Flat decks

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.

Incorrect
He announced his retirement today not tonight
Come on Gingernuts if your gunna post, how about posting with accuracy !

You're a hard man Scrappy!

I retired from Cricket at about 32 or 33.
Young family got in the way of being out all day.

I was much the same as you, Booney.

I gave it away pretty late, in my 50's, but after about 330 (2 day) games, when I started to count the overs and happily drop down the batting order, I knew it was well past time.

I go and watch my club now though and wish I was still playing

" I think the short form of the game T20 and the ODIs no one has issues with the pitches being flat because they are in essence a batsmans game
But this is test cricket and you want a contest with bat and ball
The pitches in the last 6 Tests in this country have not provided a contest between bat and ball
I didnt blame England at all in the summer over there for zooping up their pitches because it gave them the best chance of winning and we suddenly seen a great cricket contest between bat and ball
We came here for this game, Ive never ever seen the WACA as brown  as was on day one , and Im just not sure thats the direction we should be headed."

By
James Brayshaw
Commentating during the 2nd Test Australia v New Zealand

I'll counter that by saying bowlers in the long form of the game have no idea on building pressure or bowling to a plan or do not have the ability to execute those plans.

Captains move the field in a reactionary sense every ball, no patience is demonstrated and because of "work loads" a bloke bowls 4 overs to start the day and takes a rest.

Two sides to every argument and I'd rather see a thriller on day 5 and in a draw then the players hitting the golf course on Day 4 'coz the game is over.

Add to that Brayshaw is a muppett and I can't stand him.

" I think one of the issues around Australia that we are playing on wickets that are not necessarily conductive to great Australian cricket
Theyre so flat, arent they ?
A couple of years ago , there was quite a strong directive that we had to get flatter wickets
I will put my hand up and - I think the WACA for a few years, maybe the Gabba, maybe Bellerive, went too far the other way
Maybe there were times when it was a bit of a lottery for teams batting first
Now its gone too far the other way
Weve got to try and get the balance
We played at Bellerive a few weeks ago when Mitchell Johnson was bowling fast and it was bouncing twice to the wicket keeper 3 times an over."

By
Justin Langer



Read the link below
Take note at what the Perth curator was saying about the WACA pitch pre game !
www.theroar.com.au/2015/11/16/waca-pitch-sad-joke/

I think sometimes the point is missed in that a draw, in itself, is not necessarily a bad result in the context of the game. There have been many riveting draws, where either side could win or one side stoically defends to prevent a loss.

But from a pitch preparation point of view, I think most curators would want a result at least midway through day 5. I would think most of them would have that in mind. However, I just wonder how much the characteristics and preparation requirements for drop in wickets take away their "craft" in achieving this.

It seems that they don't have as much life early on and don't deteriorate as much. Therefore, they're probably just too good to provide a true Test match contest.

Here's a question. Were they in fact developed for the short forms of the game and the increasing amount of first class Cricket that is played now? Or more to do with ground sharing with Football?

Another question. Would it be better (from a contest point of view rather than financial) for there to be Test Cricket arenas only and other grounds with drop in wickets for T20 / ODI? Some cities could handle that (Sydney and Melbourne) but it isn't probably feasible elsewhere due to the cost.

The other possibility is say having 1 dedicated regular pitch for Tests with those around it being drop in. No idea whether that is realistic from a horticultural perspective.

It is interesting to observe pitch management in England from the recent Test Series over there. Some grounds have pitches covering half the width of the ground. It was commented on that there is so much cricket played over there, this many pitches are needed to rotate them to allow for the schedule. I'm not sure whether they have drop in wickets at some of these grounds. But the Test arenas are pretty much only cricket grounds so the need for drop in pitches is maybe not as relevant.

The "Flat Deck" issue is really only just emerging as more grounds in Australia go that way. But I think Cricket Australia is going to need to have a look at it soon.

Some good points raised by Chambo about drop in pitches

COST ?
Just how much does it cost in $$$$ to have 4 day test matches ?
For each day lost  how much does everyone lose ?
With entry fees, advertising , TV , sponsorship, car parking etc etc would it cost over a million dollars per days lost ?

