ICC rated as "boring"

[Burgey]

They’ll just leave a fair bit of grass on it imo

 

[SillyCowCorner1]

Isn't this the point of test cricket?

To test cricketers?

Who are these people at the helm of ICC?

Probably born near the boundary line.

 

[Gnske]

Here's the rationale and metric anyway

https://www.cricbuzz.com/cricket-news/99969/wanderers-pitch-india-vs-south-africa-the-rules-for-rating-a-pitch-dangerous-or-unfit

The objective of a Test pitch shall be to allow all the individual skills of the game to be demonstrated by the players at various stages of the match. If anything, the balance of the contest between bat and ball in a Test match should slightly favour the bowling team,

-> A pitch should be expected to deteriorate as the match progresses, and as a consequence the bounce could become more inconsistent, and the ball could deviate more (seam and spin) off the wearing surface.

Very Good: (if there is) Good carry, limited seam movement and consistent good bounce early in the match and as the pitch wears as the match progresses, with an acceptable amount of turn on the first two days but natural wear sufficient to be responsive to spin later in the game

Good: (if there is) Average carry, moderate seam movement and consistent bounce both early in the match and as the pitch wears as the match progresses, natural wear sufficient to be responsive to spin from day 1, though not quite meeting the criteria for carry and bounce for a "very good" pitch.

Average: (If it) Lacks carry, and/or bounce and/or occasional seam movement, but consistent in carry and bounce. A degree of turn, but with average bounce for the spinner. Falling significantly short of "very good" with respect to carry, bounce and turn.

Below Average: (If there is) Either very little carry and/or bounce and/or more than occasional seam movement, or occasional variable (but not excessive or dangerous) bounce and/or occasional variable carry. If a pitch demonstrates these features, then the pitch cannot be rated in a higher category regardless of the amount of turn the pitch displays at any stage of the match.

Poor: A Poor pitch is one that does not allow an even contest between bat and ball, either by favouring the batters too much, and not giving the bowlers (seam and spin) from either team sufficient opportunity to take wickets, or by favouring the bowlers too much (seam or spin), and not giving the batters from either team the opportunity to make runs. If any of the following criteria apply, a pitch may be rated "poor":- The pitch offers excessive seam movement at any stage of the match- The pitch displays excessive unevenness of bounce for any bowler at any stage of the match- The pitch offers excessive assistance to spin bowlers, especially early in the match- The pitch displays little or no seam movement or turn at any stage in the match together with no significant bounce or carry, thereby depriving the bowlers of a fair contest between bat and ball.- The pitch offers excessive assistance to spin bowlers, especially early in the match

Unfit: A pitch may be rated 'unfit' if it is dangerous.

-> It is recognised that a limited amount of seam movement is acceptable early in the match and that a pitch may develop some unevenness of bounce for seam bowlers as the match progresses. This is acceptable, but should not develop to a point where they would be described as "excessive".

-> It is acceptable for a pitch to offer some degree of turn on the first day of a match, particularly in the sub-continent, though anything more than occasional unevenness of bounce at this stage of the match is not acceptable. It is to be expected that a pitch will turn steadily more as a match progresses, and it is recognised that a greater degree of unevenness of bounce may develop.

-> It is impossible to quantify the amount that a ball is "allowed" to turn as bowlers will turn the ball differing amounts. The type and identity of bowler shall be taken into account when assessing this factor.

-> In no circumstances should the pitch 'explode'.

I'm now curious, because if you go by these guidelines the Perth pitch might have suited poor to unfit better. Albeit the bar for unfit has been set very low in the past and there's not much information for dangerous in the article, so maybe the ICC has a document better explaining it?

Seam bowlers are complete wastes of skin too I guess.

 

[Top_Cat]

Are there any consequences of any sort that mean the curator or anyone in professional cricket should give a single flying **** what the ICC says about their decks?

 

[cnerd123]

Are there any consequences of any sort that mean the curator or anyone in professional cricket should give a single flying **** what the ICC says about their decks?

Repeated poor ratings could lead to a venue being stripped of international/test status

 

[Top_Cat]

So, no.

 

[trundler]

What's a pitch explosion?

 

[morgieb]

Repeated poor ratings could lead to a venue being stripped of international/test status

I think now IIRC if they reach 5 demerit points the ground is suspended from internationals for a year.

 

[Daemon]

What did they rate the Basin recently?

 

[Bolo]

What's a pitch explosion?

Not sure if they mean the pitch itself exploding on impact (ie. dustbowl that is falling to pieces) or the ball exploding off the pitch (i.e insanely dangerous unpredictable bounce). Likely the former, but both make sense

 

[trundler]

Bring back uncovered pitches IMO. Batsmen are pampered too much.

 

[Borges]

Bring back uncovered pitches IMO. Batsmen are pampered too much.

It is considered fashionable to say this; recent history does not suggest that batsmen are being pampered.

The percentage of drawn test matches post DRS is less than what it used to be earlier. South Africa-India, England-India, Pakistan-New Zealand, Sri Lanka-England and Australia-India (so far) have all had (covered) pitches with ample help to the bowlers, with every game producing a non-draw result.

 

[trundler]

It is considered fashionable to say this; recent history does not suggest that batsmen are being pampered.

The percentage of drawn test matches post DRS is less than what it used to be earlier. South Africa-India, England-India, Pakistan-New Zealand, Sri Lanka-England and Australia-India (so far) have all had (covered) pitches with ample help to the bowlers, with every game producing a non-draw result.

.. I was clearly joking

 

[trundler]

You must be fun at parties

 

[stephen]

2018 has been a pretty good year for test bowlers actually. It's almost a different era when you look at the stats.

 

[Bolo]

2018 has been a pretty good year for test bowlers actually. It's almost a different era when you look at the stats.

It's almost too much. I find myself rooting for the bats for the first time ever.

 

[morgieb]

2018 has been a pretty good year for test bowlers actually. It's almost a different era when you look at the stats.

Best since 1959 apparently.

 

[stephen]

I wonder how much of that is Australia being rubbish this year.

 

[GRAB]

South Africa other than AB (who is not quite human as we all know) have had an abysmal year with the bat, though except in SL that has been covered over by our bowlers...

 

[stephen]

SA, Aus, Ind, Pak and NZ all have varying degrees of good bowling attacks at the moment and other than one or two superstars in each team their batting is significantly worse. NZ probably are the most balanced side now with both strong batting and bowling.