Was uncovered pitches really hard to bat?

[BeautifulGame]

We often hear cricket writers over glorifying past test batsmen by going on and on about how hard it was for those to bat in uncovered pitches.Yet Andy Roberts is giving a totally different view and saying it was actually tough on fast bowlers more than anything

Playing for Hampshire taught me a lot about bowling because we had to bowl a lot on uncovered wickets. And it is not easy because the faster you bowl and the shorter you bowl, the less you get out of uncovered pitches. That is because the pitch is damp and the ball just sits. So I used to bowl full and straight on any pitch.

So was it really that hard bat on uncovered damp pitches? Also cracking interview with Roberts too. http://www.espncricinfo.com/magazine/content/story/576267.html Mentions about how Pathetic the umpiring were in Australia even in the past

[vamos_rafa]

About Steyn:

Dale Steyn is like me. You hardly ever see him smile because he has work to do

[Trichromatic]

Uncovered pitches doesn't always mean tough batting conditions. Uncovered pitches could vary to extremes. For ex - if there was dampness on day 1, then after 2 days of bright sunshine pitch could dry very quickly and make it very good for batting, difficult for pacers and probably good for spinners. If a good batting track was prepared then it could become damp overnight making it difficult for batsmen. During NZ tour in 2002, Ganguly accused that pitch was not covered in order to let it dry and make it better for NZ batsmen next day. Referee had to intervene and finally pitch was covered 40 mins after the close of the play.

[BeautifulGame]

Uncovered pitches doesn't always mean tough batting conditions. Uncovered pitches could vary to extremes. For ex - if there was dampness on day 1, then after 2 days of bright sunshine pitch could dry very quickly and make it very good for batting, difficult for pacers and probably good for spinners. If a good batting track was prepared then it could become damp overnight making it difficult for batsmen. During NZ tour in 2002, Ganguly accused that pitch was not covered in order to let it dry and make it better for NZ batsmen next day. Referee had to intervene and finally pitch was covered 40 mins after the close of the play.

Roberts specifically says uncovered pitches with dampness means its easier for batsmen against fast bowlers as the ball would just sit up. So not sure on what basis u are saying dampness means harder for batsmen?

[Trichromatic]

Roberts specifically says uncovered pitches with dampness means its easier for batsmen against fast bowlers as the ball would just sit up. So not sure on what basis u are saying dampness means harder for batsmen?

Pitches can be difficult for both batsmen and bowler. For ex - very slow pitches where it's difficult for bowler to get much help from pitch and it's difficult for batsmen for play strokes. In case of damp pitches difficulty can vary with level of dampness. I'm not sure if little bit of dampness helps bowlers to get swing, but haven't we seen captains opting to bowl first when there is little bit of moisture in the pitch? :dontknow: Like I said earlier, uncovered pitches could go to extremes in a test match making it unpredictable and hard to adjust accordingly. Covers helps pitches to maintain it's nature to some extent.

[Serani]

Uncovered damp pitches are slow but not easy to bat on, a lot of swing and seam movement on offer if a bowler pitches the ball up, Roberts is just saying banging it in short would have no effect as the pitch would be too soft and slow.

[vayuu1]

Depends on conditions as well

[The Outsider]

Damp wickets will not be good for short pitch bowling which is what Roberts is saying. However you get a lot of seam movement and also the ball really grips for spinners which more than makes up for it.

[BeautifulGame]

Wouldnt it be easier to play against swing bowling in damp pitches than normal wkts since u have more time to cover the swing as the ball comes slow of the wicket than usual ? I can understand it being nightmare against spinners with the ball gripping and turning but surely its harder play swing bowling in a wkt which has some pace than in a damp wicket?

[Vijay.Sharma]

Damp wickets will not be good for short pitch bowling which is what Roberts is saying. However you get a lot of seam movement and also the ball really grips for spinners which more than makes up for it.

I am not too sure if the spinners really benefit from the "gripping" that they get on damp pitches. On the damp wickets I have played on, the spin actually gets smothered. It is unlike dry pitches which assist in the turning of the ball after pitching. In general I agree damp pitches are not easy to bat on. They are not good for bowling overall either. While they are difficult for short pitch bowling and reduce the pace of the ball, they make it difficult for stroke makers especially. You need to really dig in to score on damp wickets. Overall damp wickets make the game attritional

[vvvslaxman]

bounce will be unpredictable due to weather. Rain or sun.

[Crookbond]

Vijay - I can assure you that damp pitches help the spinners as it lets the ball "grip" the surface.

