Are the poms the new Bannies?

Come The Ashes, come the Old Troll.

Why, horrie, why????

eowyn wrote:Come The Ashes, come the Old Troll.

Why, horrie, why????

complete tosh Eowyn...if you bothered to listen to aggers, tuffers and boycs they all rattled on about the pitch being prepared deliberately in the way it is - ie doctored

Horrie do you mean fixed in the same way that the first Ashes test in Oz is ALWAYS at the Gabba which is the most un-English pitch you have and where the match is usually played in sapping heat?

gabba usually gets that test as the weather there gets shaky after december (rainy season)...the pitch usually gives all bowlers some assistance and it is also good to bat on.....but maybe the Gabba and all other Oz pitches should  be hard and bouncy with a bit of green

might balance the surprising dryness predicted of the Pom test pitches this summer

horace wrote:gabba usually gets that test as the weather there gets shaky after december (rainy season)...the pitch usually gives all bowlers some assistance and it is also good to bat on.....but maybe the Gabba and all other Oz pitches should  be hard and bouncy with a bit of green

Dale Steyn says thank you.

that is in fact why I said "usually"

So is this wicket as bad as some made it out to be?

It's a dour wicket. Due to the slow nature of it, there're no demons in it at all.

Interestingly, Ronnie Knicks said it's not the sort of pitch the English batsmen like to bat on and I tend to agree.

Well basically it's a test wicket that on the start of the 5th day that all 4 results are still possible on. Given that the draw is highly unlikely.

Not the worst test wicket of all time.

No, not the worst by a long chalk. But I like a pitch with pace and bounce - all cricketing disciplines usually prosper in such conditions, if the exponent of them are good enough.

It must be really rubbish taips. What did horrie say on page 2?

"doctored to have no pace, bounce or seam and to break up early...views put by tuffers, boycott, aggers et al"
That suggests that, we've set it up for spinners ie Swann, and negated the Aus quicker bowlers.

Let's look at some of the facts of the matter .....

1. We're starting day 5 but haven't had weather delays.

2. 1044 runs so far. When I was at school, that was an average of 261/day, so obviously a minefield for batsmen.

3. 36 wickets down .... 9 a day, so bugger all help for bowlers.

4. A 19yo debutant at 11 setting a new record score.

5. Analysis of 4 experienced bowlers (match so far) ....

a. Watto 19 overs -13 maidens - 18 runs for 0 wickets
b. Siddle 47.5 - 16 - 135 - 8
c. Jimmy 41 - 6 - 129 - 6
d. Swann 47 - 9 - 124 - 4

No surprise at Andersons stats, we all know he's almost unplayable during May when it's overcast and damp, fodder on dust-bowls. Damned if I know the actual playing conditions 'coz I've only seen a few highlights - but as the pitch was doctored to suit Swann, the plan appears to be an abject failure.

Or maybe young horrie was just blowing through his arse? You decide based on the above.

Hmmm. I'd like to have seen two other teams, more adept in such conditions - say SA v Ind - play on this pitch. I have a feeling 500 would've played 500. These two batting line-ups aren't great shakes in conditions such as these IMO.

You've missed the point, Dan.

Do you think, on those facts, that the pitch was doctored, as has been suggested? I tend to agree with you, that the batting of both teams is slightly above complete dogshit, but well short of solid in any conditions.

Two years ago (admittedly not on this pitch, of course) we rolled India for 288 & 158 , JA 5/131 over both innings. Steyn and, I feel, Philander would do similar damage.

I'm therefore not so sure we'd have 500 v 500 were SA to face India on this track. No, its not wonderful, but nothing suggests the groundsman has been doctoring it.

Lacking a bit of pace, but a good Test wicket. In the days of covered wickets we need tracks that will disintegrate and offer something for the bowlers on days 4 & 5. We've had some Lords tracks in recent years that have been better for batting on Day 5 and teams racking up 500+ in the 3rd or 4th innings.

Growler wrote:You've missed the point, Dan.

Do you think, on those facts, that the pitch was doctored, as has been suggested? I tend to agree with you, that the batting of both teams is slightly above complete dogshit, but well short of solid in any conditions.

Two years ago (admittedly not on this pitch, of course) we rolled India for 288 & 158 , JA 5/131 over both innings. Steyn and, I feel, Philander would do similar damage.

