Are placid pitches to blame as India run Sri Lanka ragged? : Dileep Premachandran

[The Outsider]

^ In fact all pitches in the last season were very good with the exception of Delhi - even there a result would have been possible if Lambu had taken Clarke's catch. But this year we have got off to a terrible start. I hope this doesn't pan out to be like the season two years back when terrible pitches were produced against Pakistan and South Africa.

[vvvslaxman]

Nagpur 08 was a good pitch. Not a flat one' date=' it had everything. We should aim to produce such pitches. Even Ponting praised it.[/quote'] That is because they had bowlers to bowl well on any pitch. Australia batted very well in both innings of the Test. Even Aggy, Murali kartik batted well there. They had a plan for each batsman. They executed it precisely. Actually it was more a spin pitch.

[vvvslaxman]

I don't care about uneven, under prepared pitches.We just have to avoid the "roads" that we are getting.

[The Outsider]

Dileep Premachandran rips into BCCI for creating dead pitches http://www.cricinfo.com/magazine/content/current/story/436009.html

Why aim for dominance when you can have somnolence? Why bother supporting the idea of a Test championship when you're doing your best to kill off the oldest form of the game? Why mouth platitudes about the sanctity of Test cricket when matches are played out in front of paltry crowds on pitches designed to drag the game off to the post-mortem table? Comparisons may be odious at times, but in certain cases, they're extremely instructive. Consider this. Over the past five years, 27 Tests have been played in Australia. Only two have been drawn. In South Africa, only three of 29 games did not end decisively. In that same period, Sri Lanka have hosted 22 games. Only four have gone the distance. And India? Ahmedabad was the 24th match in the last 60 months, and the 11th to end in a draw. There's nothing quite as unique, or as nail-biting, as the exciting draw. The Oval 1979, Old Trafford 2005 and Cardiff 2009 will never be forgotten. In the first instance, all four results were possible heading into the final over. Sadly for the Indian cricket fan though, some of these 11 draws have been among the worst games ever played, mindless batting exhibitions on surfaces where the bowlers were neutered the moment the new ball lost its shine. Back in 2004, the Green Park in Kanpur, which has a reputation for dire games, hosted South Africa. After Andrew Hall sleepwalked his way to 163 in 588 minutes, India, with the exception of Virender Sehwag and Gautam Gambhir, went on a go-slow of their own. By the time the match was called off, those that did bother to turn up were probably wishing that they were Rip van Winkle. The nadir was reached when Pakistan toured India in 2007. After an exciting and low-scoring opening Test at the Kotla in New Delhi, the Eden Gardens and the Chinnaswamy Stadium hosted games where mountains of runs were scored and the bowlers were flogged mercilessly. Anil Kumble injected some excitement into his home Test by bowling seam-up, but that apart, those were two matches that brought back awful memories of the years when India-Pakistan games meant safety-first tactics on featherbeds and two sides paralysed by fear of defeat. A unique hat-trick of deplorable pitches was completed in Chennai a few months later, as Neil McKenzie, Hashim Amla and Sehwag booked in for bed, breakfast and then some. Sehwag scored the fastest triple-century ever, but even when the teams mercifully shook hands on the final day, the pitch looked good enough to last another week. Who then do we blame for these appalling surfaces, these games of batting practice? Dhiraj Prasanna will be used for target-practice after this, but how much independence do India's curators really have? It's not as though Ahmedabad can't produce decent pitches. There was a generous smattering of grass 18 months ago when India were routed for 76 on the first morning, but South Africa, with AB de Villiers scoring a double-century, still managed a huge total in a three-day finish. When Sri Lanka last toured, the game went to the last morning. There was a superb century from VVS Laxman, and wickets for both pace bowlers and spinners. Mystifyingly though, Clive Lloyd, the ICC's match referee, complained about the surface to his bosses, reinforcing the view that there's a deep-rooted prejudice against spin-friendly pitches. The ICC though can only issue guidelines. It's the home board that's responsible for pitch preparation. The BCCI has a television deal that's on the basis of days of coverage. The broadcaster doesn't shell out for a certain number of series, it pays up for a fixed number of days. Three-day finishes like the one at Mumbai in 2004, or the Kanpur game last year, are terrific entertainment for fans, but not good news for the TV companies. To ensure that they don't frown, the paying public has to put up with snore draws. There's nothing wrong with a surface being batsman-friendly initially, as long as it deteriorates over the course of a game. There have been some great finishes in Chennai (the Tied Test and 2001 were ones for the pantheon) and elsewhere, but at the Motera on Friday, you had to endure the pathetic sight of the game's leading wicket-taker, Muttiah Muralitharan, being reduced to trundler status. The bowlers' foot-marks aside, there was barely an indentation on the pitch. It might as well have been marble from the quarries in Rajasthan. Comments about declining Test-match crowds in India often ignore reality. People talk of the good old days when thousands turned up to watch drab draws all across the country. The England series of 1981-82 was especially devoid of excitement. But back then, entertainment options were few and far between. Most towns didn't even have access to television. You took what you got. Now, with cable TV bringing every kind of international sport into your living room for a nominal monthly charge, why would you stomach mediocrity? When different kinds of entertainment are on offer, why drag yourself to a stadium to watch eight wickets fall in three days, and not one of them to an especially good delivery? Whenever the IPL, which has the board's blessing, introduces a new innovation or an expansion to 10 teams and 94 games, we hear the word 'entertainment'. A few days ago, someone involved with marketing the league appeared on TV and announced that cricket had now become "prostitution". If that individual was speaking on behalf of the establishment, then it should surprise no one that Test cricket is being treated like a two-dollar hook-up in a dingy room with a lone lightbulb. This is a series where the No. 1 ranking is at stake. You'd think that results mattered. But while Australia, South Africa and Sri Lanka leave little to chance as they pursue that ambition, India are content with being world-leaders: at signing TV deals and producing bog-standard pitches.

