When Alastair Cook won the toss in Rajkot, a streak was broken. After winning seven consecutive tosses against South Africa and New Zealand (across two seasons), Virat Kohli had finally lost one at home.
Without so much as a blink, Cook opted to bat and over the course of the next five days, England put India under pressure. Kohli had to dig deep with lower-order batsmen in the final session of the first Test to avoid a stunning defeat.
For the visitors, finishing just four wickets away from victory was an inspiring turnaround from their embarrassing defeat against Bangladesh in Dhaka a few days earlier.
“It’s been a good five days for us,” said Cook, after the draw in Rajkot. “We’ve put everything on the line and played some really good cricket. It’s disappointing not to get over the line but it was a great Test and everyone can be proud of the way they played.”
Engand's last six Test victories since 1980 in India have come in Tests where they lost the toss.#IndvEng#justsaying
— Mohandas Menon (@mohanstatsman) November 17, 2016
His tone changed a week later, and for good reason. England went down in Visakhapatnam by 246 runs. Truth be told, they had competed and fought hard on the final two days of this second Test.
It was their collapse in the first innings on day two, thus surrendering a lead of 200 runs, which cost them a 1-0 lead. Any captain ought to be disappointed, but Cook’s words thereafter painted a different picture.
“We can all agree it was a good toss to win. Anyone could see that. The first day was the best day to bat. You saw the scoring rates decline as opposed to the first day. It was harder to score,” he reasoned.
A lot was said about the Vizag pitch before the game, that it would take exaggerated turn, and a four-day result was a strong possibility. Neither happened, and the match progressed like any Test on a normal Indian wicket does – initially a good strip for batting, it wore out progressively and then challenged the batsmen on days four and five.
In fact, it was in keeping with the pitches rolled out for the New Zealand series at Kanpur, Kolkata and Indore. Rajkot, in that sense, was an aberration, as an overtly grassy patch at the good length spot did not let the wicket deteriorate enough over the course of five days.
At this juncture, a pertinent question emerges. Sure, Cook has the right to be upset with his team’s display in the second Test. But the change in his tone from Rajkot to Vizag cannot be missed. Is this ‘toss talk’ justified?
Over the course of the last season or so, various debates about the toss have gained momentum. The 2016 English County Championship played out with this rider, and visiting teams had the chance to bowl first. If such a regulation comes into effect in Test cricket, visiting teams would want the chance to bat first in India.
Kane Williamson talked about it. Last season, Hashim Amla too spoke about it. Surely, India’s performances have followed a well-rehearsed script whenever Kohli has won the toss and opted to bat. Get runs on the board, and then unleash the spinners. In seven Tests against the Blackcaps and Proteas, India bowled first only once, in Bengaluru.
The South Africa series stands out in terms of its ill-prepared pitches. Not once did the first innings score cross 350. However, it can also be taken out of this debate simply on the argument that South Africa were bowled out for 214 runs in their first innings in Bengaluru – on day one. It was perhaps the best pitch of the series, which saw no result.
Against New Zealand too, the first two Tests didn’t see a 350-plus total in the first innings. India scored 377/5 in the second innings in Kanpur.
It was only in Indore that they breached the 400-run mark, and later the 500-barrier. It highlights the fact that Kiwi bowlers made Indian batsmen work hard for their runs – much like English bowlers in Rajkot and Visakhapatnam. And the Indian bowlers reciprocated too, albeit under the cushion of runs. Bringing tosses in here would be too simple.
This needs to be expanded a bit. Is South Africa’s domination over Australia because of winning three successive coin tosses or is it because they have lorded over their rivals with both bat and ball at both Perth and Hobart? What of Adelaide, where despite the pink ball factor under lights, Faf du Plessis won the toss and decided to bat?
Funnily enough, these two Tests are the only losses for Australia at home since May 1, 2013. This date is a marker for two reasons – one, the toss debate is a recent phenomenon and consequently, two, the current ICC Test rankings are calculated from this particular day.
England's 4th test here. None previous on a pitch as dry and cracked as this one. Big toss again. #INDvENG
— Jonathan Agnew (@Aggerscricket) November 25, 2016
In this same duration, England have lost 11 tosses at home, but have managed to win five of those matches and lost only two, to Australia (2015) and Pakistan (2016). Can it be argued the toss handed their opponents an advantage? If not, is this debate reserved only for Indian pitches?
Furthermore, New Zealand have lost nine tosses at home, and won five Tests and lost two as well. South Africa have lost eight tosses at home, and only lost the one match in this interim.
All over world cricket, home advantage appears to be a bigger factor than which side the coin comes down on. Sure, the toss doesn’t mitigate its significance. But then again, isn’t this the challenge of playing Test cricket away from home? Also, what happens when home conditions don’t suit the hosts either, a la Rajkot?
This is where missed chances – in the context of the current series – come in. Kohli and Cheteshwar Pujara rescued India from 22/2 on day one in Vizag, before Adil Rashid dropped the Indian skipper after lunch. He was on 56 then, and would go on to score 167. Does that account for something when the toss complaint is voiced?
And what about India’s plight in Rajkot? They dropped three catches on day one, two in the first session, and let England escape from 102/3 at lunch, all after losing the toss. Ben Stokes got another two lives on day two as well. All of it enabled the visitors to amass 500-plus runs on the board.
As another dry wicket is being rolled out in Mohali, it makes for some wonderment. If India had held those chances, and dictated terms on a placid Rajkot wicket, would Cook have argued about the toss then as well?
