2015 ODI WORLD CUP discussion thread

[shiznit]

I wouldn't call it sooking. More like disappointment that a cash grab has IMO dented the spectacle. I've got very little interest in watching batsmen chip the ball over cover for six runs and find it bizarre that a ground can hold WC match when it is officially not up to standard.

Officially it's up to 'standard'... Grounds pre-2007 are exempt...

It's no different to what MLB did with some baseball grounds... They set a standard but they exempt older stadiums to retain character.

 

[vvvrulz]

It's been a great world cup so far in terms of the bat vs ball contest.

I was worried scores would balloon out Rohit Sharma style, but we've had some really good bowling and runs in general have had to be earned.

 

[undertaker]

55 metres on the straight drive is a bit ridiculous, we got one of them in our district but we only play 4th grade games on it, can't believe they play international games on such a small pitch

I know there was already a provision on grounds that had hosted international cricket before the rules on field dimensions came into effect in 2007. Nothing against NZ, but with ground boundaries of only 55-60m (and furthermore, being the stadium with the largest capacity in NZ), those games should've been taken away and played in venues which do meet the requirements.

Add the flat pitch to that, and you have yet another high-scoring match where the team batting first scores 300+ with consummate ease on top of the 8 matches which have already cracked the 300 mark. What a joke. The fielding side might as well bring out a bowling machine to bowl in place of their own bowlers. Oh how I miss the old vertical boundary at Adelaide Oval and horizontal boundaries at the WACA before ropes were enforced.

 

[shiznit]

I know there was already a provision on grounds that had hosted international cricket before the rules on field dimensions came into effect in 2007. Nothing against NZ, but with ground boundaries of only 55-60m (and furthermore, being the stadium with the largest capacity in NZ), those games should've been taken away and played in venues which do meet the requirements.

Add the flat pitch to that, and you have yet another high-scoring match where the team batting first scores 300+ with consummate ease on top of the 8 matches which have already cracked the 300 mark. What a joke. The fielding side might as well bring out a bowling machine to bowl in place of their own bowlers. Oh how I miss the old vertical boundary at Adelaide Oval and horizontal boundaries at the WACA before ropes were enforced.

Sure.... And why don't we stop playing international cricket at Lords until they fix the slope... :roll:

What a joke....

Just because Australia are the only country geniused enough to have that abomination of a sport AFL Which gives them large grounds... It doesn't mean the rest of the world have to follow suit.

Some of the older grounds in countries like NZ, WI & SA will be under what's perceived as the 'standard'... Who cares... The game of cricket has changed a lot in the last decade... But as far I know they don't change the boundaries between innings... So both teams have the same advantage/problem to deal with...

 

[JJ]

I wouldn't call it sooking. More like disappointment that a cash grab has IMO dented the spectacle. I've got very little interest in watching batsmen chip the ball over cover for six runs and find it bizarre that a ground can hold WC match when it is officially not up to standard.

Like I said, always been the same at Eden Park, not sure what the issue is

 

[Twizzle]

Sure.... And why don't we stop playing international cricket at Lords until they fix the slope... :roll:

What a joke....

Just because Australia are the only country geniused enough to have that abomination of a sport AFL Which gives them large grounds... It doesn't mean the rest of the world have to follow suit.

Some of the older grounds in countries like NZ, WI & SA will be under what's perceived as the 'standard'... Who cares... The game of cricket has changed a lot in the last decade... But as far I know they don't change the boundaries between innings... So both teams have the same advantage/problem to deal with...

they were cricket grounds before they were AFL Grounds, AFL was developed by early Irish settlers and Victorian cricketers who wanted to keep fit during winter

 

[shiznit]

I know there was already a provision on grounds that had hosted international cricket before the rules on field dimensions came into effect in 2007. Nothing against NZ, but with ground boundaries of only 55-60m (and furthermore, being the stadium with the largest capacity in NZ), those games should've been taken away and played in venues which do meet the requirements.