Its a very very good reason to make sure the games get as deep as possible into day 5 , this is very logical
And why not, using a Boonism , 5 days cricket is better than 4
But the cost could be the potential attrition  to fast bowlers

Drop in pitches are part of the issue for sure, they're grown in such superb conditions the curators can create anything, mother nature has no say in it, but it wouldn't hurt having a World class spinner in the side(s) to take advantage of the pitches as they deteriorate too.

Day 5 used to be the day for the spinners to change the game on a turning deck anywhere in Australia, Melbourne and Perth included, now it's up to plodders rolling down 130 km/h straight ones with a soft ball to blokes with bats thicker than Pauline Hanson.

An interesting article on ESPN about drop in pitches.
David Sandurski, head groundsman at MCG, has his say.

Drop-in pitches are hard work - don't get me wrong - but a simpler, less dramatic, process than I thought. Especially in Australian grounds - where footy and cricket seasons don't clash - the installation and removing has to be done only once each year.

I've seen in Christchurch a pitch being brought in a day before a T20 match and then removed minutes after the conclusion. Here in Australia, at MCG for example, they remove the pitches - 10 of them - in the off season and leave them in an open ground near the G. They keep working on them during the off season - on the foot holes, tending to grass etc. - but they leave it open to the elements. The actual work on the pitches begins when they are installed in the ground.

The pitches are in a steel frame - a cake tin, if you will. They are 24 metres long, three metres wide and 200 millimetres deep. They weight around 30 ton. MCG brought the concept 14 years ago, and is using the same pitches still. That means they are durable. The work on them, the soil in them, the grass on top of them is pretty much similar to actual pitches.

The most taxing work starts when they have to be transported into the ground. One of the 10 brought in after the footy final this year will be the stage of the World Cup final. The machine that brings them in has to be as long and as wide, and weighs more than 30 ton. MCG has to get in touch with transport authorities a month in advance, and close out traffic for four nights on Brunton Avenue. They can bring in the 10 pitches over three nights, but they need a fourth night should the machinery break down. It cannot be repaired on the go, you see. They don't sell spares for such machines in usual mechanic shops. The process is repeated after the cricket season is over. It helps that the same staff looks after the ground during footy season too.

In the process I also realised that my biggest curiosity about drop-in pitches was stupid: why can't they get them to behave exactly like they want them to? The soil and the grass used for the pitches are same as the real ones used to use at the MCG. When they first began, the G had to do with slow and spongy bounce, but it is slowly getting back to its original nature.

Adelaide Oval, the youngest drop-in pitch consumer in Australia, behaved more or less like the Adelaide Oval of the old in the first Test of this series. The drop-in pitches will continue to behave differently and retain old traits because the soil and the atmosphere where they are made doesn't change.

That drop-in don't crumble as much is a criticism they have to live with, although Adelaide Oval went a long way to disprove that. Still I can't forgive them for being accessory to the conspiracy of implanting ugly stands on the top of the lovely Adelaide Oval.

Side tracking here, but a nice little parting shot at the end there.

I love how Victorians have had so much to say about the Adelaide Oval redevelopment.

Very condescending IMO - we'll have the big city stadium at whatever cost ..... but little old Adelaide, you should have kept your quant little ground in tact so that we can have that experience when we come to your nice little town.

Shane Warne has said similar.

A Victorian firm was amongst the team of Architects too.

Scrappy wrote:Some good points raised by Chambo about drop in pitches

COST ?
Just how much does it cost in $$$$ to have 4 day test matches ?
For each day lost  how much does everyone lose ?
With entry fees, advertising , TV , sponsorship, car parking etc etc would it cost over a million dollars per days lost ?

Its a very very good reason to make sure the games get as deep as possible into day 5 , this is very logical
And why not, using a Boonism , 5 days cricket is better than 4
But the cost could be the potential attrition  to fast bowlers

Firstly the WACA doesn't have drop in pitches, football is not played on it, yet it has become placid.

Secondly the WACA would have lost money because the test went into a fifth day. Only just over 3,000 people attended the last day. Given that many of them would have been members it surely would have cost more money to pay staff than the last day generated.

Even the fourth day only had 4,000 people. If the match was heading for an exciting finish on the fourth day is it safe to assume that more people would have attended than the 7,000 in total who attended the last two days.

