Pitch Bitch.

[silentstriker]

this one will certainly give in a result in 180 overs.

Yea but clearly it's not the pitch considering two out of the four innings were normal. When I say a pitch "certainly" would give a result in 2 days, I meant that you can't reasonably expect both Test teams bat twice and not last 180 overs.

I haven't seen that pitch - the couple candidates had the game canceled.

I know slc isn't a powerful board and so I feel bad for them. If I was running the bcci and they gave that report to one of my pitches I would reply something like this:

"Dear ****face,

I've received your letter regarding the pitch at xyz being unfit to play. In your letter you mention that you would not like to see pitches inordinately helping the batsmen either. In an effort to avoid facing sanctions for such a pitch, I am asking for a list of pitches that have been warned for being too batsmen friendly, so as to not repeat their mistakes. In the absence of such a list, I will be forced to conclude that the policy is ambiguous and thus will be unable to implement your recommendations to any pitch in India.

-Up yours,
SS"

 

[smash84]

Yea but clearly it's not the pitch considering two out of the four innings were normal. When I say a pitch "certainly" would give a result in 2 days, I meant that you can't reasonably expect both Test teams bat twice and not last 180 overs.

I haven't seen that pitch - the couple candidates had the game canceled.

I know slc isn't a powerful board and so I feel bad for them. If I was running the bcci and they gave that report to one of my pitches I would reply something like this:

"Dear ****face,

I've received your letter regarding the pitch at xyz being unfit to play. In your letter you mention that you would not like to see pitches inordinately helping the batsmen either. In an effort to avoid facing sanctions for such a pitch, I am asking for a list of pitches that have been warned for being too batsmen friendly, so as to not repeat their mistakes. In the absence of such a list, I will be forced to conclude that the policy is ambiguous and thus will be unable to implement your recommendations to any pitch in India.

-Up yours,
SS"

lol.....well said

 

[hang on]

Sometimes you have to try to distinguish between the performance of the team and the quality of the pitch though. If you bowl **** you'll go for a lot of runs on any pitch. Saying any pitch where a team scores more than 500 is a flat deck without looking at what was tossed up by the bowlers is a bit silly.

Similarly the same applies for a pitch where a lot of wickets fall in quick succession. The first test wicket in SA was fine in my opinion. There weren't any demons in it, just a bit of movement.

The only wickets which deserve to be blasted are those which are up and down with inconsistent bounce, thus making it dangerous, and those which have been dramatically altered from how they originally play for the benefit of one team.

It gets ridiculous when the usual suspects dive in trying to criticise every pitch where a team gets out for a low score because someone once criticised one of their wickets. Misses the point completely, and is quite stupid frankly.

i agree. it was a comment partly in jest. but seriously, playing devil's advocate, given your point about the quality of the bowling/batting being taken into account, that surely also applies to the situations where, for example, in india (and elsewhere) where teams score big on a regular basis given that the indians or the lankans etc. are blessed with far better batting than bowling. not saying that u are critical of such big scoring pitches, but there are many who jump to the conclusion that a pitch is rubbish without taking into account the bowling resources available.

regarding inconsistent bounce, i am afraid i disagree. it think that it is good for the game. it is a test of a batsman's technique and application.

 

[Daemon]

What's the difference between some deliveries moving off the seam and some not (despite landing on the seam) and inconsistent bounce (provided it's not dangerous)?

 

[Spark]

Nah, at a certain point inconsistent bounce becomes a matter of sheer luck.

 

[Cevno]

What's the difference between some deliveries moving off the seam and some not (despite landing on the seam) and inconsistent bounce (provided it's not dangerous)?

Yeah, this.

Just that everybody is used to seam movement more than inconsistent bounce with more Conditions that way and also traditionally in the world.

Playing on pitches with inconsistent bounce is a Skill in itself, as Sehwag has shown in the past or Hussey in Srilanka. Also the problem seems to be on pitches where the odd ball keeps low, not the pitches where the odd ball shoots up of certain areas for some reason.

 

[Cevno]

Nah, at a certain point inconsistent bounce becomes a matter of sheer luck.

Not if you know how to play on them, I.e Play late/Use your feet to get onto the pitch of the ball and cut out horizontal bat shots.

Sheer matter of luck means that the teams would get out for 50/60 or something every time.Otherwise most pitches will have a pretty decent luck element to them as it is, where they do something extraordinary, like Sreesanth's famous delivery to Kallis for example where the ball instead of keeping low inconsistently, shot up of good length. I used to play in Parks when i was younger, which didn't even have a level pitch and had stones in the surface and even on that surface with adequate protection, if you know how to play on that surface + have quick reflexes and practice, it can be done. So really can't agree with putting any wicket down to just luck, though the element may go up and down.

In any case, same could be said about Seam movement too, where for example on the 2nd day of the SA vs Australia test, i doubt any of the batsman or even bowlers could tell for sure in which direction the ball would go after pitching, and how much it would move. At most you could do is keep it straight and on the stumps like Watson did, and the same applies to pitches with inconsistent bounce(as long as it isn't dangerous).

