Pitches

[bren122]

Re: Pitches

Boris- i take your point about the doctoring.
i think that if the pitch is prepared the same way for years on end then it is a little difficult to get upset about it for a team to go there and find that it is what it always has been.
generally speaking i think that when a pitch is different to what is traditional for it then there is usually one of two causes- an honest mistake or an inexperienced/ inadequate curator.
does doctoring take place- sure, but i don't think that it is as prevalant as might be expected.

 

[LIONS then DAYLIGHT]

Re: Pitches

If Australia had won the toss, batted and then gone on to win the game, would you be saying the same thing about the pitch as you are now or would it be a case of "back luck England, better luck next time"?

Im not sure how much of this thread you have read, but i said earlier on that I wasn't complaining because if we had won the toss then we'd be laughing because we would have won the ashes.

Rather i was disputing the notion that the pitch was 'good for cricket'.

I disputed this notion because of the importance the toss had to the result, which is exactly what England wanted. On skill they are an inferior team, but level the playing field and make the result of the match hinge on a coin toss.

As I said, its why test cricket is dull in the sub-continent, win the toss bat, get 400+, then try and get 20 wickets why the other team trys to save the follow on and force the other team to bat again.

 

[Boris]

Re: Pitches

Another issue I would have brought up earlier is the universalisation of pitches. Where has the bouncy wicket of the WACA gone? Why is the Gabba quite often a great batting pitch? Pitches seem to all be focussing on one point - making it batting friendly.

Really a curator cannot go and make an intentionally bad pitch. So they use more and more technology in machinery to make them flatter and harder and more withstanding so the day one pitch is not too different from the day five one. There are grounds that get their dirt shipped in and use a different sort from a complete other place.

I'm not saying that all pitches are the same at this very time, but I am saying I expect them to be in the future. Grounds seem to be changing so they become like a footy field with exact measurements to the boundary, and the same pitch for every ground. This is not right.

I may be arguing a conspiracy theory here, but there hasn't been a sticky wicket for years. The only time there are bad pitches is when a curator does them intentionally.

Does anyone not think I'm throwing around a conspiracy here?

 

[Caesar]

Re: Pitches

True sticky wickets disappeared the with the end of the uncovered pitch era. They did occur occassionally for a while after that, because the covers used sometimes led to the pitch 'sweating' in humid conditions. Decent ventilation has pretty much eliminated that now, though.

 

[Boris]

Re: Pitches

True sticky wickets disappeared the with the end of the uncovered pitch era. They did occur occassionally for a while after that, because the covers used sometimes led to the pitch 'sweating' in humid conditions. Decent ventilation has pretty much eliminated that now, though.

I notice that, and I'm not talking about the true sticky wickets. The only one I have seen for a long time was at the Gabba vs New Zealand when the storms we had up here that year blew the covers off.

Obviously covers are a necessity, but is technology ruining the 'bad' pitches?

 

[distributer of pain]

Re: Pitches

The ball went through the top on the 1st ball of day 1, sure you can make a result WKT but the curator over cooked that one, i recken even he'd admit that (i honestly dont think he deliberatly made it as bad as it was).

It was an exciting test though and it goes to show that result wkts are much more fun from a spectator point of view than a flat Adelaide track.

 

[LIONS then DAYLIGHT]

Re: Pitches

Another issue I would have brought up earlier is the universalisation of pitches. Where has the bouncy wicket of the WACA gone? Why is the Gabba quite often a great batting pitch? Pitches seem to all be focussing on one point - making it batting friendly.

Really a curator cannot go and make an intentionally bad pitch. So they use more and more technology in machinery to make them flatter and harder and more withstanding so the day one pitch is not too different from the day five one. There are grounds that get their dirt shipped in and use a different sort from a complete other place.

I'm not saying that all pitches are the same at this very time, but I am saying I expect them to be in the future. Grounds seem to be changing so they become like a footy field with exact measurements to the boundary, and the same pitch for every ground. This is not right.

I may be arguing a conspiracy theory here, but there hasn't been a sticky wicket for years. The only time there are bad pitches is when a curator does them intentionally.

Does anyone not think I'm throwing around a conspiracy here?

As I mentioned earlier, the thing that never gets mentioned is the carry.

As a bowler you don't need much movement to be in business, I remember the MCG wicket in the 2006 boxing day test was moving a mile off the wicket early on day 1 but it was going to far and the batsmen really didnt have much to worry about.

You need a bit of carry in a wicket for several reasons.

1) If a bowler hits the edge of the bat he should be rewarded with a catch presented to the slips cordon. Rather then the ball not carrying.

2) Bounce in a wicket means that batsmen who are lazy or simply inferior with their technique and/or footwork will be found out. I can almost guarantee that Paul Collingwood will average in the 30's against SA for this very reasons.

Wickets are called flat for a reason, that is the ball doesnt really bounce and there and its easy paced. Batsmen have time to play their shots and can readjust if they get beaten by movement off the wicket.

The Gabba is the best wicket in the world, anyone who knocks it knows nothing about the game.

 

[Boris]

Re: Pitches

Firstly I wasn't knocking the Gabba. It is my favourite ground and probably pitch in the world (and also happens to be the only one I can get to in the world ).

I only class a bowler good if they can get wickets on a pitch like Adelaide's. I also very much like the Adelaide pitch and find that it often dishes up good games. That is why I like bowlers like McGrath and Clark, to name to recent ones, who can bowl on flat roads of pitches and have the same average. That is a good bowler.

On the other hand I class a good batsman as one who can do the same on a bowling pitch.

Carry through can also help a batsman depending on what pitches they play on. Players like Langer and Katich are helped by having a pitch that carries through because that is their focus area.

Carry is a definite must in a pitch, but I'm talking about bad wickets.

Technological advances have made them impossible with the exception of intention and natural causes such as a storm or very high temperatures. The SCG used to be rolled by the roller they have in their Museum there... which had an old mower engine with about a third of the weight as is used by the rollers we have today.

Also transportation of pitch materials has made it easier for pitches to be made the same way. If they really wanted to they SCG could have dirt shipped in from Adelaide and made into the same pitch.

I am just thinking there should be a cap as to the equipment that can be used on pitches. Soon we are going to have pitches harder than concrete that destroys balls, or a pitch that can be easily turned into a spinners wicket over night if they so pleased.