Ball bouncing too low on turf pitches

[onedayyouwillsee]

Hey guys I've been playing on synthetic matt for 4 years now, that's where I started my cricket from, lately I've started turf cricket at Melbourne, yet some ball are almost close to rolling on the pitch, so its super hard to judge it.

Hence some feedback or tips to counter this habit would be nice.

Cheers.

 

[Line and Length]

The transition from synthetic to turf requires some modifications. With the lower bounce you need to get on the front foot more. Synthetic is ideal for back-foot play but the ball that skids on turf can trap you.

 

[Son Of Coco]

Personally, I found one of the highlights of playing on turf was the one that hit the seam and flew past the batsman's shoulder as he was coming forward to it.

I was a bowler though. It's probably not as entertaining when you're batting.

 

[Daemon]

I’ve played on synthetic wickets that do the opposite and others that roll. It’s all a gamble, just make sure you exaggerate what the ball did when you get out.

See Laxman when he got bowled and Sreesanth to Kallis and work on it.

 

[honestbharani]

It really depends on the surface beneath too sometimes. The matting type rolls we played on during school cricket in Tamilnadu usually played hard or slow based on how the surface underneath was but it just sort of make it a bit more even and trustworthy. I suppose they were not sure of the standard of those wickets for schoolboys and the worry was that some folks may get seriously injured with protective equipment not being that widely available back then (late 90s and early 00s).

 

[cnerd123]

Play on the front foot more, play straight, probably bat out of the crease as well so you can better reach the ball.

 

[NotMcKenzie]

My first thought on reading this was 'welcome to turf pitches'. Particularly if you play at a low level, turf pitches in my experience tend to be low and are often extremely inconsistent, particularly if the ball pitches in footmarks. As others have said, playing forward can help, and if the keeper is back, I'm always with both feet outside the crease so that if the length is such I need to go back, it is unlikely to be full enough to hit the stumps.

 

[Burgey]

Just get on the front foot.

Then when you get better you'll face faster bowlers who'll get it through on turf and you'll get your back foot game back soon enough.

 

[social]

Artificial can get you into bad habits as the bounce is so true & seam movement generally minimal that you can simply hit through

Playing on turf is very different

Need to play later

Good news is that a half volley is still a half volley etc

As others have said, if it’s keeping low then get forward

 

[Line and Length]

Prior to the advent of synthetic turf wickets (and turf wickets becoming wider spread) I remember playing on malthoid pitches. Those of a younger generation may not have heard of malthoid. It is a two-ply felt material impregnated with bitumen that was rolled onto a concrete base. I recall it was extremely helpful to bowlers as there was plenty of nasty bounce and the surface took grip for spinners. I recall on very hot days the bitumen in the surface would become quite tacky and the ball would become quite dark.
Following the demise of malthoid I can remember that pitches for a brief period were coated with Plexipave - a substance which was troweled on and, when dry, had the effect of sandpaper and the ball would be a mess within a few overs. Fortunately, synthetic turf replaced this dire surface.
Returning to malthoid, here is a picture from an excellent article (referenced below)

Memories of malthoid

CRICKET By LIAM DURKIN BEFORE most local cricketers had the luxury of playing on turf, or even astro for that [...]

latrobevalleyexpress.com.au

 

[social]

Malthoid was bad but matting is the worst

 

[Line and Length]

Malthoid was bad but matting is the worst

As a bowler I enjoyed playing on matting (once) but these pitches were rare in the Perth metro area. The time I played on this surface the matting was pegged out over a malthoid pitch that had worn through to concrete.

 

[Burgey]

As a bowler I enjoyed playing on matting (once) but these pitches were rare in the Perth metro area. The time I played on this surface the matting was pegged out over a malthoid pitch that had worn through to concrete.

Lol I bet you did. Matting was so bad to bat on. You just knew something had your name on it.

 

[Line and Length]

Lol I bet you did. Matting was so bad to bat on. You just knew something had your name on it.

I vividly remember one delivery I sent down. My fast-medium in-swinger pitched on leg and flew outside the off with the 'keeper taking it in front of first slip. The batsmen didn't get near it and the umpire said, "That would have troubled Bradman."

