Surface Tension
April 18th 2008 12:15
Surface Tension
Surface Tension, in the physical world is defined as an effect within the surface layer of a liquid that results in a behavior analogous to an elastic sheet. The effect of surface tension permits insects to walk on water and for drops of water to bead up. When a liquid
interfaces with a solid to produce this effect, it is referred to as surface tension. When this effect is found between two liquid phases, it's referred to as interfacial tension.
When it comes to the recently concluded India-South Africa Test series, there was Surface Tension of completely another kind though. While it was not apparent whether the pitch surfaces produced for these contests had a behaviour analogous to an elastic sheet or whether the Ahmedabad pitch was green and moist enough for water to bead up an insects to walk on water or whether the Chennai wicket was dead enough or the Kanpur wicket alive enough to cause 'interfacial tension', what is apparent is that the three surfaces used for the match caused enough tension. Within the players' minds, in the officials' reports and in the general viewing public's minds.
Bearing this in mind let us take a look at the different kinds of Surface Tension as evident in the three different surfaces used for these Test matches, starting with the first Test at Chennai.
Chepauk Tension
In physics it is said that Surface tension results from an imbalance of molecular forces in a liquid. Well, the Chennai Test seemed to indicate that in the cricket perspective, it was an imbalance of the forces between bat and ball which caused the Surface tension.
Simply put, the surface provided at Chennai had nothing in it for the bowlers. The funny part - albeit in a cruel way - was that experts talked up the Chennai surface as one that had pace and bounce for the faster bowlers and then some assistance for the spinners. As it turned out, no type of bowler would have relished bowling there. The bounce was there but it was ultra-even. There did not seem to be any variation of any sort as the days wore on from the first to the fifth. And the rough created by the faster bowlers too did not
But what cannot be forgotten is Sehwag's scintillating display of batting. In one fell swoop, he came close to denting the South African team's psyche with a dazzling array of strokes. Strokes worth over 300 runs. The best part of it was that these runs were scored
nearly at a run a ball rate which meant that the highlights package was well stocked with batting pyrotechniques unlike that of most Test matches.
At the end of the drawn match - the only result which stared the viewer in the eyes ever since the first day's play - there was considerable acrimony about the surface (aka Surface tension) and even question marks raised over Sehwag's performance which came only on a flat pitch.
Motera Tension
Surface tension is caused by the attraction between the molecules of the liquid by various intermolecular forces. This scientific definition was probably kept in mind by the curator of the Motera wicket. He prepared a wicket which had a lot of molecules - of water as well as grass.
It was by no means a menacing greentop of the kind that we have seen in the past on wickets in Australia or South Africa. But for a wicket in India, it was positively green. And the local pace bowlers would have given an arm and a leg to bowl on it if only it did not affect them adversely in playing the game.
That the wicket, despite the grass cover was not impossible for batting was demonstrated by the South African batting lineup. Although they were harried by Harbhajan and occassionally harassed by Sreesanth, at no time was the pitch looking unplayable. But tell that to the Indians who were scuttled out for a meagre 76. A raging Ntini and a steaming Steyn made short work of them. They were aided in this task ably by the young but rampant and obviously skilful Morkel.
And this time too there was a lot of tension about the surface. Only this time the tension was in the other camp - the home camp. They were 0-1 down in a three Test series and they were playing at home too. A lot of column space was consumed about how we must not have given a green and therefore advantageous wicket to the visiting South Africans. At the end of the day, there was Surface tension of a different kind at Motera.
Green Park Tension
This last Test seemed to be based on a real-life example of surface tension. Or rather the after-effects of it. A real life example of surface tension is based on how water drops stretch themselves into elongated shapes before dripping down from a faucet (which is not completely closed). Apparently the faucet was still dripping moisture after Motera. Somebody on seeing this, shut the faucet off completely. As a result, there was no moisture available on the Green Park surface. It looked like the world's best dowsers would have been hard put to find a drop of moisture anywhere on or under the surface of the wicket.
It was a classic turner. That kind of wicket that experts outside the subcontinent use lovely adjectives for, such as, 'dustbowl', 'rank turner', 'underprepared', 'minefield' etc. This time though, quite unexpectedly, they had support from within the subcontinent too - albeit sporadic and a bit turned down in volume of course.
And on this wicket, the South Africans collapsed in the first innings to 265 despite promising a mite more initially. India, who were quite used to this sort of wicket prospered a bit in comparison. But then they too suffered a collapse midway in the first innings. However a very handy last wicket partnership gave them a handy lead of 60 runs. And in the second innings, with the ball turning square and India's stand-in captain making move after inspired move, the visitors surrendered for a mere 125 run second innings. India duly completed the formalities and restored status quo to the series which ended at 1-1.
Not surprisingly, far greater reserves of tension were aroused after the match played at Green Park. Accusations ranged from doctoring the wicket to supposed allegations from the match referee that the wicket was not fit for Test match cricket. Now, that is some surface tension, dont you think?
Cricket and the playing surface
While it is true that the playing surface has a lot of say on the quality and quantity of play taking place in a Test match, it is very important to evaluate the play of both the teams on the same wicket before passing an assessment on the wicket. Tthe wickets do seem to be extremely touchy subjects with all and sundry. But lets try and make an honest assessment of the surfaces based on the action that took place in the Test series.
1) The Chennai wicket was made out to be a dead wicket. As dead as a dodo, in fact. And people from many quarters seem to use this as a factor in bringing down the sagacity and skill which Sehwag showcased in that Test match. It must be pointed out here that out of the remaining 21 players in action nobody even came close to matching Sehwag's blazing blade - despite the dead wicket. It should also be kept in mind that Sehwag played against the arguably better fast bowling attack too.
2) The Motera wicket was made out to be a greentop which was out of place in India and which might have cost India a shot at garnering this series. While it is true that the preparation of a wicket which suited the visitors' strength more than it does the home team's is fraught with peril, it must also be understood that the wicket was only one criterion in that match. And our cherished champions have bested such conditions often; this, even on surfaces which were far more spiteful and greener than this one. It is very important to bear in mind that on a wicket which was made out to be a batsmen's nightmare, the South African batsmen were quite comfortable. The pitch did not look unplayable when they were batting. The Indian batsmen cannot get away from their failure by blaming the pitch.
3) The Green Park wicket was vilified even before a ball was bowled. It was termed as an after-effect of Motera. That is such a cliche. In any case, being the following Test, any wicket would have been termed as an after-effect of Motera. It just so happened that India played to its strength there. It was a bone-dry wicket. It was a wicket which had varying shades of bounce and movement. Any spin for the turners was sharp and substantial. It required a different set of batting brains and skills. South Africa were distinctly lacking in that.
It must also be said that any claims of the wicket being unsuitable for Test matches look dubious when you look at South Africa's more than decent total of 265 in the first innings. India simply spun out their opponent for a low score in the second innings and completed
the coup.
So, whatever else it was lacking in, the series did have a lot of surface tension going for it!
| 38 |
| Vote |
Shared on
Subscribe to this blog
