I’ve had it. I’m sick of flat pitches being Test cricket’s staple diet in Australia.
Flat pitches where the ball consistently falls short of a properly positioned keeper on day one are rubbish. I’ve asked cricket to give bowlers a chance before. But that was too mild.
For instance, I said, “There shouldn’t be any pitch in the world in which 150 is a par first innings score, although it is a lot more interesting than a pitch where the par score is 550.”
Normally I would still agree with that. Over several seasons, it would breed the emergence of lesser-skilled medium-fast bowlers who rely on those conditions, bad technique, and fewer spinners.
But for one season, it would do more good than harm.
As Roarer Liam rightfully said in the comments section of my article on pitches, the bowler-dominated Hobart Test between Australia and New Zealand in 2011 was superb to watch. I was privileged to be at the ground to watch that Test, and to enjoy that match was human nature.
Those conditions benefitted bowlers. But those conditions are rare indeed. Since the 2011-12 season, batsmen have received far more help from the pitch than bowlers.
Bowlers deserve a Test season of love.
In run-laden draws where there is an average run rate of over four runs an over, bowlers are emasculated creatures and a result is about as likely as Steve Smith telling Peter Nevill to have a bowl.
When South Africa comes to Australia, I want pitches that trigger Dale Steyn’s crazy eyes. I want pitches that cause Morne Morkel to turn from a genial giant to a three-headed dragon. I want pitches that force Steve Smith to enlist the help of his nine other teammates to pluck the ball from James Pattinson’s right hand. I want pitches that might lead to Josh Hazlewood bowling all session at one end, and giving Steve Smith the same treatment Glenn McGrath gave Ricky Ponting when Ponting took him off on the second day at Lord’s in 2005.
And when Pakistan comes to Australia, I want conditions that cause Wahab Riaz to start clapping even though Shane Watson has retired. I want conditions that make Mohammed Amir virtually unplayable. I want conditions that make Mitchell Starc feel this is like ODI cricket, but much better.
When the series reaches the SCG, I want conditions to help out Nathan Lyon and Yasir Shah, and maybe even a third spinner.
I like roads. When I’m trying to get to work. Or study. Or a family gathering. Or a mate’s place.
In Test cricket, roads are needed occasionally, especially when it is part of a ground’s well-established tradition, provided it is balanced against grounds of differing traditions. But not constantly. And when there have been too many of them, the only answer is to go cold turkey for a while.
I detest how it has been taken for granted that the only time fairer conditions can be expected is when there is a day-night Test. I’m exasperated at pitches that would only significantly deteriorate if the nation’s top sprinters were employed to run up and down the pitch during the lunch break. Enough is enough.
And if you, sensibly, think my heightened levels of rage are not good reason for bowlers to have a season of love, consider that bowlers come up with two ways of redressing the balance that cricket did not like; Bodyline and underarm. In a world where being a bowler is no fun, then the next reaction will be more like underarm than Bodyline.
What’s wrong with that? Whatever you think about Bodyline, it was a strategy where the first priority was to get the batsman out. The underarm ball was based on a desire for fewer runs to be scored, where a captain was planning based on the potential of his bowler to be hit for six, and not his strengths.
Cricket needs strategies to be based on the strengths of bowlers, and conditions that allow for bowlers to recognise and even inflate their strengths in their own minds.
Conditions in Test matches in Australia need to be rebalanced more than they need to be overcorrected. But after years where the conditions have been batsmen-friendly, it’d be nice to see an overcorrection before a rebalance.
And it would be sad to see neither a rebalance nor an over-correction. Sad, and predictable.
Paul Potter
Roar Guru
Aside from the WACA, I'd say the MCG has been the other big example, flatter in recent seasons, holding together more and more. Even the matches before the last two seasons, the last innings of the match was pretty much as good for batting as other innings in the match having watched them live at the time. But in mitigation, that's probably matching what has happened in Sheffield Shield cricket. Normally there isn't a big difference between the way the MCG reacts in a Test compared to a Shield match.
Alex L
Roar Rookie
I don't recall any time besides the India series (which we all know is a money grab rather than a serious contest for CA) when truly flat tracks have been the majority -- last summer the only flat track was Perth, Brisbane was a good pitch but NZ bowled utter garbage and were punished for doing so, and Adelaide was excellent.
Craig Swanson
Guest
Bowler graveyards. That is what Aussie decks have been for at least the past two summers. Makes you wonder why the poor old bowler bothers. Meanwhile the flat track fash Harry's are prospering on batting paradises. For god sake give our batsmen something to test their techniques. Pottsy. Please do not wish the SCG back as a spin paradise. There are now one or two other pitches that turn more than the iconic Sydney ground's deck.
