A general comment

[Anonymous]

Sorry about some recent over the top comments I may have made, but by God I'm just becoming very frustrated with a lot of peoples attitudes towards cricket.

I am sick and tired of hearing about how a side "capitulated" and was all out for 220 or 230, about how so and so scores too slowly (in reality, NONE of the Indian or Australian top order are anywhere near slow scorers, nor have they been this summer), or about how a certain pitch was a green seamer when it was a good even pitch. I, seemingly unlike most people, get bored and annoyed with constant 300 Vs 300 one dayers. I think the odd test match with 2000 runs scored and the side batting first scoring 700 is enjoyable, but it shouldn't be the norm.

Am I the only person who likes a REAL contest between bat and ball? And by a contest, I don't mean both sides scoring at 6 an over with one or two bowlers doing their best to extract something out of a nothing pitch, I mean a pitch with a bit for both sides and scores between 200 and 250. I mean batsman having to be on full alert at all times, and I mean fans actually having to enjoy boundaries when they are hit, rather than expecting a few every over as par for the course. I want to see batsman who have honed their technique to perfection, not a rash of big-hitting flat-track bullies who have great eyes and cash in on all of the lifeless pitches.

Am I really on my own?

 

[Macca]

Na mate you are not on your own. I love Test cricket a heel of a lot more than one dayers. I love the way the Aussie side plays though. There is nothing better than watching a genuine contest between bat and ball, like when Steve Waugh and Curtley Ambrose went at it. Like Shane Warne and Brian Lara. They are brilliant to watch. I don't like domination of a test, I love it when it's tight, but only when the Aussies win.

 

[DJDL]

Gotta agree. I've always preferred the tests, but even more so the last few years.
One dayers are all pretty much forumaic these days.

Still, there is the odd little gem of a match thrown in but they are too few and far between

 

[DJDL]

Errrr, sorry. That should be "formulaic" not "forumaic"
Seems I'm suffering a little "forum ache" myself....

 

[thuganomics]

i prefer one dayers.

 

[SirShire]

Tests are great and I probably love them more than ODIs, but I get a real kick out of a neck and neck ODI finish, ie 120 runs of 80 balls needed, or a 7 runs off 2 balls (BINGA!) etc.

But I get a kick in tests when blokes like Tugga get unreal centuries, or when blokes like Dizzy and Pidgeon rip the order up). Its even better when blokes like Dizzy get out there and have a hit (he is a great batsman!).

Either way, I wont complain if one or the other is on the box.

 

[Mr Angry]

Test cricket is the true test of a cricketers skills. ODI are still just hit and giggle to me, enjoyable but they do not mean a lot. Once every 4 years it means something.
As Twizzle has pointed out a few times this season, these 'drop in' pitches with no life what so ever for bowlers is not producing the true test for anyone. So I would agree and hope the ACB looks at it.

 

[Macca]

The best analogy I have heard on the two forms of the game is this:

A ODI is like going for a quick feed at Maccas, the food is prepared hastily and is ok, you have a full stomach and you are happy.

A Test is like dining in a fine Italian restaurant, the food is prepared painstakingly and is so superb that your mouth waters between bites. You feel so full afterwards that you couldn't possibly eat another thing but you want to taste more of these delights.

 

[Anonymous]

I love Test Cricket more than ODI's but I happen to think that the ODI's are set up for it.

The pitches are made for the batsman, and a 600 run game is what most of the public want to see.

Unfortunatly that can sometimes take away the competition in a match

 

[Twizzle]

You are definately not on your own TH.

Good post.

But you do have a tendency to look at things through Kiwi coloured glasses.

And if you didn't, it wouldn't be forum.

 

[Craig]

You are definately not on your own TH.

Good post.

But you do have a tendency to look at things through Kiwi coloured glasses.

And if you didn't, it wouldn't be forum.

Then I'm definatly not "fourm" am I?

I try and stay as neutral as possible.

 

[ozbash]

You are definately not on your own TH.

Good post.

But you do have a tendency to look at things through Kiwi coloured glasses.

And if you didn't, it wouldn't be forum.

thats the way of the world though,, you guys see things thru green and gold coloured specs..

mcsharkies analogy of test and ODI,s is the best i have heard,, i love both but prefer 5 days.

 

[Twizzle]

You are definately not on your own TH.

Good post.

But you do have a tendency to look at things through Kiwi coloured glasses.

And if you didn't, it wouldn't be forum.

Then I'm definatly not "fourm" am I?

I try and stay as neutral as possible.

Yes I noticed that with your comment about Gilly being boring.

