Random Cricket Thread (International Cricket)

[Dr Cricket]

The CEC agreed to introduce a system of demerit points for poorly-rated pitches and grounds. If a venue accumulates five demerit points (each point will remain active for five years once received), the venue will receive a 12-month suspension. Ten points will force a 24-month suspension.
bit interesting although suspect ICC would be bias and sub c pitches unfairly judged and crap pitches in england and Australia being ok.

[rich1uk]

The CEC agreed to introduce a system of demerit points for poorly-rated pitches and grounds. If a venue accumulates five demerit points (each point will remain active for five years once received), the venue will receive a 12-month suspension. Ten points will force a 24-month suspension.
bit interesting although suspect ICC would be bias and sub c pitches unfairly judged and crap pitches in england and Australia being ok.

not that you are biased or anything

there will be criteria set for what is considered a poor pitch and those criteria will have to be agreed by the sub con boards as well

[Dr Cricket]

Suspect they will use the same criteria as before but generally only the sub c pitches getting reported.

[rich1uk]

Suspect they will use the same criteria as before but generally only the sub c pitches getting reported.

well maybe the sub con boards shouldn't have agreed to those criteria ...

[Dr Cricket]

Rich do you even know what the criteria is and anyway nothing wrong with the criteria but something wrong with the ICC for only following the rules in certain circumstances.
Wonder why nothing happens to 700 play 700 or when the game is a seaming minefield on day 1 etc.

The ICC's pitch and outfield monitoring process in 2010 states that a pitch is said to be poor if it any of the following apply:

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.

Wonder when the last match for a pitch offering excessive seam movement at any stage got acted on or the one with no seam or turn at any stage in the match got acted on.

[Making_Splinters]

Rich do you even know what the criteria is and anyway nothing wrong with the criteria but something wrong with the ICC for only following the rules in certain circumstances.
Wonder why nothing happens to 700 play 700 or when the game is a seaming minefield on day 1 etc.

The ICC's pitch and outfield monitoring process in 2010 states that a pitch is said to be poor if it any of the following apply:

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.

Wonder when the last match for a pitch offering excessive seam movement at any stage got acted on or the one with no seam or turn at any stage in the match got acted on.

How often do you actually see "excessive seam movement" though?

I'd agree that dead pitches are rarely if ever called, but it's a lot easier to define a pitch that turns a lot on day one than it is a pitch that causes too much seam movement.

[Dr Cricket]

reckon I seen a few NZ pitches that have met the requirement.
but it tends to get forgotten because 3rd and 4th innings are very good batting decks.
but surely the fact turning pitches are easier to define means this won't be a good idea especially if nothing happens to pitches that break the other 3 requirements.

this might be dangerous politically as well considering last year Australia were not a fan of the sri lankan pitches but Sub C boards were saying good normal sub C wickets.
how the hell are ICC going to decide which pitches are fine when every nation or region have different style of wickets or pitches they like.

plus would be bit odd attacking pitches that turn when 50-60% of Test nations pitches tend to turn.
Zimbabwe, WI, India, Sri lanka, Bangladesh, Pakistan all of these tend to help spinners.

plus not sure I like the way grounds can be ban from hosting games, what happens if the groundsman made a honest mistake or weather hampered preparations.

[Arthur Crabtree]

Trent Bridge got reported for the India Test in 2014, for being too flat.

[Arthur Crabtree]

On drop in pitches that tend to be batter friendly (if the atmospherics are batter friendly as well) it might be that the best chance to get a result is to leave the pitch a bit damp at the beginning so you get wickets on the first two days of the game. You get an advantage at the toss, but only the same as when the pitch is expected to break up in the fourth innings.

[meninblue]

Rich do you even know what the criteria is and anyway nothing wrong with the criteria but something wrong with the ICC for only following the rules in certain circumstances.
Wonder why nothing happens to 700 play 700 or when the game is a seaming minefield on day 1 etc.

The ICC's pitch and outfield monitoring process in 2010 states that a pitch is said to be poor if it any of the following apply:

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.

Wonder when the last match for a pitch offering excessive seam movement at any stage got acted on or the one with no seam or turn at any stage in the match got acted on.

Don't remember any of those pitches being termed as poor. The ones where Ashwin or Jaddu or other spinners could hardly get a wicket. Lot of those.

[Dr Cricket]

Trent Bridge got reported for the India Test in 2014, for being too flat.

That mostly got reported because both teams said it was a poor wicket.
After every game teams give a report to the match referee and it include the pitch as well in it, rarely would you see both teams agree that the deck was poor.

That was also the only instance of a flat deck getting reported and if I remember correctly it only got reported for the slowness of the deck and not because it was a run scoring machine pitch.

[Dr Cricket]

On drop in pitches that tend to be batter friendly (if the atmospherics are batter friendly as well) it might be that the best chance to get a result is to leave the pitch a bit damp at the beginning so you get wickets on the first two days of the game. You get an advantage at the toss, but only the same as when the pitch is expected to break up in the fourth innings.

Idea doesn't work considering in NZ scoring 500 etc is common in 3rd or 4th innings makes the latter part of the game quite boring to watch.
Really the only way to make it intresting would be to have help for the bowlers throughout the game.
Would improve the standard of batting as well.

[Dr Cricket]

Although maybe the best idea is to get a duke ball or sg ball used all the time considering kookaburra is an awful ball and quality is substandard.

[Arthur Crabtree]

In England, and TB in particular, you might get a very flat wicket but overhead conditions will allow wickets to fall. Wickets did fall in that game, but when it was flat it was very flat. There was no bounce, but only similar to some indian pitches. It made for a bad game so should have been reported. If the pitch causes an unbalanced or unfair game, it should be reported. But because other factors are in play apart from the pitch, it can only ever be an impression.

Hard to see the ICC can be biased against India.

[meninblue]

Some of the wickets are like the concrete wickets at nets. The only difference is better bounce than on concrete wicket and slight turn. There is no purchase for spinners. On those wickets spinners have to depend on bounce to get bat and pads catches.