By Kersi Meher-Homji
April 10th 2009 @ 1:56am
Related coverage
There’s too many tall scores and small thinking
Indian batsmen Sachin Tendulkar, right, and V.V.S Laxman return for the tea interval on the final day of the first cricket test match between India and Australia, in Bangalore, India, Monday, Oct. 13, 2008. AP Photo/Gautam Singh
Groundsmen around the world, please note: bowlers do exist. But the way you are preparing the pitches, they may become extinct. Ditto for Test cricket.
I realise you must be under instructions to prepare a pitch like a billiard table so that it lasts for five days and more spectators turn up to swell the organisers’ coffers.
But with pitches not breaking up even on day 5, it becomes BORING!
To score 400 runs in the final innings is becoming more common these days.
Just look at current statistics:
When set 414 runs to win the Perth Test against Australia last December, South Africa made it comfortably on the final day with six wickets in hand.
It was the second highest fourth innings total to win a Test, the highest being 418 by the West Indies against Australia at St John’s in 2002-03.
In the recent Test series in New Zealand, the home team hammered 9 for 619 in Napier (podigy Jesse Ryder, a Colin Cowdrey look-alike, hitting 201) and India hung on to score 4 for 476 on the final two days.
A week earlier, South Africa amassed 651 in Cape Town and Australia compiled 422 runs on the final day.
There were more run tsunamis in Pakistan and the West Indies this February-March.
In the Karachi Test in February, Sri Lanka declared at 7 for 644, captain Mahela Jayawardene scoring 240 and Thilan Samaraweera 231.
In reply, Pakistan declared at 6 for 765 (Younis Khan 313).
In the Bridgetown Test from 26 February to 2 March, 1628 runs were scored at 95.76 runs per batsman.
England declared at 6 for 600. The West Indies, far from getting overwhelmed, declared at 9 for 749, Ramnaresh Sarwan smashing 291.
Even on the final day, there was no respite for the bowlers as England made 2 for 279.
In the Lahore Test this March, the Sri Lankans totalled 606, Samaraweera 214, hitting his second double century in a week.
At stumps on day-2, Pakistan were 1 for 110 before the game came to an abrupt end because of the terrible shooting tragedy.
Thus, in five Tests within five weeks, there were two totals of over 700 and five of over 600. These included one triple and five individual double centuries (including a 291).
I agree that recently the standard of bowling has dipped and batsmen get advantages: helmets, heavy bats and shorter boundaries.
Also, pitches are made in heaven for the batters.
So Mr Groundsman, you may prepare a batting paradise for Twenty20 or Fifty50, but for a Test match, please give the aspiring (and perspiring) bowlers a cracking surface that swings like a cabaret dancer and spins like a cobra on the fifth day.
Get Australia's best Cricket opinion emailed daily.
Like this content? Buzz it up!
Free Email updates:
Our daily emails are only sent if there is content for the sport or that author. You can subscribe to multiple daily emails; or get the daily Roar email with all our content in it. We value privacy. More...
(6)
Spiro said | April 10th 2009 @ 7:46am | Report comment
Kersi, While I agree with you about the New Zealand pitches, we have had a Test series between Australia and South Africa with results all along the line, with the South Africans getting a record score in the last innings of the first Test to get the series off to a splendid start.
I think people like to see great batting more than great bowling, except when someone exceptional like Shane Warne is involved.
The main problem is not the pitches but the over rates, in my opiniion.
Greg Russell said | April 10th 2009 @ 9:34pm | Report comment
Kersi wrote “I agree that recently the standard of bowling has dipped.”
To see further evidence of this, one only has to look at the Wisden Test XI for 2008 that was named a few days ago. The only clearcut bowling selection in this team was Dale Steyn, with the other 3 spots being disputed and going to Zaheer Khan, Mitchell Johnson and Harbhajan Singh. These three are all decent bowlers (remember: we are talking about Johnson’s 2008 form here, not what he has shown since), but they are well below the class of the batsmen selected. I mean, Gautam Gambhir is arguably the form batsmen in world test cricket of the last 9 months, and yet he could not even make the Wisden side (in which G Smith and Sehwag were the chosen openers).
