Rajkot wicket

[Karan114]

looks like the burning has already begun. :hysterical:

:hysterical::hysterical::hysterical:

[king2be98]

I personally couldn't care less about individual records in a team game. Never cared for Afridi's fastest 100, or Murali's wicket and even Tendulkar's 100s. The point I am making right now, is the same I have made for 10 years. Cricket surfaces all over the world are too flat, you know they are flat when a quality bowler like Steyn disappears. Like I said already, it is a magnificent achievement to score 200 in an ODI game, incredible, the sheer scale of what he achieved today is awesome. But I am talking about day in day out flat pitches being served up and reducing bowlers to cannon fodder. Cricket is a contest between bowlers and batsmen, in Test cricket the contest should slightly favour the bowlers and in ODIs it should slightly favour the bowlers. Pitches like the ones in Karachi, Rajkot, Jo'Burg and the one today are so in favour of batsmen it nullifies any contest. So boring to watch ODI cricket these days, I thoroughly enjoyed watching these two sides int he Test series and also England vs SA recently, but the one dayers have been so boring. How can anyone enjoy bowlers being murdered day in day out, it's just not on. What is wrong with 280 playing 280? I would go so far as to say that the 213 plays 213 of WC99 between SA and AUS was 100 times better than the slogfest at Jo'Burg where every single bowler disappeared. We are all entitled to our opinions, mines are firmly in favour of the bowlers.

[vvvslaxman]

If the pitches are made to help bowlers "some teams" would get bowled out for 75 runs :cantstop: . Problem is not just ptiches. Also quality of teams.If you ask the team of India in the 90s to bat on this pitch with the same attitude i bet they wouldn't have crossed 300 runs. They would score quick in the first 10 overs then tuk tuk all the way upto 45th over and score 280 runs. It is about attitude and approach. Even those days teams did make 350, 370 runs. But those were rare. Because they didn't have a consistent attitude of aggression.

[king2be98]

If the pitches are made to help bowlers "some teams" would get bowled out for 75 runs But those were rare. Because they didn't have a consistent attitude of aggression.

You make some valid points and I agree to an extent. However you're taking my point too far, I said give something to the bowlers, not everything. If you put a bit of grass on the surface, you'll get some seam movement which would knock a few runs off the score, more than enough. Perhaps you could increase the size of the boundary to the same length as you see in Aus, again you'd reduce the score by probably 30-40 runs. Just give somethign to the bowlers, anything, today there was nothing in it for the bowlers. No turn, no bounce, no seam movement, short boundaries and fast outfield, everything to make yet another huge score. The agression part you're right about, India are defintely the most aggressive and they'd outscore any other team, even the Aussies of the 90s by probably 50 runs.

[siddhu]

You make some valid points and I agree to an extent. However you're taking my point too far, I said give something to the bowlers, not everything. If you put a bit of grass on the surface, you'll get some seam movement which would knock a few runs off the score, more than enough. Perhaps you could increase the size of the boundary to the same length as you see in Aus, again you'd reduce the score by probably 30-40 runs. Just give somethign to the bowlers, anything, today there was nothing in it for the bowlers. No turn, no bounce, no seam movement, short boundaries and fast outfield, everything to make yet another huge score. The agression part you're right about, India are defintely the most aggressive and they'd outscore any other team, even the Aussies of the 90s by probably 50 runs.

I agree with some of your points. But your points are more valid for Test matches than ODIs But think of it this way, In ODIs the team batting first on a green pitch is at the most disadvantage. They can be 50-75 all out... what sort of contest will that be? Also, if the pitch is too slow & dusty, then team batting second is at a disadvantage. Above all, an ODI time is PRIME TIME in terms of TV revenue. The match has to last 100 overs hence the flatness of the pitch. especially the match between decent competitors.

[king2be98]

The same applies to the wicket today, honestly I felt so much pity for all of the bowlers today. It was so in favour of the batsmen, it's just ridiculous. A full strength Indian line up might actually have chased that down, in fact I think they probably would have given the form and confidence they've got. These wickets are just destroying the value of bowlers, it's so boring to watch these run feasts.

[Sachinism]

I think its more than just the wickets, I feel the batsmen these days are a lot more confident and a lot more willing to take risks