What is a "Good pitch"

[marc71178]

No, there's no such thing as a "good pitch", it's fantasy.

Oh, the irony of Richard calling something Fantasy.

 

[Richard]

Because things like let-offs and wickets due to poor strokes are fantasies, aren't they?

 

[marc71178]

The First Chance Average is a fantasy.

Wickets not slowing run rate is a fantasy.

Economy rates over 4.5 being useless is a fantasy.

Wickets in hand not meaning a huge total is a fantasy.

 

[Richard]

The First Chance Average is a fantasy.

No, you just don't like it because it breaks what you've always thought of as convention.

Wickets not slowing run rate is a fantasy.

No, it's very clear to those who look at the situation instead of outdated assumptions.

Economy rates over 4.5 being useless is a fantasy.

No, the bowlers who go for and accept that are useless.

Wickets in hand not meaning a huge total is a fantasy.

No, the idea that it's not possible to stop people smashing the ball all over the park if they've got wickets in hand is a fantasy.

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

For what it's worth, my idea of a "good" pitch is one which suits the criteria of the home side. There are some basic standards that have to be met of course - the ball shouldn't have dangerously variable bounce at any point in the match, one part of the pitch should not fall apart and have another part stay together and pitches must be adequately covered and so on, but frankly I dislike the idea of uniform pitches intensely. If Sri Lanka want to have murali-built dustbowls because it helps their cricket, go for it, and if Australia want to make the WACA fast and bouncy and the Gabba a green-top, that's fine too. That is the essence of home advantage, and it's not cheating to take advantage of it.

The pitch I most enjoy watching cricket on would be like that described earlier in the thread, with seam movement early on and help for the spinners later, but I'm happy with anything except a road. Even the pitch in mumbai last year, for example, made for some spectacularly entertaining cricket, and generally speaking I vastly prefer bowler-friendly wickets. Give me a shocker like that over everything offered up in the last two Australian home series any day. Although, The WACA and the SCG weren't too bad this year.

 

[Richard]

Top post.
I hate this "we have a policy of preparing the best cricket wickets" rubbish - the whole point of cricket being played in different places (both around countries and around The World) is that you get different conditions wherever you go.
The phrase "doctoring" is one I've come to detest more than most, because of the fact that people misuse it to try to make home-advantage illicit and excuse any potential failings of their team.
And even extremes have their time and place - as long as they're only rare.

 

[MoxPearl]

i guess the point is im sick of the commentators dictating what a good pitch is...

They should just say its a "Fast" pitch.. or a "Slow" ptch etc..

but for them it seems that anything not fast is a "Bad" pitch :/

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

As has been said earlier, I'm pretty sure when a commentator says something like that they mean from the batting perspective - particularly in one day matches.

 

[vic_orthdox]

I dont understand why alot of commentators/people here seem to think

"A fast pitch is a good pitch" .. sure.. it is to the batters .. but cricket is a 2 way game.

I dont understand since a pitch is not lightspeed fast that its a bad pitch...

As long as a pitch has evenish bounce then i dont see how a slow pitch is a bad pitch.. it should just be called a "Slowsh Pitch" .. and a fast one can be called a "Fast Pitch" .. not a "Bad pitch" and a "Good pitch"

My 2cents

because there are advantages for everyone if the pitch is considered "fast" - which in most cases one would also describe as having consistent bounce. the ball comes onto the bat nicely for batsman who can therefore play attacking shots. if a bowler is willing to bend his back there will be enough bounce and carry to worry a batsman, and edges are easier to find on a faster pitch. and for spinners, a slow pitch allows a batsman to adjust to variation, and the amount of turn, after the ball bounces. a fast, hard pitch will also allow more bounce and bring the bat pads into the game.

 

[vic_orthdox]

i've heard first class players (and batsmen) say they don't care how fast or slow a pitch is for a one day game, as long as it is flat.

 

[Richard]

because there are advantages for everyone if the pitch is considered "fast" - which in most cases one would also describe as having consistent bounce. the ball comes onto the bat nicely for batsman who can therefore play attacking shots. if a bowler is willing to bend his back there will be enough bounce and carry to worry a batsman, and edges are easier to find on a faster pitch. and for spinners, a slow pitch allows a batsman to adjust to variation, and the amount of turn, after the ball bounces. a fast, hard pitch will also allow more bounce and bring the bat pads into the game.

There's only something in it for the bowlers if there's sideways movement (be it seam for the seamers or turn for the spinners).
High bounce doesn't trouble decent batsmen in itself - it just makes sideways-movement harder to deal with.

 

[Richard]

i've heard first class players (and batsmen) say they don't care how fast or slow a pitch is for a one day game, as long as it is flat.

Uneven pitches are never as good as even ones - especially in the one-day game.

 

[tooextracool]

the best pitch ive seen in a long long time was the one at old trafford between west indies and england. not only were the conditions even throughout the game, but they also provided enough for good bowlers and yet provided batsmen who were good enough the chance to score runs.

 

[Richard]

2000 or 2004?

 

[tooextracool]

2004 obviously

 

[Son Of Coco]

There's only something in it for the bowlers if there's sideways movement (be it seam for the seamers or turn for the spinners).
High bounce doesn't trouble decent batsmen in itself - it just makes sideways-movement harder to deal with.

If there's something in it for the seamers there's nearly always bounce as well as movement.

As for the bit about high bounce not troubling decent batsmen, I think I've already said 'rubbish'.

 

[vic_orthdox]

Uneven pitches are never as good as even ones - especially in the one-day game.

woah woah woah! clearly a pitch being "flat" would mean that it doesnt have uneven bounce.

 

[SJS]

A good pitch is one on which Sachin gets his maiden triple hundred out of 500 runs by India, Pakistan fails to avoid the follow on, fights in the second innings with great hundreds from Inzy and Butt and India just manage to scrape home with one wicket to spare, Laxman guiding the teams fortunes in the second knock

 

[Richard]

If there's something in it for the seamers there's nearly always bounce as well as movement.

As for the bit about high bounce not troubling decent batsmen, I think I've already said 'rubbish'.

So good batsmen regularly get out because they've top-edged cross-bat strokes or because they've been gloved then?
No, they read the bounce and play according to it.
Of course, once you get uneven bounce it's quite a different matter.

 

[Richard]

woah woah woah! clearly a pitch being "flat" would mean that it doesnt have uneven bounce.

Yeah, I know - that's what "flat" means in essence - no divets or cracks, so no unevenness.