Yes correct. I may have led the WACA pitch discussion astray re drop in wicket theories.

Quite a few articles have been written on the trend to flat less lively pitches, drop in or otherwise.

I read today that there has been an instruction (possibly from CA) in recent seasons to prepare flatter pitches for Sheffield Shield as a theory to better prepare batsmen for Test Cricket. However, I don't quite understand the rationale to that.

Whether this is what has occurred at the WACA I am not sure.

The new WA Ground at Burswood will have drop in wickets.

In 1969 we put man on the moon
In 2015 we should be able to 'alter' a drop in pitch to behave the way a curator wants it to ?
Is the following possible
More bounce
More spin
Less bounce
Less spin
Combination off any of the 4

If we read in the post of Chambo's
David Sandurski , the MCG groundsman says
* Why cant they get them to behave exactly like they want them to ?*

robranisgod wrote:

Scrappy wrote:Some good points raised by Chambo about drop in pitches

COST ?
Just how much does it cost in $$$$ to have 4 day test matches ?
For each day lost  how much does everyone lose ?
With entry fees, advertising , TV , sponsorship, car parking etc etc would it cost over a million dollars per days lost ?

Its a very very good reason to make sure the games get as deep as possible into day 5 , this is very logical
And why not, using a Boonism , 5 days cricket is better than 4
But the cost could be the potential attrition  to fast bowlers

Firstly the WACA doesn't have drop in pitches, football is not played on it, yet it has become placid.

Secondly the WACA would have lost money because the test went into a fifth day. Only just over 3,000 people attended the last day. Given that many of them would have been members it surely would have cost more money to pay staff than the last day generated.

Even the fourth day only had 4,000 people. If the match was heading for an exciting finish on the fourth day is it safe to assume that more people would have attended than the 7,000 in total who attended the last two days.

Wrong days to finish off days 4+5 then ?
The attendances each day were :
1...13543
2...10047
3...9263
4...4243
5 ..3142

Days 4+5 were working days of Monday and Tuesday
That had to have a BIG affect on attendances
RG , has more or less stated the crowds would have been more if a result was more probable
By how many , double ?

Scrappy wrote:

robranisgod wrote:

Scrappy wrote:Some good points raised by Chambo about drop in pitches

COST ?
Just how much does it cost in $$$$ to have 4 day test matches ?
For each day lost  how much does everyone lose ?
With entry fees, advertising , TV , sponsorship, car parking etc etc would it cost over a million dollars per days lost ?

Its a very very good reason to make sure the games get as deep as possible into day 5 , this is very logical
And why not, using a Boonism , 5 days cricket is better than 4
But the cost could be the potential attrition  to fast bowlers

Firstly the WACA doesn't have drop in pitches, football is not played on it, yet it has become placid.

Secondly the WACA would have lost money because the test went into a fifth day. Only just over 3,000 people attended the last day. Given that many of them would have been members it surely would have cost more money to pay staff than the last day generated.

Even the fourth day only had 4,000 people. If the match was heading for an exciting finish on the fourth day is it safe to assume that more people would have attended than the 7,000 in total who attended the last two days.

Wrong days to finish off days 4+5 then ?
The attendances each day were :
1...13543
2...10047
3...9263
4...4243
5 ..3142

Days 4+5 were working days of Monday and Tuesday
That had to have a BIG affect on attendances
RG , has more or less stated the crowds would have been more if a result was more probable
By how many , double ?

Day one was also a working day and it had 4 times as many people as day 5. I know that it is subjective but I am sure a close 4 day test would be more profitable than a no result 5 day run fest.

Day 1 was exceptional, compared to the other days
Would have thought days 2+3 should have been the highest attendances being the Saturday Sunday ?
Days 4+5 thats a very poor turn up , I think you are on the ball RG , with a draw imminent, that is prob why they stayed away

Robert Craddock

* Sir Richard Hadlee reckons ball tampering should be legalised and evidence is mounting in his favor
To see some of the highways breaking fast bowlers backs at Test level is to ponder whether the death of rampaging Test spearheads like Mitchell Johnson

Australian pitches have simply become too flat
Since December last year some of the first innings scores at Australian Test venues are
7/517 + 444 Adelaide
408 +505 Gabba
530+465 MCG
7/572 +475 SCG
9/556 + 626 WACA
Half of these scores were made by Australian batsmen which quite frankly, is not that good at batting
These statistics tell a simple story of decks which weighed to heavily in the batsmans favor