And on the topic of Steyn, a friend of mine recently pointed out that a major reason for Australia’s success in the first two South African tests was that Steyn did not bowl well. As the friend pointed out, in McGrath’s whole career he never had a series in which he bowled as poorly as Steyn did in this one. And yet Steyn is the top bowler in the world at the moment.
Which brings me to my point: Glenn McGrath and Shane Warne have retired, Jason Gillespie suddenly lost his mojo, and Shane Bond is banned because of playing for the ICL. Top bowlers have always been rarer than top batsmen, and that is four top bowlers from the first half of the 2000s who suddenly are no longer playing. One could possibly also throw in that Steve Harmison has lost his way (although he was never as consistent as these others). Thus there is something of a vacuum at the top of world bowling, and it is showing.
Having said all the above, I agree that pitches are not helping.
However I wonder if this is due to groundsmen per se or whether it is advancing turf technology and knowledge. It seems to me that groundsmen would certainly like their pitches to deteriorate as tests progress, but these days their turf is so well managed that pitches simply do not deteriorate as they used to.
Gulu said | April 10th 2009 @ 9:40pm | Report comment
Quite right, Kersi. It used to happen only in the sub-continent, now all over the world. As if cricket does not have enough problems already!
Greg Russell said | April 10th 2009 @ 9:48pm | Report comment
I forgot to say: I think another important point is the attitudes of the players and captains.
I think the Australians and South Africans actively sought results on each and every occasion in the recent two series. However it seems to me that other teams were quite different. There is no doubt that Pakistan and Sri Lanka were both happy with draws. Once the West Indies won the first test of their series against England, everything after that was geared towards not losing, as opposed to winning more tests.
Even the Indians were guilty of this in New Zealand, making all too clear that their only priority was not to lose in the third test, hence setting NZ the ridiculous target of 620 in 5 sessions, even though they had rolled NZ for under 200 in the first innings and all the forecasts were that rain would arrive on the last day. It promptly did, just in time to give NZ a draw it did not deserve.
After this test MS Dhoni made clear that he had no regrets, and that only the series victory was important for him. He genuinely did not seem to care that a ridiculously over-conservative declaration had cost his team a win. Obviously cricketing culture is somewhat different in India to this part of the world, but that is my point: while such attitudes exist so widely, one has to expect a lot of the batting draws that Kersi (rightly) complains about.
Incidentally, I note that the ICC’s test ranking system encourages teams to try to win every match, so for once there is no blame to be apportioned to the ICC!
This raises a question: India say they aspire to the no. 1 test ranking, but how are they going to achieve this when they are happy to draw tests that they should win?
Rich_daddy said | April 12th 2009 @ 9:29am | Report comment
I think this problem will get worse over the coming years. Most kids today have a batsman as their cricketing hero, hence when they go out and play cricket they will only care about batting. This will only compound the problem. I also think the career span of a bowler is generally shorter as well. Bowlers generally put more strain on the weak points of the body such as the knees and the back than batsman which usually cut their career short.
Merchandising is another problem, batsman have all sorts of equipment that need sponsoring which gets brand names out there. Bowlers on the other hand have no equipment.
So whilst I agree that groundsmen need to start preparing better wickets, I think favouring batsmen is far more engrained in cricketing culture and marketing than we think. A lot of people and stakeholders need to shift their focus to give bowlers a “fair go”.
preciouspress said | January 24th 2010 @ 9:15pm | Report comment
Kersi,
I agree totally with regard to pitches and am very happy that the Australian curators have prepared ‘more balanced ‘ tracks for the WI and Pakistan tests.
I don’t however agree that the standard of bowling has dipped. Considering that they now bowl to batsmen with protection from equipment, laws and flatter pitches, I believe the statistics of the leading test bowlers compare well to past eras. On the other hand, in view of the aforesaid advantages I consider that the overall standard of test batsmanship has declined. One can only muse as to what runs and averages the likes of Morris,Harvey, Hutton, Compton, Weekes, Worrell, Mankad or Mandrekar would have batting on covered pitches with full body suits, helmets and ‘bionic’ bats.