Page 6 of 8 FirstFirst ... 45678 LastLast
Results 76 to 90 of 113

Thread: 'No Doctoring' of the pitch at the Oval

  1. #76
    Cricket Spectator
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Redditch
    Posts
    8
    Well I want to say a huge thank you and well done to the curator. He prepared a brilliant pitch. One that yielded a definite result but wasn't a total mine field.

    It certainly was a weird one though. Whenever a pitch is deteriorating like that it normally only goes one way and thats worse but it looked like this pitch got easier to bat on after day 2. Boycott was saying we'd got enough of a lead at 200 but fair play to Australia, they never go down without a fight.

    How they didn't go in with a spinner on such a dry pitch is baffling though.

  2. #77
    International Captain
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    england
    Posts
    5,657
    Quote Originally Posted by huxleypig View Post
    Well I want to say a huge thank you and well done to the curator. He prepared a brilliant pitch. One that yielded a definite result but wasn't a total mine field.

    It certainly was a weird one though. Whenever a pitch is deteriorating like that it normally only goes one way and thats worse but it looked like this pitch got easier to bat on after day 2. Boycott was saying we'd got enough of a lead at 200 but fair play to Australia, they never go down without a fight.

    How they didn't go in with a spinner on such a dry pitch is baffling though.
    It was a bad pitch but was possible to bat on once a batsman had got in. Whether it was "doctored" depends on your definition. It was by design completely different to any pitch ever seen at the Oval before but whether that qualifies as doctoring is open to debate.

  3. #78
    Hall of Fame Member Furball's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Justice For The 96
    Posts
    19,141
    Quote Originally Posted by howardj View Post
    Will the curator be joining the lads on the open-top bus tour?
    Why?

    Strauss and Trott in both innings, Hussey and Ponting in the 2nd proved that the pitch wasn't exceptionally difficult to bat on.

  4. #79
    International Debutant Cruxdude's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    2,377
    Quote Originally Posted by Lillian Thomson View Post
    It was a bad pitch but was possible to bat on once a batsman had got in. Whether it was "doctored" depends on your definition. It was by design completely different to any pitch ever seen at the Oval before but whether that qualifies as doctoring is open to debate.
    A pitch that is tough for Batsmen to bat on is not a bad pitch. When there were 3 scores > 300, I don't understand how it is a bad pitch. Bad pitches would be the ones in Kanpur (2008), Mumbai (2004), all of NZ (2002-03).

    Earlier curators were blamed for no-result pitch, now a pitch that promises a result but is not too tough to score on also gets him blamed.
    Last edited by Cruxdude; 25-08-2009 at 05:37 PM.


  5. #80
    Cricket Web Staff Member Burgey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    The Castle
    Posts
    40,397
    Quote Originally Posted by Cruxdude View Post
    A pitch that is tough for Batsmen to bat on is not a bad pitch. When there were 3 scores > 300, I don't understand how it is a bad pitch. Bad pitches would be the ones in Kanpur (2008), Mumbai (2004), all of NZ (2002-03).

    Earlier curators were blamed for no-result pitch, now a pitch that promises a result but is not too tough to score on also gets him blamed.
    What happened in NZ 2002-03?
    WWCC - Loyaulte Mi Lie
    "People make me happy.. not places.. people"

    "When a man is tired of London, he is tired of life." - Samuel Johnson

    "Hope is the fuel of progress and fear is the prison in which you put yourself" - Tony Benn

  6. #81
    Hall of Fame Member Jamee999's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Leicestershire, UK
    Posts
    15,094
    Wasn't that when they had the drop-in pitches?
    Or something.

    RIP Fardin Qayyumi (AKA "cricket player"; "Bob"), 1/11/1990 - 15/4/2006

  7. #82
    Cricket Web Staff Member Burgey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    The Castle
    Posts
    40,397
    Dunno tbh.

  8. #83
    International Captain
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    england
    Posts
    5,657
    Quote Originally Posted by Cruxdude View Post
    A pitch that is tough for Batsmen to bat on is not a bad pitch. When there were 3 scores > 300, I don't understand how it is a bad pitch. Bad pitches would be the ones in Kanpur (2008), Mumbai (2004), all of NZ (2002-03).

