To my eye this is not really a straight match for the Jindrich vase as seen in other examples of this pattern, I agree the blue and green one is, as are the more common dark green ones. Even the Raban book has a near accurate attribution except for the date(!) and perhaps height even.
This example could be a reverse of the Jindrich pattern, at an angle, almost a mirror image in my opinion, which I have seen occasionally for other patterns, but I don't see it as a straight match for the ordinary Jindrich pattern, I tend to sympathise with Aniks comment.
This is at least the second time in this long, enjoyable thread I have been uncertain about attributions. This is an issue, because, unlike normal GMB individual posts about pieces, where we are free to discuss and have filed separately attributions, discussions being sandwiched here in a long thread, makes it seem not so free and easy to discuss attributions, which makes me more cautious about commenting on Skrdlovice within this thread (other than on obvious pieces). I would rather comment about attribution in an attribution thread....... tricky... (though I am sure it is a Skrdlovice piece.....)
I am not sure if it would be more efficient to post Skrdlovice pieces separately, before being added to a Skrdlovice thread or something by moderators...... certainly I can see this issue happening again, I hope my point can be understood.... it is not a major issue affecting most of the posts but is relevant to a few. There will eventually be a post that is not even Skrdlovice and mods may be asked to remove it! But ambiguous or unusual attributions may deserve their own posts.... commenting on attributions within this post seems slightly difficult to me, I hope this is clear. I would add that I think the thread is generally accurate and impressive and enjoyable,
all the best