So you prefer pitches of Ind (2003-11) instead of present Indian pitches ?Flat pitches for sure make for better player development. Batsmen learn to play long innings and bowlers earn their wickets and are forced to develop inventive ways to take wickets. If batsmen play all their lives on ****ty greentops they dont develop the full range of shots to score at the highest level.
India and Pakistan had very flat pitches in the fifties and sixties, if anything even flatter than those from the seventies on and definitely flatter than the mid 00's. They produced very few notable bowlers and they tended to be hopeless overseas where the ball moved as they weren't used to facing it.Flat pitches for sure make for better player development. Batsmen learn to play long innings and bowlers earn their wickets and are forced to develop inventive ways to take wickets. If batsmen play all their lives on ****ty greentops they dont develop the full range of shots to score at the highest level.
For player development, yes of courseSo you prefer pitches of Ind (2003-11) instead of present Indian pitches ?
There are far more factors at play there than just the pitches,so no. Hopelessly simplistic post.India and Pakistan had very flat pitches in the fifties and sixties, if anything even flatter than those from the seventies on and definitely flatter than the mid 00's. They produced very few notable bowlers and they tended to be hopeless overseas where the ball moved as they weren't used to facing it.
Writers at the time attributed a significant part of their struggles to their pitches. They discentvised fast bowling and without movement of the ball batsmen would tend to follow it when it did move overseas.There are far more factors at play there than just the pitches,so no. Hopelessly simplistic post.
And flat pitch is also one of the major reasons of struggle of Australian batsman in overseas conditions in recent times except few playersWriters at the time attributed a significant part of their struggles to their pitches. They discentvised fast bowling and without movement of the ball batsmen would tend to follow it when it did move overseas.
It's your post that is the simplistic one which ignores other factors. You're proclaiming one way is better when historic precedent isn't clear on that.
I think this was more true in the early 2010s tbh, and Shield pitches in those days were very very green which is why you had medium pace dobblers like Butterworth averaging 20. The last two or three seasons is when they've gotten flat again.And flat pitch is also one of the major reasons of struggle of Australian batsman in overseas conditions in recent times except few players
Melbourne and Perth have been flat for a long time, and Adelaide was still very flat until Burdett left, and I don't think the problems against the moving ball have gotten better - if anything they might have gotten worse.I think this was more true in the early 2010s tbh, and Shield pitches in those days were very very green which is why you had medium pace dobblers like Butterworth averaging 20. The last two or three seasons is when they've gotten flat again.
I'm talking about FC level here mostly.Melbourne and Perth have been flat for a long time, and Adelaide was still very flat until Burdett left, and I don't think the problems against the moving ball have gotten better - if anything they might have gotten worse.
Such wickets don't exist except in few places in Eng /SAThere's an art in producing a good Test wicket .... one which offers assistance to the seamers on the first day and, by the fifth day, is taking spin.
The SCG used to be like this. Hasn't in quite a while now though.Such wickets don't exist except in few places in Eng /SA
So am I. Considering how much of each batting cohort at each time crossed eras I consider the pitches of secondary importance at best.I'm talking about FC level here mostly.