    Earlier curators were blamed for no-result pitch, now a pitch that promises a result but is not too tough to score on also gets him blamed.
    It was a terrible wicket. The ball was taking chunks out of it after tea on the first day. If the teams had had proper bowling attacks with two quality spinners you would have a very short match. In fact if Shane Warne had been playing it would have been a very uneven contest between bat and ball. Though you have to assume that the curator wouldn't have done what he did if Australia still had Warne and McGill.

  9. #84
    Cricket Web: All-Time Legend Uppercut's Avatar
    Tournaments Won: 1
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Norn Iron
    Posts
    23,054
    Quote Originally Posted by Lillian Thomson View Post
    It was a terrible wicket. The ball was taking chunks out of it after tea on the first day. If the teams had had proper bowling attacks with two quality spinners you would have a very short match. In fact if Shane Warne had been playing it would have been a very uneven contest between bat and ball. Though you have to assume that the curator wouldn't have done what he did if Australia still had Warne and McGill.
    Moan moan moan. It brought a result, it was a good pitch.
    Quote Originally Posted by zaremba View Post
    The Filth have comfortably the better bowling. But the Gash have the batting. Might be quite good to watch.

  10. #85
    International Captain
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    england
    Posts
    5,657
    Quote Originally Posted by Uppercut View Post
    Moan moan moan. It brought a result, it was a good pitch.
    It's not actually possible for anyone to be thick enough to believe that any wicket that brings a result is automatically a good one, so I'll assume there's an ulterior motive behind that post.

  11. #86
    Cricket Web: All-Time Legend Uppercut's Avatar
    Tournaments Won: 1
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Norn Iron
    Posts
    23,054
    There is. All the whining that goes on after surfaces like these are prepared is the reason there are so many flat pitches and bore draws in test cricket these days. Anything other than rank flatties I'm happy with.

  12. #87
    International Captain
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    england
    Posts
    5,657
    The fact that groundsman aren't capable of preparing proper wickets that gradually deteriorate within the timespan allowed for the game doesn't make a wicket that falls to pieces on Day One a good one. It might be preferable to one that stays flat for the duration but it's still not a good wicket.

  13. #88
    International Debutant Cruxdude's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    2,377
    Quote Originally Posted by Burgey View Post
    What happened in NZ 2002-03?
    Well the balls were swinging miles and test matches gt over in 2 or 3 days. Actually in the 1st or second test India got all out for 99 and got a lead

  14. #89
    International Debutant Cruxdude's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    2,377
    Quote Originally Posted by Uppercut View Post
    There is. All the whining that goes on after surfaces like these are prepared is the reason there are so many flat pitches and bore draws in test cricket these days. Anything other than rank flatties I'm happy with.
    This. It wasn't an unplayable wicket and if Ponting and Clarke hadn't been run out Australia would have got even closer to 500. Give us results and we wont have talks about test cricket dying out.
    Last edited by Cruxdude; 26-08-2009 at 09:09 AM.

  15. #90
    International Coach tooextracool's Avatar
    Dick Quicks Island Adventure Champion!
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    not far away from you
    Posts
    14,307
    It's always considered to be a 'bad' pitch by players if they cannot trust the bounce on the wicket especially as early as Day 1. I can understand their point, I've batted on pitches where the ball could either die or jump and hit you on the head and it could be potentially dangerous. However, its important to point out that not that many balls misbehaved during that test and that the pitch didn't deteriorate that much over the course of the game. If that meant that they were playing on a day 4 pitch on day 1 and a day 5 pitch on day 2 so be it, with all the protection that batters have these days and with the game already been loaded in favor of the batters, cannot see how this pitch was bad for the game.
    Tendulkar = the most overated player EVER!!
    Beckham = the most overated footballer EVER!!
    Vassell = the biggest disgrace since rikki clarke!!

Page 6 of 8 FirstFirst ... 45678 LastLast


Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Official Under 19 World Cup thread
    By JASON in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 392
    Last Post: 07-03-2008, 04:09 AM
  2. Monty
    By Unattainableguy in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 40
    Last Post: 25-09-2007, 06:14 AM
  3. Giles retires
    By Steulen in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 186
    Last Post: 14-08-2007, 10:32 AM
  4. Mahmood and Panesar power England to series glory
    By symonds_94 in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 08-08-2006, 10:11 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •