ICC rated as "boring"

[stephen]

https://www.cricket.com.au/news/per...ia-india-virat-kohli-justin-langer/2018-12-21

In response to the incredible, entertaining Perth test match, the ICC has given itself a rating of "boring".

An official spokesman for the ICC has stated "while it has always been our intention to produce the most banal and arbitrary decisions possible, the recent Perth test was deemed to be far too exciting and interesting to watch. In light of this, we have decided to give ourselves a rating of 'boring' to describe the gravity of the situation. This enthralling test match cricket absolutely should not be allowed in the modern game. It hurts the game when the batsmen can't pile on 500 runs at 4.5 runs per over with no risk. This cannot be permitted going forward."

The ICC is cricket's governing body and is responsible for ensuring Indian batsmen have as high averages as is possible.

Itstl.

 

[the big bambino]

Any pitch that morphs between flat and spitting venom from one session to the next is lucky to receive a pass mark. Anyone who enjoys "risk" and "excitement" can go bat on it and have their understanding of words better aligned to their actual definitions. ICC being generous.

 

[Starfighter]

https://www.cricket.com.au/news/icc...e-mitchell-johnson-michael-vaughan/2018-12-22

One of the precious few times I have agreed with Vaughan. Of course Aakash Chopra didn't like it, bet he was ****ing himself whenever he played on a deck where it got above dick height.

 

[GoodAreasShane]

Any pitch that morphs between flat and spitting venom from one session to the next is lucky to receive a pass mark. Anyone who enjoys "risk" and "excitement" can go bat on it and have their understanding of words better aligned to their actual definitions. ICC being generous.

Would take this over 500 v 500 highway all day every day.

 

[TheJediBrah]

*facepalm*

great thanks ICC just what Australian curators need, more incentive to just make roads

**** me

 

[stephen]

Any pitch that morphs between flat and spitting venom from one session to the next is lucky to receive a pass mark. Anyone who enjoys "risk" and "excitement" can go bat on it and have their understanding of words better aligned to their actual definitions. ICC being generous.

That was nowhere near a dangerous pitch though. Most of the balls that were rearing up were doing so from a short length. It was a hard pitch to bat on at times but it was in no way dangerous.

If that pitch was bad then so have half the pitches in test history. It was a good cricket wicket that saw plenty of runs for batsmen who gritted it out.

It's astonishing that this pitch gets rated "average" and that cricket is still allowed to be played in Galle.

 

[cnerd123]

The pitch was rated Average, and this has nothing to do with the drama it produced. It doesn't mean 'boring' either.

Personally I feel some of the best Tests to watch in the last few years have been played on pitches deem underprepared or poor for cricket. As fans we like the random element of uneven bounce, and not being able to predict how a pitch will behave session to session. But that's not what pitches are graded on clearly.

 

[the big bambino]

Funny then I saw a few full length balls from Bumrah either taken by a leaping keeper or fly over his head.

 

[stephen]

"Most" doesn't mean "all".

The pitch was fine for most of the match. It started playing up towards the end off the innings' and settled down after the heavy roller, which makes for good cricket since it incentivised run scoring and punished teams for batting too long.

 

[the big bambino]

The pitch was rated Average, and this has nothing to do with the drama it produced. It doesn't mean 'boring' either.

Personally I feel some of the best Tests to watch in the last few years have been played on pitches deem underprepared or poor for cricket. As fans we like the random element of uneven bounce, and not being able to predict how a pitch will behave session to session. But that's not what pitches are graded on clearly.

I’m guessing they rate a pitch on the balance it provides between bat and ball. Administrators also have to account for player safety and I think, though can’t say for certain, that pitches can be rated as dangerous. A rating so bad that it can cause a game to be cancelled. Dangerous wickets are usually associated with uneven bounce, a feature of this pitch. As the bounce was unpredictable and that it seemed to vary from session to session the pitch was a bad one imo. So I think the ICC is being generous.

I wouldn’t like to think that a curator, who has basically failed in his job, be congratulated for providing what was such a bad wicket. I sometimes muse that batsman would walk up to curators and offer their hand to those who’ve prepared an uneven wicket then smack him in the chops. Then say that’s what batting on your **** heap feels like. We don’t want road after road (though I don’t mind the occasional one) but we should be looking for pitches more like Adelaide and nothing like Perth.

 

[the big bambino]

"Most" doesn't mean "all".

The pitch was fine for most of the match. It started playing up towards the end off the innings' and settled down after the heavy roller, which makes for good cricket since it incentivised run scoring and punished teams for batting too long.

Full length balls that make a keeper leap. Shouldn’t even be most, though that is bad enough for a batsmen’s peace of mind. It should be never or rare.

 

[Spark]

god forbid we unsettle these poor oppressed batsmen for once

 

[Gnske]

The pitch was rated Average, and this has nothing to do with the drama it produced. It doesn't mean 'boring' either.

Personally I feel some of the best Tests to watch in the last few years have been played on pitches deem underprepared or poor for cricket. As fans we like the random element of uneven bounce, and not being able to predict how a pitch will behave session to session. But that's not what pitches are graded on clearly.

Come on man with this Nagpur ****.

The test lasted five days, with two days of inconsistent bounce at a new ground. My rating would be "Promising, but with room for improvement."

 

[cnerd123]

I'm pro Nagpur and I'm pro this pitch ftr. Batsmen can GAGF.

 

[stephen]

It shouldn't have been rated "very good" but it certainly was "good". Uneven bounce is fine. It wasn't dangerous, it wasn't a Bunsen, it wasn't a raging green top, it wasn't a filthy road, it lasted five days and it provided entertaining cricket. It's the definition of a good pitch.

The icc are idiots.

 

[morgieb]

People realise Average is still a passing grade yeah?

Plus we need context for this too. What has the average Aussie road been rated as?

 

[Burgey]

Full length balls that make a keeper leap. Shouldn’t even be most, though that is bad enough for a batsmen’s peace of mind. It should be never or rare.

I’d like to see a deck where all full length balls fly through to the keeper at head height. Would be awesome.

Much better than a road or a rank turner. The former is boring and the latter effeminate.

 

[stephen]

People realise Average is still a passing grade yeah?

Plus we need context for this too. What has the average Aussie road been rated as?

Last year Brisbane got a "very good" rating, as did Adelaide. Sydney and Perth got "good".

 

[Burgey]

Bcci would have marked it down as it bounced above waist height

 

[Victor Ian]

So what are we getting in Melbourne? On the one hand, we are coming off a poor rating so you think they will make something in it, but on the other hand we need a flat pitch to make sure they have bums on seats on Saturday and Sunday.