Flat decks

CRICKET CONSPIRACY ?
I ask this question after watching the recent Australia v India test series
In Adelaide, Melbourne, Sydney we basically had very flat pitches for 3 days
Days 4+5 in general the bowlers got some assistance
Brisbane appeared flatter than normal , but at least the bowlers had some help throughout

Collectively they end up being the flattest pitches Ive seen in an Australian Test series
Why ?
Was there an agenda ?
Was this agenda to make sure there were 5 days of cricket in each test at all co$$$$$$$t$ ?
For whatever reasons with disruptions, re-scheduling etc , there may have been an expectation of lower than nor mal crowds and a need to maximise profits by ensuing 5 day games?
Makes cents!

Whatever the reason the decks were too batter friendly in my opinion
Personally I would prefer a more equal contest between bat and ball
Even if that means the games dont get to day 5

I don't think we need to roll out any conspiracy theories, just yet.

Adelaide had a day 5 result, Melbourne should have ( bar Marsh taking too long and Smith/Lehmann opting for safety in a series already won ) and Sydney very nearly a result late on day 5.

For mine, I don't want games decided inside 4 days. That's not a contest, for mine, that comes down to luck.

A tough 4 match series with 2 close wins and 2 close draws is about the perfect series for mine. Both sides could have won in Adelaide, India battled valiantly ( albeit too late ) in Brisbane, Australia made some conservative decisions in Melbourne and Sydney was very flat, yet a result was perhaps only 5-10 overs away.

The fact two men in the series made 700+ runs is extraordinary, but both are extraordinary players in sensational form.

I think I enjoyed this summer as much as any in recent years and India having a quick with venom would have changed the summer.

Much better than a summer of doctored pitches like visiting sides encounter in the sub-continent.

On the contrary Booney , I didnt enjoy this series as much as I should have
I think the essence in cricket is to have contest as even as possible bat v ball
But for Brisbane fast bowlers for both sides were disadvantaged in this series
Quite simply the batters were too heavily advantaged in the series with flatty decks

There were a few too many declarations for my liking, but it would be very hard to prepare a deck that caters for both bat and ball.

I think the results were less about the decks, and more about the Indians lacking the ability to take 20 wickets a match as is the usual story when they leave home.

What constitutes a good Test wicket ?
Heres mine

DAY 1
Some life for the quicks in the first session
Settles down sessions 2+3 and becomes mostly batter friendly
Some bounce for the quicks
A smidge of spin for the spinners
Should favor batting slightly

DAY 2 + 3
Slightly to more better for batting than bowling
Some bounce for the quicks
A degree of spin for the slows , enough to keep batters honest

DAY 4
Bowlers have a slight advantage
Pitch takes some turn
Variable bounce for all bowlers

DAY 5
With the pitch deteriorating, bowlers have most of the advantages
More turn for the spinners
More variable bounce for all bowlers

Gingernuts wrote:There were a few too many declarations for my liking, but it would be very hard to prepare a deck that caters for both bat and ball.

I think the results were less about the decks, and more about the Indians lacking the ability to take 20 wickets a match as is the usual story when they leave home.

The gross inability to take 20 wickets in Australia is the greatest weakness of Indian touring teams
Im a great believer in ' Make your own luck' though
They persist too often in playing 4 man bowling attacks here
They should punt in the future
Perhaps batting a keeper at 6 and play 5 bowlers is a formula to think about

On the slip side, are you happy with a 3 day Test where sides struggle to make 200 because the aggart is nipping around all over the place?

This series might be remembered as one played on benign wickets. I'll remember it for Smiths amazing summer, Kohli and his remarkable form and the severe lack of venom in the Indian attack. Shami and Kumar made a young Boon look like a very capable, match winning bowler.

It wasn't the pitches IMO, it was their pop gun attack.

( PS - They didn't play R Ashwin in Adelaide!! )

IMO the pitches were too flat and bowler friendly. The fact no front line bowler on either side could take more then 10 wickets at an average less than 30 seems to indicate overly placid pitches. Drop in pitches seem to hold together too well and do not develop the variable bounce or spin we have seen in the past.