 

[Anonymous]

There seems to be a misinterpretation of my post.

It had nothing to do with tests or ODIs.

It was more about the bat dominating the ball to such an extent that people (especially in Australia where you have such good batting pitches) have started to take ridiculously fast scoring rates for granted and have an unrealistic perspective on things.

 

[Dingle]

I think you have things all wrong. Here in Australia we just love seeing the opposition get smashed! We love seeing the boys post a massive total just as much as we love seeing Brett Lee put a bouncer in Ganguly's head. Really we do take high run rates for granted but that's because we are the best and are proud of it!

 

[Doctor]

I suppose I see the need to not ruin international cricket statistics too much. I'm one for the history of the sport and hence I find myself comparing bowlers and batsmen from the past with their modern teammates and opponents. Although such comparisons are unfair and we are incapable of comparing them at all accurately, I like the idea of records and team achievements, individual milestones etc.

If Test sides are scoring 500-600 in the first innings, modern batsmen are going to have inflated figures - we'll suddenly be talking about previously decent batsmen rivalling the greats. That is why Steve Waugh's figures are not higher - he started on decks that did indeed provide an even contest between bat and ball.

It is why the New Zealanders don't have higher batting averages - not because they aren't any good but because, from what I gather, there is a bit there by way of swing, bounce and a bit of grass for the bowlers in New Zealand.

One Day cricket will be judged in history for what it is - entertainment. I don't consider the achievements of Tendulkar and co (12,000 ODi runs) as anything more than worthy of a shrug of the shoulders. When you play that many matches on such small grounds favourable to batting - you're bound to average 45.

But Tests are different - I'd like to see 250-400 run scores regularly so as to get rid of the draw and promote either side as eventual victors.

But in saying that, this Australian team deserves some credit for their attacking style. Reverting back to the days of 2.5 to 3 runs an over is a step in the wrong direction. Scoring 350 runs in a day is good for the game, but so is a crumbling track on the 5th day when you might see a score of 10/200 in the final day's play.

You make some interesting comments though.

 

[salivor]

There seems to be a misinterpretation of my post.

It had nothing to do with tests or ODIs.

It was more about the bat dominating the ball to such an extent that people (especially in Australia where you have such good batting pitches) have started to take ridiculously fast scoring rates for granted and have an unrealistic perspective on things.

I couldn't agree more. If I hear Martin Crowe and Ian Smith complain about pitches one more time I'm going to scream, they're even conned Danny Morrison, a bowler into agreeing with them. Jeremy Coney even thought the Edan Park pitch was a bad one. Both sides scored 230 odd and it went to the last over in a cliff hanger. That was bloody entertaining.

I'd rather see 250 pitches that offer something to a bowler who is prepared to work hard than a 300+ batters paradise. While everyone thought the 350 from CD was great, the contest was over half way through. Few teams successfully chase totals in excess of 290 and those who are prepared to take off the rose coloured glasses such as M Crowe will know that most 300+ run pitches end the contest after the 1st innings with the 2nd innings ends up only being for entertainment rather than a serious run chase.

New Zealand and world groundsmen shouldn't be listening to the media hype, instead they should be listening to their commen sense which says a good one day pitch is probably a 260-70 one which still offers some assistance to a bowler who puts it in the right place.

Batting averages around the world are on the rise. An average around the 50 mark used to be the mark of a top line player, now it seems to be the norm for most top order batsmen around the world. A lot of the current batsmen will no doubt go on to break records if the trend continues but at the end of the day will they have as much pride with their record compared to players from older generations who earnt their runs on pitches that didn't always offer consistant predictable bounce?

 

[Craig]

I only really enjoy ODI cricket when they are close, when teams (either side) has a chance of winning, lange shot or not, then I like it, but if they are very umcompetitive (ie Australia v Zimbabwe at Hobart) and only one side has a chance of winning, then iti s a bore.

Green wickets sometimes produce more exiting matches as they sometimes/usually are more closer.

 

[Mr Angry]

Can I just say both teams play on the same pitch. If it dead and batsmens paradise it is for both sides. If it is a green top with lots of life for bowlers it is for both sides.

 

[Stormin Norman]

i agree in a way i like the idea of diff type of pitchs all over the world. i like it in aus ur going to score runs. when u go to nz and eng the ball is going to seam around a bit, when u go to the ind,pak,sri the pitchs will turn and when u got to sth africa and zim the pitchs will be fast cause your at altitude. so i agree wit u that i dont like 300 v 300 but its good to get some big scores every now and again.