Add the flat pitch to that, and you have yet another high-scoring match where the team batting first scores 300+ with consummate ease on top of the 8 matches which have already cracked the 300 mark. What a joke. The fielding side might as well bring out a bowling machine to bowl in place of their own bowlers. Oh how I miss the old vertical boundary at Adelaide Oval and horizontal boundaries at the WACA before ropes were enforced.

I'll tell what I miss in Adelaide... The short square boundary at the Adelaide Oval...

The new renovation looked great.,. They looked absolutely amazing... But sadly it looks like it's lost that short boundary square....

Here's something else for ya.... You complain about boundary sizes being a big cause in these scores of 300+... Well Manuka Oval and the MCG supposedly have the same size boundaries.... And we just watched Chris Gayle hit 200... And WI's hit 370... Add to that the 300+ scores India and Australia hit at the MCG.... I don't think the ground sizes are as big of a factor as you think it is...

 

[undertaker]

they were cricket grounds before they were AFL Grounds, AFL was developed by early Irish settlers and Victorian cricketers who wanted to keep fit during winter

This.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australian_rules_football#History

On 10 July 1858, the Melbourne-based Bell's Life in Victoria and Sporting Chronicle published a letter by prominent Victorian cricketer Tom Wills, calling for the formation of a "foot-ball club" with a "code of laws" to keep cricketers fit during winter. This letter is regarded by many historians as giving impetus for the development of a new code of football today known as Australian football.

Hence why not only was the sport traditionally played at venues where cricket was also played, but also why there were numerous Australian test players (predominantly from Victoria) who also played in the then-VFL as recently as the 1980s (e.g. Max Walker, Simon O'Donnell)

Whoever the hell this kiwi guy needs to get his facts right.

 

[shiznit]

This.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australian_rules_football#History



Hence why not only was the sport traditionally played at venues where cricket was also played, but also why there were numerous Australian test players (predominantly from Victoria) who also played in the then-VFL as recently as the 1980s (e.g. Max Walker, Simon O'Donnell)

Whoever the hell this kiwi guy needs to get his facts right.

Whether cricket came first means absolutely nothing...

Because if it wasn't for that abomination known as AFL.... You wouldn't have the abundance of large grounds that you do have... Because the AFL contributes big money to those cricket stadiums.

 

[Mr Angry]

Don't start me on drop in pitches, the different grounds makes cricket unique.

I have no issue with the size of the ground, but want pitches where both bat and ball have an even chance, for both teams.

 

[undertaker]

Don't start me on drop in pitches, the different grounds makes cricket unique.

I have no issue with the size of the ground, but want pitches where both bat and ball have an even chance, for both teams.

Couldn't have said it any better. I know we're heading way off topic in this thread, but this needs to be said again...

The AFL Commission are to blame for drop-in pitches in Adelaide and Melbourne. Yeah, everyone says the new Adelaide Oval looks magnificent and seats another 20k ppl and I don't disagree with that at all, but it definitely came at a price...there ain't any free lunch as they say...

The epitome of the curse of drop-in pitches was the last Boxing Day test match. Yes, those dropped catches of Kohli and Rahane in the 1st innings cost us many runs, but throughout the course of that test, there was absolutely nothing in the pitch for the bowlers. The SCG pitch wasn't much better. I can understand Ryan Harris vented his frustration on radio after the SCG test, and I've also read online there were some rumours about the BCCI putting pressure on CA to ensure test matches lasted 5 days after the last time India were here and pitches (especially the WACA) gave plenty of assistance to the bowlers and we won 4-0. That wouldn't surprise me at all if those rumours turned out to be true. It is no surprise that the WACA didn't get a test this time.

It will be a sad day when The Gabba and SCG managements give in to the AFL and start implementing drop-in pitches, or cricket is moved from the WACA to the new 60k Perth stadium. Regarding Perth, I fear that will happen as the WACA management doesn't have any money to renovate the ageing facilities at the WACA, and with the SCG I believe the Swans AFL side will be permanently moving back to the SCG in 2018 and that may be strong enough of a case for management to consider their claims when that happens.

