About time too, IMHO
Do I contradict myself?
Very well then I contradict myself,
(I am large, I contain multitudes.
Well Lancashire didn't bid because of redevelopment, so that leaves either Headingley, which had an Ashes test last year and gets an ODI in 2011, or Chester-le-Street which has been given several chances to host test matches but, for whatever reason, consistently draws mediocre crowds, and has been given two ODIs in 2011 anyway.
Also whilst Trent Bridge is about halfway up the country geographically, I'd imagine going by population concentration it is actually quite far north (i.e. most of the country live south of Nottingham even though it is in the midlands).
The fact is that England (and Wales) now have more international standard grounds than there will be test matches in a summer - Lord's, Oval, Edgebaston, Trent Bridge, Headingley, Chester-le-Street, Old Trafford and now Sofia Gardens and the Rose Bowl. As long as Lord's gets two per summer (which is disputable, but considering how profitable matches are there and the prestige of touring teams to play there I can't see it changing) then three grounds will miss out every summer. It's just a fact and there's no way around it really.
Last edited by pskov; 28-08-2010 at 03:30 PM.
Hosting mediocre opposition in mid-May has hardly helped Chester-le-Street to pull in the crowds, tbf. But they have been promised an Ashes Test for 2013.
Reminding me of the situation here..Everything is down to money in the end.. Two grounds 30km away from each other hold test matches during the rainiest time of the year, whereas in permanantly dry Port Elizabeth, with 1.5 million people and the lengthiest cricket history in the country, our nearest regular test match ground is 740km away..
I do think it is a real shame that there is going to be no Test cricekt in the North of England next year. This is really just down to there being far too many "international" grounds in England. Given that Lord's should always hold one test during any series and the Oval always being up there for having a test too, it does mean that the North could often be left out of receiving matches.
You know I wish this is a problem that India had. Big cities like Bombay and Calcutta regularly pull in good test crowds whereas small cities like Nagpur don't. It would be logical to give test matches to the 5-6 big cities and compensate the smaller places with extra ODI's and TT games which invariably fill out stadiums. Instead we have seen more test matches in Nagpur over the last 7 years than almost any other city in India and in general smaller cities get way too many tests which are played in front of empty stadiums.
Is it just me or does is the title a little dramatic and has little to do with the content of the article?
If I only just posted the above post, please wait 5 mins before replying as there is bound to be edits
West Robham Rabid Wolves Caedere lemma quod eat lemma
Happy Birthday! (easier than using Birthday threads)
Email and MSN- Goughy at cricketmail dot net
Playing on new grounds like Cardiff & Rosebowl is almost like playing @ a neutral venue & sort of kills the unique feel of having "home town advantage".
MSN Messenger: minardineil2000 at hotmail dot com | AAAS Chairman
CricketWeb Black | CricketWeb XI Captain
ClarkeWatch: We're Watching Rikki - Are You?
Up The Grecians - Exeter City FC
Completing the Square: My Cricket Web Blog
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)