• Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

ICC moving in on pitch preparation

Scaly piscine

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
As with Zimbabwe, Clive Lloyd is long overdue for the chopping block - he's nearly as clueless as the ICC.
 

a10khan

School Boy/Girl Captain
Lets be honest here, those two pitches were terrible. They were total dustbowls, and looked more like "under-construction" roads then pitches. The CricInfo writer needs to get out of his bias and look at it from a nuetral perspective.
 

andyc

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Personally I don't see why a 'terrible' pitch is one that gives the bowlers more chance. To me, that's just how cricket is, more often than not you'll get a pitch that greatly helps the batsmen, so what's wrong with helping the bowlers out once in a while. Obviously, not to the point where it becomes dangerous to the batsmen though.
 

Jono

Virat Kohli (c)
Oh I see, we want all pitches to be flat roads. Can't have spinners dominating unless its day 5, with both sides scoring 450+ in the first innings.

Absolute BS.
 

Anil

Hall of Fame Member
a10khan said:
Lets be honest here, those two pitches were terrible. They were total dustbowls, and looked more like "under-construction" roads then pitches. The CricInfo writer needs to get out of his bias and look at it from a nuetral perspective.
why? there were batsmen who performed well on both pitches against quality spin and pace bowlers had their moments as well...if they were pitches where teams got shot out in the low 100s or even less and the matches were over in a couple of days, i can understand the scrutiny(if not accept it), but this is ridiculous....in any case, pitches have always been made to suit home team conditions and why is that under the microscope now? i don't think any batsmen were in real danger either so they are just messing around with stuff that doesn't need any correction....clive lloyd should hark back to his playing days and remember how the pitches were made rock hard and bouncy in the windies to always suit the fast bowlers....the hypocrite... :@
 

Sanz

Hall of Fame Member
a10khan said:
Lets be honest here, those two pitches were terrible. They were total dustbowls, and looked more like "under-construction" roads then pitches. The CricInfo writer needs to get out of his bias and look at it from a nuetral perspective.
Did you really watch any of the test matches between India & Sri Lanka ? 8-) 8-)
 

JASON

Cricketer Of The Year
I knew there was more to it than just our SL Batsmen being pretty crappy and badly out of form to get thumped by India 6-0 (in ODIs) and 2-0 (in Tests) !! :D :D

Now Good old Big Brother ICC thinks that's the reason for our Team's crap form !! :laugh: :laugh:

** Must Remember to put Clive on my Christmas list next year ** :laugh:
 

Jono

Virat Kohli (c)
To be honest there's always been something about Clive Lloyd (as match referee, not player) which bugged me. This takes the cake though. I think the writer of that article makes a valid point though. If any pitch needs inspection, its ones like Antigua where West Indies and other teams can pile up the runs with ease, yet in previous tests with 'less friendlier wickets' struggle to get past 200-250. There's also the NZ pitches of India's tour in 2002/03, which to be perfectly honest I didn't mind that much (other than the fact India were losing). I like variety in cricket pitches. We need an even amount of flat tracks, green seaming wickets and dust bowls. Clive Lloyd seems to disagree.

I think the writers conclusion summed it up, the two Ind v SL tests made interesting test cricket where the ball got the better of the bat, but not due to the pitch alone. Rather due to awesome bowling performances from Murali, Kumble and Harbhajan. There's no surprise that those 3 spinners were the best bowlers in the series, because they are the best bowlers from their respective teams! Added to that, it wasn't so bowler friendly because Sachin and Laxman managed to get tons and hell Pathan came awfully close too.
 

Josh

International Regular
Cricket isn't cricket anymore. Soon the international teams will all be playing on synthetic turf like us terrible players do.
 

Jono

Virat Kohli (c)
LOL Josh!

One thing I love about synthetic though, it can rain for like 90 mins, but once it stops and a bit of sunlight we'll be back on the ground playing again. :cool:
 

swede

School Boy/Girl Captain
I think its a good idea in theory but cant see how they can really do it.

Its ok for a home side to seek an advantage at the expense of the opposition but not at the expense of the game.
So much test cricket is ruined by bad pitches. Test cricket should be played fast and furiously and be over in 3-4 days as all the ashes games were. great cricket. Thats how it will flourish and if the ICC could help that, well great,
 

LongHopCassidy

International Captain
IMO, wickets should favour bowlers far more than they should. You know something's afoot when every Test nation has a player averaging 50 plus with the bat and only four or five in the world under 25 with the ball.

Everyone likes a result, as well.
 

Tom Halsey

International Coach
LongHopCassidy said:
IMO, wickets should favour bowlers far more than they should. You know something's afoot when every Test nation has a player averaging 50 plus with the bat and only four or five in the world under 25 with the ball.

Everyone likes a result, as well.
Yes, and the majority of Tests are results. I see no problem, personally.
 

Top