Lords Pitch

[C_C]

Is anyone gonna slam this Lord's pitch ?
I remember how when oh-so-many wickets fell in Mumbai not too long ago, every tom,**** and harry were condemning the pitch.........this pitch has seen 17 wickets fall on day1 with uneven bounce and the ball keeping low pretty frequently.......So, are we gonna have some consistency and slam the Lords' pitch too ?

 

[King_Ponting]

Is anyone gonna slam this Lord's pitch ?
I remember how when oh-so-many wickets fell in Mumbai not too long ago, every tom,**** and harry were condemning the pitch.........this pitch has seen 17 wickets fall on day1 with uneven bounce and the ball keeping low pretty frequently.......So, are we gonna have some consistency and slam the Lords' pitch too ?

Yep a first class 6th grade wicket dished up by the home of cricket. Appauling

 

[Neil Pickup]

Well the descriptions I used in the text messages I exchanged with PY yesterday were uncomplimentary to the point where I can't repeat them here without major edits.

Along the lines of "Who .... is responsible for this track?! This isn't a cricket pitch. It's a .... joke"

Enough of a slam?

 

[aussie]

not really becuase it has played pretty well today, has Mark Nicholas said ``it sdefiantely not a 17 wicket pitch but all the emotions & build up of the Ashes came out in a spectacular way yesterday``

Gee i love the way Nicholas analyses stuff..

Mumbai on the other hand was definately a horrible surface no question about it

 

[Neil Pickup]

There should be no shooters on day one, two or three of a Test pitch. Ever. It's a shocker.

 

[King_Ponting]

There should be no shooters on day one, two or three of a Test pitch. Ever. It's a shocker.

Agreed. A fourth day pitch on the first day???? Groundsman should be sacked

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

I actually defended the Mumbai wicket at the time, for although it wasn't really test class I don't think it made for a poor game of cricket or anything, same with the Darwin pitch against Sri Lanka last year.

I'm fine with seeing a seamer every now and then and if this had been similar to the Lords wicket in the NWS final I'd be okay with it too, but uneven bounce is one of those things you really don't want to see too much of, because it has so little to do with bowler ability (although it CAN be exploited through talent) and more to do with plain luck. Certainly a wicket shouldn't be uneven on day 1 to the extent seen yesterday with batsmen getting hit repeatedly by balls which leapt off the surface or hit them in the upper body instead of flying through at head height, and also wickets falling to grubbers.

 

[aussie]

well its agreeable that this is the worst lord's test pitch since i've been watching cricket. (that would be from the 97 lord's test to now)

 

[King_Ponting]

we had a pitch not too disimilar to this one dished up at the local district match...... Some idiot decided to do burnouts on the pitch right at a good length.... Resulting in some balls grubbering and others rocketing through over the batsmans head. The end result was a all out 52 to a all out 60..... And it is fricking hard to bat on.

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

well its agreeable that this is the worst lord's test pitch since i've been watching cricket. (that would be from the 97 lord's test to now)

The 97 Lords test had uneven bounce and a heap of seam movement. I think it was worse for batting than this one, which is clearly quite playable if you apply yourself and get forward to negate the uneven bounce. In terms of being a bad wicket I'm not sure. It really depends on your criteria.

Actually the 2001 Lords pitch seamed around a fair bit as well. Odd for a wicket which is usually fairly good for batting that three Ashes series in a row it should seam.

 

[Jono]

I love general seamer friendly conditions with green tops and/or uneven bounce. It makes for great cricket viewing IMO.

I'm not the biggest fan of balls bouncing shin high though. Especially on day 1.

 

[aussie]

The 97 Lords test had uneven bounce and a heap of seam movement. I think it was worse for batting than this one, which is clearly quite playable if you apply yourself and get forward to negate the uneven bounce. In terms of being a bad wicket I'm not sure. It really depends on your criteria.

Actually the 2001 Lords pitch seamed around a fair bit as well. Odd for a wicket which is usually fairly good for batting that three Ashes series in a row it should seam.

well for me a bad pitch would be has neil rightly said one that has grubbers on day 1 to 3, neither test againts AUS 97, SA 98, NZ 99, WI & ZIM 2000, PAK & AUS 2001, SRI & IND 2002, ZIM & SA 2003 nor WI 2004 had that occuring.

 

[PY]

In defence of the groundsman, he has freely admitted that he feels the pitch was 1-2 days late ie the first day was what he wanted on 3rd/4th day.

The weather has been rather dry around UK recently which granted is no excuse but he's had to have the pitch covered for last few days to stop the sun killing it. It is a dodgy pitch but as the play has shown today, it wasn't a 17 wicket pitch on the first day by any stretch of the imagination. I would say that half of the wickets were partially batsmans fault.

Didn't see any coverage of the Mumbai Test I'm afraid but I'm sure you'll put it down to racism within every tom, **** and harry.

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

well for me a bad pitch would be has neil rightly said one that has grubbers on day 1 to 3, neither test againts AUS 97,

That's my point though, it did. In 1997, rain killed off early play in the Lords test, then on day two which was really day one, McGrath came out and took 8/38 on a wicket with heaps of seam movement and uneven bounce.

 

[aussie]

That's my point though, it did. In 1997, rain killed off early play in the Lords test, then on day two which was really day one, McGrath came out and took 8/38 on a wicket with heaps of seam movement and uneven bounce.

yes i remember that but you could say that the rain had a major effect on how the pitch played, not really any fault of the groundsman.

 

[Chubb]

I was at the first day and it was moving around a lot, but i think the main reason for the wickets was brilliant bowling. I don't think anyone alive or dead, including Bradman, Grace or sobers could have kept McGrath out. It was incredible.

 

[PY]

I don't think anyone alive or dead, including Bradman

You mean the great man couldn't score a century from the grave? You've just rocked my world.

 

[aussie]

I was at the first day and it was moving around a lot, but i think the main reason for the wickets was brilliant bowling. I don't think anyone alive or dead, including Bradman, Grace or sobers could have kept McGrath out. It was incredible.

i've got one batsman who could have gotten through that period `Brian Lara`

 

[King_Ponting]

i've got one batsman who could have gotten through that period `Brian Lara`

Brian Lara= Glenn Mcgrath's bunny........ Your decision

 

[aussie]

the thing is between those two great players is that unlike Atheton, Adams, Trescothick etc (batsmen who he has failed numerous times) and who haven't made that many runs againts him can be rightfully called Pigeons Bunny's .

But even though he has gotten Lara plenty of times Lara has scored big runs & destroyed McGrath as well. Scores of 213, 153, 132, 182 come to mind.