I'm therefore not so sure we'd have 500 v 500 were SA to face India on this track. No, its not wonderful, but nothing suggests the groundsman has been doctoring it.

No, not doctored. An ideal Test wicket will give you a result on day 5 with some assistance in it for seamers and spinners while allowing quality batting (as seen in this match by Agar and Bell) to be rewarded. You won't see many better wickets in Test matches this year than this one.

Growler wrote:You've missed the point, Dan.

Do you think, on those facts, that the pitch was doctored, as has been suggested? I tend to agree with you, that the batting of both teams is slightly above complete dogshit, but well short of solid in any conditions.

Two years ago (admittedly not on this pitch, of course) we rolled India for 288 & 158 , JA 5/131 over both innings. Steyn and, I feel, Philander would do similar damage.

I'm therefore not so sure we'd have 500 v 500 were SA to face India on this track. No, its not wonderful, but nothing suggests the groundsman has been doctoring it.

I don't think the pitch has been doctored, as such, no. I think Horace was lonely and bored and wanted some attention.

I do think that TB wanted full value out of the fixture, though.

As for us v India - they were ramshackle - not so much now. The pitch is and has been incredibly benign, IMO.

Growler wrote:It must be really rubbish taips. What did horrie say on page 2?

"doctored to have no pace, bounce or seam and to break up early...views put by tuffers, boycott, aggers et al"
That suggests that, we've set it up for spinners ie Swann, and negated the Aus quicker bowlers.

Let's look at some of the facts of the matter .....

1. We're starting day 5 but haven't had weather delays.

2. 1044 runs so far. When I was at school, that was an average of 261/day, so obviously a minefield for batsmen.

3. 36 wickets down .... 9 a day, so bugger all help for bowlers.

4. A 19yo debutant at 11 setting a new record score.

5. Analysis of 4 experienced bowlers (match so far) ....

a. Watto 19 overs -13 maidens - 18 runs for 0 wickets
b. Siddle 47.5 - 16 - 135 - 8
c. Jimmy 41 - 6 - 129 - 6
d. Swann 47 - 9 - 124 - 4

No surprise at Andersons stats, we all know he's almost unplayable during May when it's overcast and damp, fodder on dust-bowls. Damned if I know the actual playing conditions 'coz I've only seen a few highlights - but as the pitch was doctored to suit Swann, the plan appears to be an abject failure.

Or maybe young horrie was just blowing through his arse? You decide based on the above.

growls - was reporting the comments of English commentators as well as what the pitch did on the first day....did not break up as much as your commentators anticipated....that said there was plenty of turn for Chinhead...but he did not take advantage - Jimmeh was terrific

horrie - fair play - TBH I didn't realise other commentators had seemingly made such an issue of it.

That said, whilst accepting your point that curators can water pitches, it's not the same as natural rainfall in weather patterns, and this summer is certainly hotter than recent years by some way. I suspect all the pitches will be more dusty than we're used to - but I don't honestly think there's any nefarious action on the part of our groundsmen.

true re rainfall...but conditions had been mild in the spring (snow?) and has only just heated up....and yep it was Aggers English co commentators who made the comments

And so the ducking and diving begins.

I've no doubt that we could produce green seamers if we so wished. No doubt at all. I disagree with growler that it's not that easy. It is.

Dan, I didn't mean to give the impression that I thought that it's difficult to produce green seamers.

Against horries point of the TB strip being specifically prepared to help Swann, my contention was that the groundsman had not watered the pitch to green it up - but neither had he done anything extra to deaden it to the disadvantage of the Aussie bowlers, d'you see ?.

horace wrote:true re rainfall...but conditions had been mild in the spring (snow?) and has only just heated up....and yep it was Aggers English  co commentators who made the comments

English commentators are becoming increasingly more like tabloid journalists - full of shit. Ian Botham always has been, but the rest are following.

Growler wrote:Dan, I didn't mean to give the impression that I thought that it's difficult to produce green seamers.

Against horries point of the TB strip being specifically prepared to help Swann, my contention was that the groundsman had not watered the pitch to green it up - but neither had he done anything extra to deaden it to the disadvantage of the Aussie bowlers, d'you see ?.

No way did he doctor it. No-one would purposefully prepare a pitch like that.