What Waqar says makes sense

[Gotchya]

Yet Ali Bacher and his ICC refuse to budge. When will these people learn to give an ear in to those who make the sport live ?
Given that South Africa are the organisers and they would end up losing money perhaps, still though it would be better cricket played at the end of the day. The atmospheric changes are drastic as has been evidenced, and there is nothing to indicate that the same will not happen later.

As Waqar says, Pool B has some of the most importants games to be played under lights, now if these games were decided with a toss better not go out there anyway ! Makes sense to claim that the matches be shifted to the traditional day format. Thank goodness the final isn't flood lit ?!



I think that its time for the ICC to give a little, I hope that other teams come in to suport this claim.

 

[Rik]

I have to agree here. Why not let the games against the minor nations have the floodlights if they are so necessary. I mean the bigger games will be sold out anyway, lights won't come into it. There is too much of an advantage.

Ali Bacher and the ICC have become rather a bad joke of late but this just digs them further into what is turning into rather a large hole in their standing.

 

[Top_Cat]

Aside from the fact that the extra dew around makes the ball move more under lights, the lights in South Africa are dim too, relative to the ones in Australia for example. This means it is a VERY large advantage to win the toss, something which shouldn't be such a large factor in a team's performance in one-dayers.

 

[warrioryohannan]

And to think an important semi final is going to be played under lights at Durban , that would mean the team winning the toss and batting first getting away with the match:!(
I wouldn't even like to see India (if they get to Semis) reaching the final that way. Bacher should really listen to Waqar and co.
It is quite possible that SA themselves would end up playing semis at Durban (if they end up as runner up in super six stage), and taking into consideration SA bad lucks in the past, SA might end up being the team batting second under light and thus losing the semis!!

 

[marc71178]

Thank goodness the final isn't flood lit ?!

No, it's just at a ground that Pollock has critcised greatly as not being up to such an event!

 

[full_length]

Strange. Pollock was part of this D/N match in Durban, some 11 months back:
http://uk.cricinfo.com//link_to_dat...IN_RSA/SCORECARDS/AUS_RSA_ODI5_03APR2002.html

In the last 10 D/N matches, it's 4-5 to the team batting first. In it's entire history it's been 50-50.
How can the organizers take a decision based on that evidence?

Waqar claimed it's something like 75-25. Have things actually changed in the past months at Durban?

 

[luckyeddie]

In the last 10 D/N matches, it's 4-5 to the team batting first. In it's entire history it's been 50-50.
How can the organizers take a decision based on that evidence?

Waqar claimed it's something like 75-25. Have things actually changed in the past months at Durban?

I am amazed at those stats - and I'm almost on the point of retracting my previous statements in support of Ali Bacher's stand. Almost, but not quite.

Is it just the time of the year? It's high summer at the moment with daytime temperatures of 28-30, dropping to a minimum of 12-14 overnight (he said after checking the weather forecast).

Perhaps in April the temperature drop in the 2-3 hours after sundown is not as extreme and it is this sudden drop in temperature with all the complexities of water vapour condensing which is partly responsible for the extravagant movement.

 

[full_length]

Actually it's 50-50 for all matches in Durban.

Check this out for the D/N matches:
http://statserver.cricket.org/perl/...h=&event=0&submit=1&sort=result&sortorder=ASC


if the link comes out alright..

Teams batting second have won 7 times. Teams batting first have won five times. Before this WC, it was 7-3 for teams batting second.

Zimbabwe beat SA on 2nd February '00
http://statserver.cricket.org/link_...T/SCORECARDS/RSA_ZIM_SBTT_ODI6_02FEB2000.html

13 February 1997,
SA just about beat India in a rain shortened match:
http://statserver.cricket.org/link_...BIODS/IND_RSA_SBIODS_ODI-FINAL_13FEB1997.html
In that match, the target was reduced by 17 runs while the no. of overs was reduced by 10! India still made 234 against SA batting second.

17 Jan, SA beat England batting second
http://statserver.cricket.org/link_...995-96/ENG_IN_RSA/ENG_RSA_ODI5_17JAN1996.html

All other matches were played in April, or November-December as far as I could see. All these are D/N matches.

All I'm saying is that the officials simply cant make a decision based on past history here.

Much has been said about the conditions favouring team bowling second. But nobody's said anything about climatic conditions changing over the past year or so..
Hopefully I'm not making a mistake!

 

[luckyeddie]

Maybe we're just sniffing around for excuses, then.

It's certainly the case that England seemed to be getting more out of the ball against Pakistan under the lights, similarly with India against England.