 

[Mr Angry]

When I grew up, you played

GABBA - 3 quicks and a spinner, Bowl first
MCG - 3 quicks and a spinner, Bat first
SCG - 2 quicks, 2 spinners, Bat first
Adelaide, 3 quicks and spinner, Bat first. Really want that.
WACA - 4 quicks, Bowl first.

Hobart did not have tests then.

 

[JJ]

Drop in pitches don't have to be awful, just seems they are that way in Australia

 

[hineyrulz]

Whether cricket came first means absolutely nothing...

Because if it wasn't for that abomination known as AFL.... You wouldn't have the abundance of large grounds that you do have... Because the AFL contributes big money to those cricket stadiums.

:lol: really??? SA taxpayers footed the bill for Adelaide Oval. Not sure about the MCG but Merkincon stadium and spotless was funded by the tax payers. AFL are well known for leeching of the taxpayers

 

[Twizzle]

Whether cricket came first means absolutely nothing...

Because if it wasn't for that abomination known as AFL.... You wouldn't have the abundance of large grounds that you do have... Because the AFL contributes big money to those cricket stadiums.

yet if we didn't have AFL we'd still have the cricket grounds that we had prior to AFL

seems to be a very relevant argument to me

 

[shiznit]

:lol: really??? SA taxpayers footed the bill for Adelaide Oval. Not sure about the MCG but Merkincon stadium and spotless was funded by the tax payers. AFL are well known for leeching of the taxpayers

Really??? Well why were the cricket commentators telling the whole world that the Adelaide Oval refit was funded mostly by the AFL... Because they will now be using it every week during the AFL season....

 

[shiznit]

yet if we didn't have AFL we'd still have the cricket grounds that we had prior to AFL

seems to be a very relevant argument to me

You might find that if you didn't have the AFL... Those stadiums might have ended up under pressure from the rectangular football sports to shrink in size to better fit those codes.

 

[hineyrulz]

Really??? Well why were the cricket commentators telling the whole world that the Adelaide Oval refit was funded mostly by the AFL... Because they will now be using it every week during the AFL season....

Because the Commentators are AFL loving morons.

 

[undertaker]

:lol: really??? SA taxpayers footed the bill for Adelaide Oval. Not sure about the MCG but Merkincon stadium and spotless was funded by the tax payers. AFL are well known for leeching of the taxpayers

again, I don't know where the hell this shiznit guy has appeared from, but he obviously hasn't done his research. Every NRL fan living in Australia on this forums are all too aware of how the AFL have lobbied the government into getting tax payers to fund all their expansion projects, and they have succeeded for the most part because they have friends in high places in the government or the media (e.g. Ron Clarke, mayor of Gold Coast).

Just to refreshen your memory, remember how the QLD government initially stipulated a clause before the Gold Coast Suns were admitted about how they would be forced to play out of The Gabba in Brisbane and that they would be playing in no new GC stadium before 2016?

http://www.leagueoftitans.com.au/showthread.php?9631-Carrara-Stadium&

What happened with that?

And remember also how then-NSW Premier Nathan Rees put the kaibosh on GWS proposal for a new stadium/redevelopment as well?

http://wwos.ninemsn.com.au/article.aspx?id=975450

What happened with that too???

The AFL fought tooth and nail and had both of those clauses reversed, BUT at the expense of the taxpayers and not their own funds, just to prop up their sport. And that is before you mention the whole drop-in pitch issue for cricket matches just so their precious footy players don't have to get tackled on the 'hard' centre pitch....

In a nutshell, the AFL is like those spoilt-brat girls and women like Rose Porteous who love living in opulence and flaunting their wealth and assets, so long as it is someone else who has paid for it.

 

[Twizzle]

You might find that if you didn't have the AFL... Those stadiums might have ended up under pressure from the rectangular football sports to shrink in size to better fit those codes.

might, being the operative word

I don't believe there would ever be a situation where we had no cricket grounds in their current format, cricket was around long before AFL ventured north to Qld and NSW