Liam
Guest
You're absolutely right in saying that the conditions in the day/night test were akin to those in England, but preparation is everything. In Adelaide, all the runmakers had just made a glut of runs, over the last two tests, in home conditions, and the bowling they faced was the same, albeit supercharged by the newly swinging ball. In addition, while the NZ quicks had performed terrifically before they came to Australia, they underperformed significantly here, including that test. In England, Australia always had the pressure of being either level or behind in the series, so of course the mental side of things got involved. Some of the terrible shots on display came courtesy of poor leadership - Clarke's positive cricket over ugly but results driven stuff - while the rest can, indeed, be put down to psychology. And Kohli fails in England because they utterly refuse to play his game. In Australia, Kohli is sledged, berated, and harassed from the minute he enters the country, by the Australian establishment and the aussie players. Kohli, like Alan Border, responds best when the occasion has a personal spice to it, a reason to rub an opponent's face in things. Anderson, and England, don't play their cricket this way; they don't sledge much, and they got on with their games, leaving Kohli to concentrate on just his batting, leaving his heart out of the piece. What I want is for Kohli to be at his best - outraged, furious, and masterful - when the Aussies are sledging, but on a wicket that is actually challenging to bat on for once. Until that time, I will always wonder about him; is he as good as the greats of the generation before, or are his statistics inflated by the size of his bat and the lameness of the wickets he has played on?
Paul Potter
Roar Guru
A medal would certainly be lighter than the albatross that's currently there!
Paul Potter
Roar Guru
It's more that I want a balance back between bat and ball, but first I want a season where the bowlers are licking their lips - an overdose of sorts. Pitches like the Perth pitch that are more punishing on bowlers than any batsmen are annoying. In an ideal world, you'd always have pitches that give any type of player a roughly even chance of being Man of the Match, with conditions that test all facets of the game and weed out substandard batsmen and bowlers. I agree with you entirely with bowlers like Jackson Bird - there's not enough in the pitches for those type of seamers on day one consistently enough. As for Smith, he has scored runs away from home but Warner, despite showing signs, hasn't reached that level yet. With Kohli, his struggles against Anderson in the UK provide a sign of his problems, so it would be nice to see him genuinely tested with Australian conditions - my guess is the slips cordon would end up with some catches off edged cover drives. He would still make runs, but not the same quantity. With the English pitches? Cook won the toss and bowled first at The Oval based on psychological damage from Trent Bridge - fair enough. But it was a pitch that was good to bat on once the conventional swing went away. I think Australia's problems were exacerbated by rain at Edgbaston - it meant Cook only had to bowl Anderson, Broad and Finn, and not turn to Moeen. As for Trent Bridge, well, what can one say. The only one I would defend is Warner - he copped a cracker from Wood. I think they were a little beyond English pitches - I haven't seen an Oval Test before that one where bowling first was a good option. But I can't say that they were too divorced from the conditions Australia successfully mastered in NZ earlier this year.
Liam
Guest
It's incredible that you've changed tack, Pottsy, but I'll take it. For me, a large part of the last few years is that Australia has played supposedly substandard opposition, or teams that would/should struggle in our conditions (with the exception of New Zealand, who were underwhelming here anyway). I suppose there was a fear that these opponents would be unable to play the quicks on a decent seamer, or on a quick track, and for the most part that might have been correct. However, who wouldn't relish watching Kohli getting properly tested, perhaps for the first time in his career, by a fast track and australian bowling with actual teeth? Smith and Warner having to, you know, actually bat for the runs they made at home, when they have, over the past two years, kind of just strolled out to the crease here and made runs by presence alone. And - and this is infuriating beyond belief - why on EARTH should bowlers like Jackson Bird be borderline banned from test level, when his bowling has worked on the flat decks at state level? Imagine if Bird got good swinging conditions? Imagine if, next shield season, Bird was provided a swinger at Hobart? And this is limiting for the batsmen, too. Last Ashes series, the english served up two roads, after which the scores were level. Those tests were succeeded by three of the liveliest pitches Australia has seen in England for almost twenty years - and forgive me, but I don't buy the 'these are traditional English wickets' balderdash. Traditional, certainly, but the pitches in England haven't been this way for a decade or more - and, rightly or wrongly, the Australian batsman couldn't counter to save themselves. Even Stokes looked nigh unplayable, the way Warner and Clarke refused to leave, or even to play the ball late, or to even just play with soft hands. Imagine that, instead of batting like they would on the flattest Brisbane wicket they have ever seen, they bat like they valued their wickets, just a little bit, because they had prepared for a fight and for the swinging ball? Better wickets for the shield teaches bowlers how to use more than just guile, it teaches them to use the conditions to their benefit, and more than anything else, it show these young batsmen how to play the ball when batting is at its hardest.
Bob Sims
Guest
Cricket at Test level has been loaded in favour of batsmen for way too long now. Rule changes, bigger bats, pitch preparation etc etc. When we rarely get a good contest between bat and ball, we are either astonished or mortified! Bowlers deserve a medal!