 

[Starfighter]

@social @Burgey @Line and Length I'm inferring matting in this context means coir. Always wanted to have a bowl on one of those after reading about guys like Barnes and Fazal. Astroturf might be much more consistent but only looped leggies (well, and my chucked off breaks) can get much out it, so I always hated it.

Any turf better so long as the bounce isn't too inconsistent or low. It forces you to develop a proper batting technique and doesn't favour the guys who just swing across the line as much. From a bowling perspective it's also far better for one's knees.

 

[Line and Length]

@social @Burgey @Line and Length I'm inferring matting in this context means coir. Always wanted to have a bowl on one of those after reading about guys like Barnes and Fazal. Astroturf might be much more consistent but only looped leggies (well, and my chucked off breaks) can get much out it, so I always hasted it.

Any turf better so long as the bounce isn't too inconsistent or low. It forces you to develop a proper batting technique and doesn't favour the guys who just swing across the line as much. From a bowling perspective it's also far better for one's knees.

Yes @Starfighter - matting was a length of coir stretched out and pegged over a concrete pitch or, apparently in some cases, an area of rolled grass. It definitely gripped spin and seam alike but much of the problem was because of irregularities beneath the actual matting.

 

[Burgey]

Yeah. Fmd anyone who could stand the seam of the new ball up on that **** was like McGrath at Lord's. Reckon I got hit more in about five years playing on mats than the other 35+ years I played.

 

[Shri]

It really depends on the surface beneath too sometimes. The matting type rolls we played on during school cricket in Tamilnadu usually played hard or slow based on how the surface underneath was but it just sort of make it a bit more even and trustworthy. I suppose they were not sure of the standard of those wickets for schoolboys and the worry was that some folks may get seriously injured with protective equipment not being that widely available back then (late 90s and early 00s).

also depends on the age of the turf. i think my school only changed the mat once every 5 years or something. the new mats that were nicer didn't bounce much, the ones that had gotten thin after months of use and being out on the sun all the time zipped through

the one in college had rough patches. i.e, torn spots everywhere where the ball spun a mile if you hit soil where it was torn

if you tripped on the torn mat, the guy who was supposed to manage this **** who was also the coach yelled at you for damaging the mat more and to start your run more carefully

 

[Daemon]

Prior to the advent of synthetic turf wickets (and turf wickets becoming wider spread) I remember playing on malthoid pitches. Those of a younger generation may not have heard of malthoid. It is a two-ply felt material impregnated with bitumen that was rolled onto a concrete base. I recall it was extremely helpful to bowlers as there was plenty of nasty bounce and the surface took grip for spinners. I recall on very hot days the bitumen in the surface would become quite tacky and the ball would become quite dark.
Following the demise of malthoid I can remember that pitches for a brief period were coated with Plexipave - a substance which was troweled on and, when dry, had the effect of sandpaper and the ball would be a mess within a few overs. Fortunately, synthetic turf replaced this dire surface.
Returning to malthoid, here is a picture from an excellent article (referenced below)

Memories of malthoid

CRICKET By LIAM DURKIN BEFORE most local cricketers had the luxury of playing on turf, or even astro for that [...]

latrobevalleyexpress.com.au

This reminds me of the retired school teacher who goes around Australia locating and documenting forgotten pitches. Pretty cool though I think driving 14 hours to find a pitch must surely be his front to have some time away from the missus

'They're a bit like Roman ruins': One man's quest to find Australia's 'lost' cricket pitches

Many of the long-forgotten pitches Les Everett finds are overgrown, and it's been decades since they last heard the echo of willow striking leather, but he says they all have a story to tell.

www.abc.net.au

 

[karan_fromthestands]

The transition from synthetic to turf requires some modifications. With the lower bounce you need to get on the front foot more. Synthetic is ideal for back-foot play but the ball that skids on turf can trap you.

This is pretty much it. Get on the front foot right away and just play straight. It will mess up your overall technique though, you'll rarely come across a real pitch that keeps low(some SC pitches in the past were low).