Tweet
I've been wondering whether the match engine takes the tiredness of bowlers into consideration, when a team has been bowled out within the follow-on target but had batted for a long time, say 120+ overs.
When I have the option of enforcing the follow-on, I sometimes refrain, especially if the pitch is still reasonably good and my players have been in the field for over a day. But I have never yet encountered a game when I have fallen short and the AI has not enforced the follow-on.
***
A recent test match I played as England against South Africa at the Wanderers exemplifies this well.
England were coming into the second test having lost the first one badly by 9 wickets, only barely avoiding an innings defeat. On a flat batting track, South Africa won the toss and elected to bat. It was tough going for England, who had gone in with only four bowlers to increase the depth in their batting after the mauling at Newlands a week earlier. They kept picking wickets at regular intervals, but South Africa cruised to 356/5 at the end of day 1.
SA kept piling on the runs on day 2 before they were eventually dismissed for 546, an hour into the second session. AB de Villiers topscored with 238 and was last man out. The England openers gave a solid reply, batting out the rest of the day leaving them 116/0 at stumps on day 2.
Early in the morning session Eng lost Robson, but Cook and Holmes continued to keep the scoreboard ticking without giving SA any chances. Just when it seeemed that Eng would get through to lunch without further damage, they lost both the set batsmen in successive overs. 192/3 at lunch. The next two sessions belonged to SA as they kept picking wickets preventing any significant partnerships from developing and bowled Eng out for 333 just as play entered the final hour on day 3, securing a first-innings lead of 213. Eng were also handicapped by an injury to Finn, weakening their bowling attack further.
Eng were sent in again. I knew it was coming, but couldn't help wondering if SA would have been better off batting. SA had been in the field for 127.2 overs in sunny conditions. The final day was forecast to be cloudy, but without showers. They could have easily piled on another 250 runs in under two sessions, especially now that Finn was injured and still had enough time to bowl Eng out. But they chose to enforce the follow-on.
SA were immediately rewarded when Robson gave away his wicket cheaply leaving Eng at 12/1 and giving Cook and Holmes a nervous half hour to negotiate. They batted positively and Eng ended day 3 at 44/1, 169 behind.
Day 4 began with more positive batting from England and you couldn't help but wonder whether they South African bowlers were tiring. Steyn conceded 4.50 runs an over. England were reduced to 79/2 when Holmes was dismissed, but Ballance and Cook continued to score runs briskly and though Ballance was dismissed for 85, England were 264/3 at tea on Day 4, 51 runs ahead and Cook batting on 120. Still not out of danger, but well on their way to safety. More positive batting and Eng were 359/4 at stumps on day 4, 146 ahead. Cook out for 145, but Nash and Taylor continuing the good work. SA seemed clueless. Had Eng bowlers been in better form, they might have considered pushing for a win, even.
England are finally all out for 480 with SA needing 268 to win in three and a half hours. By then SA had been in the field for 264.5 overs! One more bowler, another 50 runs to defend, another session to play, then Eng could have tested the tired legs of SA batsmen! SA choose not to push for victory on a wearing fifth day pitch, batting out the rest of the day to settle for a draw at 124/2.
***
When I have the option of enforcing the follow-on, I sometimes refrain, especially if the pitch is still reasonably good and my players have been in the field for over a day. But I have never yet encountered a game when I have fallen short and the AI has not enforced the follow-on.
***
A recent test match I played as England against South Africa at the Wanderers exemplifies this well.
England were coming into the second test having lost the first one badly by 9 wickets, only barely avoiding an innings defeat. On a flat batting track, South Africa won the toss and elected to bat. It was tough going for England, who had gone in with only four bowlers to increase the depth in their batting after the mauling at Newlands a week earlier. They kept picking wickets at regular intervals, but South Africa cruised to 356/5 at the end of day 1.
SA kept piling on the runs on day 2 before they were eventually dismissed for 546, an hour into the second session. AB de Villiers topscored with 238 and was last man out. The England openers gave a solid reply, batting out the rest of the day leaving them 116/0 at stumps on day 2.
Early in the morning session Eng lost Robson, but Cook and Holmes continued to keep the scoreboard ticking without giving SA any chances. Just when it seeemed that Eng would get through to lunch without further damage, they lost both the set batsmen in successive overs. 192/3 at lunch. The next two sessions belonged to SA as they kept picking wickets preventing any significant partnerships from developing and bowled Eng out for 333 just as play entered the final hour on day 3, securing a first-innings lead of 213. Eng were also handicapped by an injury to Finn, weakening their bowling attack further.
Eng were sent in again. I knew it was coming, but couldn't help wondering if SA would have been better off batting. SA had been in the field for 127.2 overs in sunny conditions. The final day was forecast to be cloudy, but without showers. They could have easily piled on another 250 runs in under two sessions, especially now that Finn was injured and still had enough time to bowl Eng out. But they chose to enforce the follow-on.
SA were immediately rewarded when Robson gave away his wicket cheaply leaving Eng at 12/1 and giving Cook and Holmes a nervous half hour to negotiate. They batted positively and Eng ended day 3 at 44/1, 169 behind.
Day 4 began with more positive batting from England and you couldn't help but wonder whether they South African bowlers were tiring. Steyn conceded 4.50 runs an over. England were reduced to 79/2 when Holmes was dismissed, but Ballance and Cook continued to score runs briskly and though Ballance was dismissed for 85, England were 264/3 at tea on Day 4, 51 runs ahead and Cook batting on 120. Still not out of danger, but well on their way to safety. More positive batting and Eng were 359/4 at stumps on day 4, 146 ahead. Cook out for 145, but Nash and Taylor continuing the good work. SA seemed clueless. Had Eng bowlers been in better form, they might have considered pushing for a win, even.
England are finally all out for 480 with SA needing 268 to win in three and a half hours. By then SA had been in the field for 264.5 overs! One more bowler, another 50 runs to defend, another session to play, then Eng could have tested the tired legs of SA batsmen! SA choose not to push for victory on a wearing fifth day pitch, batting out the rest of the day to settle for a draw at 124/2.
***
Comment