You dont want to see 3 day matches but neither do I want to see what we saw every match this series.
Side batting first makes heaps of runs.
Side batting second makes heaps of runs
Side batting third makes runs but the bowlers go slow to reduce scoring opportunities. This leads to a late declaration as the captain needs lots of runs as the pitch is so batter friendly.
Side batting fourth either loses early wickets and shuts up shop or has a go and runs out of time.

NO, Booney
Not happy with 3 day tests either
That usually means the opposite , that the decks were too much in favor of bowling

Heres the scores from the Test series just completed

ADELAIDE
AU 7/517
IN 444
AU 5/290 DEC
IN 316

GABBA
IN 408
AU 505
IN 224
AU 6/130

MELB
AU 530
IN 465
AU 9/318
6/194 [WALKERGATE :the day the Australians walked off with 4 overs left ]

SYDNEY
AU 572
IN 475
AU 6/251
IN 7/252

Both teams scored 400+ in the first innings of each test [8 innings]
AU scored 500+ each first innings 34/2124
IN scored 400+ each first  innings 40/1792

It can be argued that India had a deficient attack
But this does not apply to the Australian Attack
Ryan Harris[best] and Mitchell Johnson[2nd ???} are bowlers that have top 10 best strike rates per wicket in Australian history
They played 3 tests each , and yet India still made 400+

That either means India batted exceptionally well
Or that the pitches were some of the flattest ever prepared in Australian grounds
I confidently say the latter is far more applicable

The Indians DID bat exceptionally well. ( Well, their top order sure did )

Fair points that about the Australian attack Scrappy.

I have to agree with Booney on the highlights of the series still though. I don't think I've even seen a batsman in such irresistible form as Smith was this summer. He was seeing them like basketballs.

And the aggression of Kohli was brilliant also, every good story needs a villain, and he played the part beautifully, with bat and mouth.

India have always been strong with the bat and weak with the ball, and nothing changed this series.

There was one difference though - their bowlers finally have pace. If they can find some discipline and patience then India could become a very tough prospect in the future.

If India could find someone to pitch the ball up and swing it, they would be a weapon.

But some young lad in Dehli playing U17's is hardly going to toil away with a slightly red rock on the concrete he's playing on.

They say the drop in pitches make a difference in pitches staying together longer. I think Adelaide and Melbourne have them but what about the Gabba and Sydney?

Whatever the reason, you look at the bowling averages for both sides over the 4 tests and they are elevated for this series compared to recent series in Australia.Australia used 6 - 7 pace bowlers and I reckon they all struggled a bit.

Whereas, the batting averages are somewhat higher than normal.

I think the pitches were generally more benign this series than previously.

I can recall one of the greatest cricketing duels of the 20th century
The day as captain I decided to risk my cricketing reputation by bowling to Booney

Booney was in irrepressible form that match
He hoisted our formidable opening bowler with a massive blow
The hit went on and on and on and on and on and out of the park
This was at Pennington , the ball was retrieved somewhere in Rosewater
This was a fair dinkum enormous strike by the teenage Booney
I was in the twilight of my career at that stage
Not much more to prove just a veteran still playing the game he loved

Yes, Booney raced to the 20s in no time
I made the decision even to recognize my age , its a teenage rampage.
Yep a middle aged Scrappy decided to bowl to the young Booney

The first 5 balls I won the battle with 5 dot balls
The last ball, Booney excelled , he managed to inside edge the ball and made a single
That 1 run meant he has had bragging rights ever since

So the scorebook showed
Scrappy 0/1[1]
Booney 1 [6] that over

IF I had to bowl that over at Booney on the AO/MCG/SCG pitches of this season the scorebook would read
Scrappy 0/2[1]
Booney 2 [6]

For some reason my memory of the occasion differs some what....

Booney wrote:

For some reason my memory of the occasion differs some what....