Perhaps it's just the pressure of chasing, losing a quick wicket, batsmen going into self-destruct mode and the fielding side getting on top.

 

[Rik]

Bob Woolmer has entered the debate...

Artical

 

[luckyeddie]

It's all been said on here in the last week.

What is dangerous now is that sides losing the toss and being inserted in day-nighters could well believe that they are beaten before they start.

 

[Rik]

I have to admit my heart sunk when I heard England were batting 2nd. I mean it swings more under lights and India's attack is more swing based than out and out quicks. Nehra, after having a rather inconsistant career up to date suddenly takes career best figures, the fact that it's taken under lights and the fact that he is a left armer who works on swinging the ball back into the right-hander and away from the left-hander, sort of adds fuel to the fire. If a Flintoff (bang it in, dead straight) took 6-23 under lights then ok great bowling, but if it is a swing bowler then it starts to seem a little familier...it's not sour grapes don't worry, Anderson is a quickish swing bowler and what did he do to the Pakistan lineup? That's right, he bowled balls which swung from side to side then launched into a triple back-flip with pike before diving head-first into the stumps...maybe no one noticed because he took a 4for against Holland only a few days before. The fact is, although I didn't see Nehra bowl, I did see some of Anderson and for a moment I thought it was some old footage of Waqar bowling because of the way the ball was behaving.

Something needs to be done about this, but yet again Ali Bacher and the ICC do their usual trick of denying there is a problem and refusing to even look into it. This is the same method they used in the Zimbabwe-England and Kenya-NZ disputes. They just laugh off the claims. I thought a panel was supposed to discuss things...

 

[luckyeddie]

Something needs to be done about this, but yet again Ali Bacher and the ICC do their usual trick of denying there is a problem and refusing to even look into it. This is the same method they used in the Zimbabwe-England and Kenya-NZ disputes. They just laugh off the claims. I thought a panel was supposed to discuss things...

But as has clearly been demonstrated, there is no demonstrable historical justification for making such a statement.

One thing which no-one has taken into account here is the actual ball which is being used for this tournament. Is it a Kook or a Duke? What was used in the previous ODIs in South Africa before this tournament? If it was a different type of ball, then that could be the explanation.

Either that or global warming has just kicked in.

 

[V Reddy]

I have to admit my heart sunk when I heard England were batting 2nd. I mean it swings more under lights and India's attack is more swing based than out and out quicks. Nehra, after having a rather inconsistant career up to date suddenly takes career best figures, the fact that it's taken under lights and the fact that he is a left armer who works on swinging the ball back into the right-hander and away from the left-hander, sort of adds fuel to the fire. If a Flintoff (bang it in, dead straight) took 6-23 under lights then ok great bowling, but if it is a swing bowler then it starts to seem a little familier...it's not sour grapes don't worry, Anderson is a quickish swing bowler and what did he do to the Pakistan lineup? That's right, he bowled balls which swung from side to side then launched into a triple back-flip with pike before diving head-first into the stumps...maybe no one noticed because he took a 4for against Holland only a few days before. The fact is, although I didn't see Nehra bowl, I did see some of Anderson and for a moment I thought it was some old footage of Waqar bowling because of the way the ball was behaving.

Something needs to be done about this, but yet again Ali Bacher and the ICC do their usual trick of denying there is a problem and refusing to even look into it. This is the same method they used in the Zimbabwe-England and Kenya-NZ disputes. They just laugh off the claims. I thought a panel was supposed to discuss things...

The ball didn't swing. The only ball that swung was the one which got stewart. Srinath , Zaheer and Nehra got bounce but they did not swing the ball. They did not pitch the ball up to the batsman either. They bowled the length which Flintoff bowled and were successful.

 

[marc71178]

Waqar claimed it's something like 75-25. Have things actually changed in the past months at Durban?

The 75% he quoted was actually to do with the team winning the toss and winning the game - not necessarily under lights.

 

[Rik]

The ball didn't swing. The only ball that swung was the one which got stewart. Srinath , Zaheer and Nehra got bounce but they did not swing the ball. They did not pitch the ball up to the batsman either. They bowled the length which Flintoff bowled and were successful.

I was told the ball did swing much more for the Indian bowlers than it did for Flintoff. And since we have no coverage over here I'm going to take the side of the guy who has sky...

 

[Neil Pickup]

It's a Kookaburra.. How much this affects things, I don't know.

Although other matches in this climate at this time of year need looking at, not all matches at Kingsmead, else it's unrepresentative.

 

[Gotchya]

From what I have seen, today's math had nothing to do with evening, dew or winds....