Good read and almost completely replicates my thoughts - the contrast with results being produced in places like Australia, South Africa, and Sri Lanka is staggering. Adding on to a lot of which he has already said, the ICC is also to blame for this - it's a given that green wickets in India cannot produce a fair contest, so the only options left are to produce shirtfronts or turners. However, the constant prying and rebuking by match referees whenever even moderately turning surfaces are produced has had a terrible effect on test cricket in India.

[kabira]

That is because they had bowlers to bowl well on any pitch. Australia batted very well in both innings of the Test. Even Aggy' date=' Murali kartik batted well there. They had a plan for each batsman. They executed it precisely. Actually it was more a spin pitch.[/quote'] I think you are mistaken with Nagpur 2006, the dreadful test match. The last one has good wicket.and there was no Aggy or Kartik

[Lord]

if we prepare pitches like Kanpur last year.ICC would deem it dangerous

[cowboysfan]

that is called ripping BCCI a new one but honestly wont matter one iota.

[Brainfade]

that is called ripping BCCI a new one but honestly wont matter one iota.

Why do they keep doing it? I just don't understand how they benefit from it ... or is it just plain old ignorance.

[cowboysfan]

Why do they keep doing it? I just don't understand how they benefit from it ... or is it just plain old ignorance.

Part of the reason is they want the match to last 5 days but when you play the lankans and pakis these kind of pitches actually favor them then us because they can "out-FTB" us with ease,from a strategic standpoint it doesn't make sense at all.

[Temujin Khaghan]

i think he broke BCCI into pieces and then danced all over them. ROFL

[The Outsider]

^ I think there are a few different reasons : 1. The lure of having a match last 5 days for TV revenues - though I am not sure if anyone with brains has done a cost-benefit analysis on this. The TV viewership will always be higher for exciting matches which produce results. 2. The fact that green tops are not practical in India and the ICC starts it's arm twisting at the slightest sign of a crumbling pitch. 3. A general apathy towards test cricket which is the lowest revenue generator for the BCCI, so all their focus is on priming up the products which sell like ODIs and T20s.

[Sooda]

Its killing spin bowling the world over. Not enough good, let alone potentially great, spinners No young players coming through. Bhajji can be so much better than bowling flat darts, he has the variety, dosent have a choice though It happened in the 04 test at Mumbai (i think) when we beat Australia. Raging turner, Murali Kartik bowled well (and Clarke for that matter too) Bit of an outcry after that one because for some reason no one wants to see spinners pick wickets.

[Ram]

I think we should delineate between pitches that are prepared to have drawn results and pitches in which draws happen. For eg, this match could have EASILY produced a result, if only Lanka had managed to snag a couple of more wickets in the 2nd session of day 1. So, just because a match is drawn, does not mean the pitch is bad. And, I think the stats are a bit skewed against India because we hardly seem to be playing any minnows (B’desh, Zim, Pakistan etc) at home these days. That said, our pitches do seem to get slower and lower. Some of the test matches have been an absolute pain to watch.

[kabira]

I think we should delineate between pitches that are prepared to have drawn results and pitches in which draws happen. For eg, this match could have EASILY produced a result, if only Lanka had managed to snag a couple of more wickets in the 2nd session of day 1. So, just because a match is drawn, does not mean the pitch is bad.

Well thats true for every drawn test, the difference is always one or two wickets.

[Sooda]

No coincidence that those sessions on day 1 were the only -small- part of the entire test where the conditions were even remotely bowler friendly. A better attack would have bowled us for 100 ish but after that just became a snoozefest. It wasnt just a draw- overall it was a dull draw.

[The Outsider]

Wow! Now we have defenders of this Ahmedabad pitch as well - wonders never cease!

[Ram]

Well thats true for every drawn test' date=' the difference is always one or two wickets.[/quote'] In that case, how can blame the pitch then? Of course, certain types of pitches naturally increase the probability of wickets falling, which will obviously increase the probability of a result. But I don’t think its makes sense in preparing seamer friendly pitches in India (leave behind a ton of grass on the pitch). Our country and conditions are not suited for that. If we were to make our pitches any more bowler friendly, we should probably make it more spin-friendly. That is the unique challenge of India and it will bolster our record at home even more .

[Ram]

Wow! Now we have defenders of this Ahmedabad pitch as well - wonders never cease!

Defend? Who defended the Ahmedabad pitch? I was just saying that if things had gone slightly differently (which it could have), we may very well have had a result. I don’t know how you could interpret as ‘defence’ of that pitch.

[graphic23]

Defend? Who defended the Ahmedabad pitch? I was just saying that if things had gone slightly differently (which it could have)' date=' we may very well have had a result. I don’t know how you could interpret as ‘defence’ of that pitch.[/quote'] MM, with all due respect, "EASILY gotten a result" is very close to defending the pitch. You are saying we could've gotten a result when 21 out of 40 wickets fell. And test cricket's greatest wicket-taker ended with 0/128 on the last day of the pitch in INDIA. How the hell does that translate to "EASILY" gotten a result?

[The Outsider]

Defend? Who defended the Ahmedabad pitch? I was just saying that if things had gone slightly differently (which it could have)' date=' we may very well have had a result. I don’t know how you could interpret as ‘defence’ of that pitch.[/quote'] Things could have gone differently in the other way as well - had our openers got through the first hour, we would have witnessed an even greater run fest. From your earlier post, you were trying to categorize this pitch as one on which "draws happen". That's plain wrong - this was a pitch made for a draw.