 

[silentstriker]

Nah, at a certain point inconsistent bounce becomes a matter of sheer luck.

I haven't seen such a hypothetical pitch in the past 10 years in any game which has not been called off.

 

[Son Of Coco]

regarding inconsistent bounce, i am afraid i disagree. it think that it is good for the game. it is a test of a batsman's technique and application.

What's the difference between some deliveries moving off the seam and some not (despite landing on the seam) and inconsistent bounce (provided it's not dangerous)?

It's a test of a batsman's technique when one ball pitches on a good length and he comes forward to it and middles it and the next lands in the same spot and rockets off his gloves, followed by one which almost rolls?

I have to disagree, all it does is show us who gets luckiest on the day. The idea that you can refine your technique to adjust to a ball that doesn't get up at 140kph when you have about 0.44s to see it and play a shot just doesn't make sense.

 

[Daemon]

It's a test of a batsman's technique when one ball pitches on a good length and he comes forward to it and middles it and the next lands in the same spot and rockets off his gloves, followed by one which almost rolls?

I have to disagree, all it does is show us who gets luckiest on the day. The idea that you can refine your technique to adjust to a ball that doesn't get up at 140kph when you have about 0.44s to see it and play a shot just doesn't make sense.

As opposed to a delivery pitching on a length, doing nothing and the next one jagging back in sharply?

 

[Furball]

As opposed to a delivery pitching on a length, doing nothing and the next one jagging back in sharply?

That depends on the skill level of the bowler though.

 

[Daemon]

That depends on the skill level of the bowler though.

Not always. Some deliveries land on the seam and do nothing while others move off it. That's random, and thus the bowler has to get lucky with one to move into or away from the batsmen. Granted that the more deliveries you land on the seam the likelier you are to achieve this movement but in the end it's this same concept of being lucky, though to a slightly lesser extent.

 

[Cevno]

Not always. Some deliveries land on the seam and do nothing while others move off it. That's random, and thus the bowler has to get lucky with one to move into or away from the batsmen. Granted that the more deliveries you land on the seam the likelier you are to achieve this movement but in the end it's this same concept of being lucky, though to a slightly lesser extent.

To add to that same works on a uneven pitch too. The one's landing on the seam get bit of a extra bounce than those not landing on them.Also, bowling straight and in some regions/Cracks where there is low/extra bounce compared to other regions at a certain pace to extract full benefit is a skill in itself. And then you can also put overspin on the ball to make full use of the uneven bounce.

Kumble was a master at bowling accurately on Uneven surfaces and the same batsman do well on these type of surfaces again and again. If it was just down to luck random people would do well or fail and nobody would consistently fail or do well. Find it a Bizarre argument.

Coming back to the comparison, there was no way Watson or the batsman knew on the 2nd day in those 21 balls that which way the ball was going to move of the surface and how much.He just bowled straight, with a good wrist position.

 

[Burgey]

If every pitch was really bowler friendly, after a while that would get dull too.

I think the best thing is variety in pitches, provided there's always a contest. Be it one which bounces and seams or turns - as long as its a good contest, I'm happy with it.

 

[smash84]

If every pitch was really bowler friendly, after a while that would get dull too.

I think the best thing is variety in pitches, provided there's always a contest. Be it one which bounces and seams or turns - as long as its a good contest, I'm happy with it.

awta

 

[Son Of Coco]

Not always. Some deliveries land on the seam and do nothing while others move off it. That's random, and thus the bowler has to get lucky with one to move into or away from the batsmen. Granted that the more deliveries you land on the seam the likelier you are to achieve this movement but in the end it's this same concept of being lucky, though to a slightly lesser extent.

It's amazing how lucky good bowlers can get. To the extent they know which way they move it even.

 

[Son Of Coco]

And then you can also put overspin on the ball to make full use of the uneven bounce.

For a brief moment there I thought you were talking about pace bowlers.

I thought "Bloody hell, I'd like to see that!"

 

[Flem274*]

Watching Shane Bond decimate India in New Zealand on loop. Dunno what Ganguly was talking about. Only seen one ball which can be put down to the pitch (Sehwag had one come in at him and give him a good whack on the glove). Try moving your feet and getting behind the ball ya buggers. Can't believe Ganguly himself never fell over on his face trying to balance on his toes holding his bat out to dry like that.

 

[Xuhaib]

imo ICC has been spot on in this regard they have no issues with a pitch that offers a lot of movement be it in any form(swing,seam,spin) there major issues are with pitches that provide inconsistent bounce.

 

[Xuhaib]

Not always. Some deliveries land on the seam and do nothing while others move off it. That's random, and thus the bowler has to get lucky with one to move into or away from the batsmen. Granted that the more deliveries you land on the seam the likelier you are to achieve this movement but in the end it's this same concept of being lucky, though to a slightly lesser extent.

yeah but a proper skilled batting technique means you will be in a better position to adjust to seam movement however inconsistent bounce does not allow that luxury and makes a Kallis as vulnerable as Morne Morkel