I still have the scorebook
here are the scores

BOONEY X1
58
BOONEY 17 top score
SCRAPPY did not bowl

SCRAPPYX1
57
SCRAPPY 30 top score

BOONEY X1
2/26
BOONEY 19 NOT OUT [not the 20s score as posted earlier]
SCRAPPY 0/1 [1]

Booneys scoring shots
1
1
6 [This was the massive blow]
4
6
1 [the greatest single of the Boons career]

The irony of this game as amazing as it was
Scrappys X1 :
6/58
7/58
8/58
9/58
The last batsman left the ground thinking we would win the game
We added up the scores and it added up to 56

21/140 in this rain affected match
Booney and Scrappy made 2/66 between them on a mattingtop !

1,1,6,4,6,1.

The story of my career.

Australia v New Zealand
Gabba and WACA pitches were flat decks for the second summer in a row
This is confirming my thoughts that PERHAPS pitches are prepared to get games deep into the 5th day

There are rumblings in the Radio/TV/Press media

" You just shake your head as a bowler."
By
Terry Alderman
About the WACA pitch

" Flat pitch, flat balls, flat battery in the sight screen
Can anything else go wrong at the WACA?"
By
Ben Horne

" I cant watch Test cricket anymore, its become too boring watching the batters getting it too easy"
By
Jay Zed

If we keep producing these wickets in Australia the potential for our batsmen to become FBTs, flat track bullies does increase
That certainly was the case in England , when the English bowlers got conditions to suit, the Australian batters stuggled

4 hundreds (incl some biggish ones) in this second test and 2 double hundreds.
When you consider Starc is bowling up to 160kmh something does look awry a little.

I can't see anything but a draw for this one.

Even if Australia compile a decent lead of over 300, realistically are they going to be able to bowl NZ out on this deck? The odds are probably not as the pitch hasn't worn enough in my opinion. It was commentated on yesterday as being fairly lifeless, even if it is harder than concrete.

Maybe once these drop in wickets have been around a bit, they will know how to prepare them by offering a bit to the bowlers too.

Will be a draw today. A flat deck, and Mitchell Johnson has mentally checked out. He'll be announcing his retirement tonight I reckon.

" The ICC are on to it, they are talking to ball manufacturers at the moment, not just about the ball and the hardness.
Also the seam on the ball, I think they have asked the manufacturers to put a bit more ply on the seam, make a bit more of a harder seam, so we might see in years to come, a bit more there for the bowlers, which I think will be great , because in this country, the last 6 times Australia has played Test matches , they have made 500 runs in their first innings, that balance is not right."

By
Mark Taylor
7525 Test runs
1 Test wicket

Interesting views from a batsman

Gingernuts wrote:Will be a draw today. A flat deck, and Mitchell Johnson has mentally checked out. He'll be announcing his retirement tonight I reckon.

Once he publicly stated his mindset he was shot, I can't work out why he would have said what he said. Then again, Mitch has said / done some slightly odd things.

Albeit on a very, very different level when I decided to pull up stumps after 221 games across 23 seasons I had the worst of horrible feelings.

Starting a family young I gave football away at 26 as work, family and then footy/cricket year round was too much to handle. My second child came along at 26, so the time was right. Cricket I loved and played on until about 34/35. When it came time, when I knew I'd had enough, it was terrible. Terrible feeling.

I was playing North Haven at North Haven, we were bowling. I asked the umpire at the change of overs, "How many gone mate?", thinking he would say 19, 22, something like that. He looked at me quite oddly. "5 mate". 5 overs gone and I didn't want to be out there anymore.

I'd like to hear the tales of others, how they knew, when they knew it "was time".

With footy, it was completely different. After 11 years of B/C grade at Lockleys an on going groin injury was taking its toll and I was happy to be finished. I went back 4 years later, played perhaps the best string of games in my limited career and played my last ever club game, my first ever in the A grade. I knew it was time then too.

The only sport I've ever played is lawn bowls. Hopefully I'll never have to retire!

Been playing for 20 years this year. With any luck I've got another 40 - 50 left in me......

SCRAPPY
I retired because of my eyesight
I wanted to play forever

MITCHELL JOHNSON
One of the most destructive bowlers at the WACA Ive seen
However in the current test v NZ , he has lost his venom
This particular WACA pitch is a main reason, perhaps age , but whatever it is he should not retire after this test.
When he comes to his senses he will realise the 3rd Test will be played at Adelaide Oval ...

Surely MJ didnt read my post ?
He has announced his retirement today