get a lot out of Harbhajan and that is good news. But the fact that the final result came in cricketing conditions like this doesn't make me overly happy. India is a very good team now. Their overseas performances have improved. It is one of the top three teams in the world. I hope that the conditions we had in Kanpur is just a one-off and India get back to playing proper cricket on proper pitches.

I think South Africa have done themselves proud with the way they have played in this Test and even the way they have played in the subcontinent over the last six months.

The top three teams in international cricket - Australia, India and South Africa, are looking really good at the moment.

Former India batsman Sanjay Manjrekar is a cricket commentator and presenter on TV. His Twitter feed is here

Podcast | iTunes

Top

I do not agree with Sanjays comment. Pray tell me what does he mean by a "fair" wicket. The reason Test cricket is known as "Test" is that it Tests the skill, all round ability and doggedness of a player to succeed against all types of opposition in all types of conditions. Thats the reason why Clive Lloyds team succeeded in India even though they did not have any spinner of great repute. But their fast bowlers were good enough to get the better of the opposing batsmen. As far the Aussies were concerned who won in 2004 in India although they had Warne in their ranks but it was McGrath, Gillespie and Kaspers who performed brilliantly with superb field placements and strategies. The Proteas lost in Kanpur because their pace battery was not able to separate the tailenders Ishant and sreesanth and allowed them to post a significant lead. Lets face it that our best bowlers are Kumble and Harbhajan although Ishant has been simply outstanding during the last couple of months. When we go abroad we are given green tops because it suits the home teams. So why should we not prepare pitches to suit our strengths? I agree that at the domestic level players should be encouraged to play on bouncy swinging tracks but when it comes to Test cricket depending on the composition of our Team we should prepare wickets to suit us.

I tend to agree with Sanjay with the fact South Africa should be proud and pleased with their performance while India should be disappointed with 1-1 result. There were more positive for South Africa on this tour than India.

Having said that i still am of opinion that no matter which sports it is, you should play to your advantage. However like Sanjay i feel it would be most satisfying if India had won the test on neutral or seaming pitch. Just as i value India's victory at Perth as India's best test victory ever. You beat the best in world in his own backyard.

Beating India on such pitches would be like beating Australia in Perth or SA in Durban...we need such challenges to keep test cricket going... the std formula looks good, assist seamers and batsmen the first 2-3 days and then spinners come in...but we get to see amazing inns like the one by Ganguly here, Dravid in Jamaica, Gavaskar in Bangalore and Vishwanath in Chennai...Laxman and Sachin in Mumbai(04)...I guess this would count as one of the holy grails of cricket like beating Aus in Perth... .

It's nothing wrong if the pitch is prepared to suit the home conditions. It's a common practice everywhere. On the other hand, I feel the South Africans failed to capitalize on batting first and being at 152/1 at one stage. It was a stage when the pitch played the best. The loss of 9 wickets on the first day to the spinners must've been at the back of their mind when they batted again. Though the spinners claimed most wickets, the uneven bounce was the reason for the difficulty in batting on the wicket. The wickets of Dravid in the first innings, Boucher in the second and some deliveries by Sreesanth showed that the uneven bounce could be used to advantage even by the pave bowlers. The South African's were not allowed to score freely in the second innings and had a mental block of facing the spinners as the pitch was getting more difficult. Hence they could not adapt to the conditions easily. Good job team India.

I think we are missing a very important thing in here and that is the quality of cricket in a match. I don't know about others but I would take a three day intense contest like this on any day in comparison to a dull draw of Chennai. The real test of a crickter is on "demanding conditions" and that's the Test cricket is all about. Every single ball in this match was so important and intresting that you really have to make a special effort to take a breather. So, ultimately we want to see a quality cricket and if a dusty track like this can provide it then why not? Moreover, this track was not only condusive for spin but also fast bowlers like Morkel and Ishant got lot of assistance. And I think that is the reason south africa had equal chance in winning this match. However, having said that India played better cricket in 7 sessions out of 9.

I am not sure if Manjrekar understands what it means to tour countries and have other countries tour us. The important thing here is variety and one of them thing that's different in every test playing country is the kind of pitch that the host nation has to offer. So we better prepare where home team has advantage. Let other nations play on a spin track when we go out there and play on their bouncier and hard tracks.

Mr. Manjrekar surprised me by saying that he hopes India wins by playing proper cricket in proper pitches, just because the pitch ended up supporting spinners one cannot dismiss it as improper pitches, in that sense all the matches we lost overseas will end up being played on in proper pitches, since they do not support spinners. Both teams played on the same pitch and we won, so one cannot undo all the hardwork from our players.

It is ironic how Manjrekar was quick to criticise the pitch when the pitches in India during the 90's were even more suited for the spinners. I don't see how the bouncing Perth or the swinging England pitches are any more proper than the Indian turners.

I totally disagree to Sanjay Manjrekar! I think the term "Proper Cricket" is vaguely used here. Underprepared pitches are not good for conventional cricket but what happened during the first test was there for everyone to see. Anyone would agree that both teams went into the third test with a challenge. It was a tough one to play on, no doubt about that. But the team which made the most use of it won. Saying that India should make pitches for proper cricket clearly undermines this credibility. anything could have happened on a pitch like that. And the nature of pitches in Australia are one kind thats pretty difficult to play on as well. No one tell them to make pitches for proper cricket. What does Sanjay mean by Proper cricket then?

I admire Sanjay manjrekar for making a comment on Sachin when he was not playing well but I have to disagree with his comments in this column, India won matches in South africa, Australia and England on bouncy pitches. Is south africa going to prepare spin pitches in their country (I don't think so), India does prepare a mix which sometimes favour fast bowlers and mostly spin bowlers, I don't think even Austrlia prepare pitches that favour the visiting teams, traditionally these countries make bouncy tracks, similarly traditionally india make spin tracks, it is as simple as that, one got to understand that the pitch conditions are same for both the teams, international teams should be prepared technically to play in all conditions with out complaining about pitches, rightly so, Grame Smith and Kumble never complained about pitches.