Kiwi great Hadlee said on a soon to be broadcast episode of fox sports cricket legends that he could see no problem with bowlers being able to use natural forces such as their fingernails to work on the ball
Bottle tops which Kiwi bowlers once tried on a tour of Pakistan would be banned

Cricket balls have become such dusty pieces of work you wonder why anyone would have a problem with a bowler occasionally having a nibble at the seam

Footage of bowlers picking at the seam makes commentators gasp but they have no problems with batsmen gaining an advantage by re-enforcing their once - thin blades with a glorified tree trunk.*

Some hard hitting comments by Robert Crash Craddock !

*Dead pitches like the one at the WACA and a funeral pace of play brought on by un-necessary sight board stoppages and tardy over rates, are things that need to be immediately addressed*

By
Ian Chappell


" A Shield round was also being played during the Test and not a single ball was replaced
We think this issue may be specific to Perth."

By
Brett Elliot
Managing director of Kookaburra cricket balls
A dozen cricket balls were replaced

What is going on in India ?
Scores in the test series India v South Africa

1ST TEST
IN 201
SA 184
IN 200
SA 109
A 4 day test match
In the SA 2nd dig Indias first 3 bowlers used were all spin bowlers
Well , they are fast bowlers , they bowl their overs in quick time

2ND TEST
SA 214
IN 0/80
Rain affected ?

3RD TEST
IN 215
SA 79
IN 173
SA 2/32
Stumps day 2
India selected 1 fast bowler and 3 spinners
That would suggest a spin friendly deck ?

So far in the series
Ashwin 18/204 [78.1]
Jadeja 16/166 [61.4]
Total of  34/370 [139.5]

10.88 runs per wicket for the Indian spinners to date this series

Heres a few comments

This pitch in Nagpur is nothing short of diabolical for Test cricket
Telling me that was prepared to last 4 days !!!!
By
Michael Vaughan

How disappointing it is to see the quality of Test Cricket reduced to what we are witnessing
By
Matthew Hayden

I love watching cricket in India
Wickets falling , fielders all around the bat, ball turning massive !!
By
Aaron Finch

This wicket is diabolical
9 legitimate wicket chances in the first hour with 3 plays and misses every over
By
Glen BIG show Maxwell


As bad as this may seam , at least we come to expect turning pitches in India
But on face value , it appears direbowlicall
By
Scrappy

one ball turned a metre to take a wicket, i've seen the clip & when the young bloke gets home from the cricket tonight i'll find out where he got it from

" There will be no more Test cricket in 5 years."

" A trivia question in 5 years time , name the cricketer who made a a 100 in a day night Test."

By
Gerald Daffy
Tattsbet spokesman
Here is one person who does not like day /night cricket

PINK TEST
As I understand it , the Adelaide Oval pitch was prepared grassier to protect the wear and tear on the pink ball?
From what I saw
There was a deal of movement off the pitch
There was decent bounce
Added to the pitch condition ,  the pink ball produced consistent swing throughout the game


Dare I say this after all my whinging of flat decks, this test was way too much in favor of the bowlers
This test might end up being the 2nd shortest test played at the Adelaide Oval ?

FALL OF WICKETS
37 wickets
821 runs
22.18 average per wicket

FIRST SESSIONS
2/80
6/62
5/92
13/234 total

SECOND SESSIONS
5/93
2/130/3/113
10/336 total

LAST SESSION [night]
5/83
5/94
4/74 [ shortened session as game ended]
14/251 total

Those session by session stats kind of prove it was difficulty throughout for batting, even more at night
I enjoyed watching this test, it was riveting viewing throughout
But, there is a need to make things even between bat and ball
In this AU V NZ  series its heavily favored either one or the other

The ball was definitely moving more through the air with a little bit of assistance from the pitch.

I think batsmen find difficulty in adapting to changing conditions.

Particularly Australia who routinely go at 4 runs an over.
They struggle when they need to curb that aggression and be watchful of conditions that assist the bowler.

Will batsmen bat more more productively and more consistently after they have played more games in those conditions Chambo ?