[Crookbond]

Wouldnt it be easier to play against swing bowling in damp pitches than normal wkts since u have more time to cover the swing as the ball comes slow of the wicket than usual ? I can understand it being nightmare against spinners with the ball gripping and turning but surely its harder play swing bowling in a wkt which has some pace than in a damp wicket?

:blink: How did you reach that conclusion?

[vvvslaxman]

I am not too sure if the spinners really benefit from the "gripping" that they get on damp pitches. On the damp wickets I have played on' date= the spin actually gets smothered. It is unlike dry pitches which assist in the turning of the ball after pitching. In general I agree damp pitches are not easy to bat on. They are not good for bowling overall either. While they are difficult for short pitch bowling and reduce the pace of the ball, they make it difficult for stroke makers especially. You need to really dig in to score on damp wickets. Overall damp wickets make the game attritional

You have to face Derek underwood then :cantstop:

[The Outsider]

Wouldnt it be easier to play against swing bowling in damp pitches than normal wkts since u have more time to cover the swing as the ball comes slow of the wicket than usual ?

Because it's not only the swing you are up against, there is also the seam movement which is exaggerated on damp wickets and the amount of seam movement is very difficult to predict. Barnes was known to have moved the ball in the air one way and get it to seam away in a different direction after pitching on damp pitches. Also when the pitch is drying up, it becomes almost impossible to bat on. In the older era batsmen were most wary of facing up on a drying wicket rather than a damp one.

I am not too sure if the spinners really benefit from the "gripping" that they get on damp pitches. On the damp wickets I have played on, the spin actually gets smothered. It is unlike dry pitches which assist in the turning of the ball after pitching.

Not the traditional slow spinners in the Bedi, Prasanna category but the quick spinners like Underwood, Chandra, and Kumble(though he never played on them) because these bowlers would also have enough pace to not allow the batsman time to react. Underwood, in particular, was deadly on such wickets. Damp pitches also allow for the likes of Tuffey and in extreme cases Harris to become difficult to bat against because in addition to the control now they can actually get disconcerting movement off the pitch.

[Vijay.Sharma]

Vijay - I can assure you that damp pitches help the spinners as it lets the ball "grip" the surface.

I know it grips...it just grips it too well and smothers the spin. It makes the ball slow no doubt. I am only speaking from my experience on damp pitches. Others may have different experiences and am limited to the spinners whom I witnessed while playing games on damp pitches. I have heard of spinners complaining that their spin is also reduced although the ball becomes even slower...and it is the slowness of the ball that defeats batsmen rather than spin

[Vijay.Sharma]

You have to face Derek underwood then :cantstop:

Yep...it is bowlers like Underwood, Chandra, Kumble...guys who bowl fastish that benefit more than the traditional spinners. I also want to clarify that I am not saying its bad for the spin bowler. I am saying it smothers the spin because of over gripping but at the same time it makes it very slow so the pace defeats the batsman.

[BeautifulGame]

Because it's not only the swing you are up against, there is also the seam movement which is exaggerated on damp wickets and the amount of seam movement is very difficult to predict. Barnes was known to have moved the ball in the air one way and get it to seam away in a different direction after pitching on damp pitches. Also when the pitch is drying up, it becomes almost impossible to bat on. In the older era batsmen were most wary of facing up on a drying wicket rather than a damp one. Not the traditional slow spinners in the Bedi, Prasanna category but the quick spinners like Underwood, Chandra, and Kumble(though he never played on them) because these bowlers would also have enough pace to not allow the batsman time to react. Underwood, in particular, was deadly on such wickets. Damp pitches also allow for the likes of Tuffey and in extreme cases Harris to become difficult to bat against because in addition to the control now they can actually get disconcerting movement off the pitch.

Fair enough and thanks for the reply :two_thumbs_up:

[Ultimate_Game]

Damp pitches are not suited to short pitched stuff as the ball will simply sit up. However, if the ball is pitched up or against a spinner, the ball will grab the pitch and batting would be extremely tough coz as a batsman you never know how much the ball will hold up. On top of that the bounce would be variable and against a bowler like Kumble run scoring would be extremely difficult.

[vvvslaxman]

Yep...it is bowlers like Underwood, Chandra, Kumble...guys who bowl fastish that benefit more than the traditional spinners. I also want to clarify that I am not saying its bad for the spin bowler. I am saying it smothers the spin because of over gripping but at the same time it makes it very slow so the pace defeats the batsman.

There is certain degree of unpredictability you encounter on an uncovered pitch especially when it is hit by extreme weather. It is natural. Even these days when there is slight rain and pitch get wet slightly before covers are on, nature of the pitch changes slightly. On uncovered pitch this change will be unpredictable.