The Electronic Telegraph carries daily news and opinion from the UK and around the world.

Umpires' caution adds to pitch's blandness

By Mark Nicholas

10 July 1996


THIS WAS not a Test match to make the blood boil, not unless, of course, you have a problem with boring sport. It was a dull game weighed too heavily in favour of the batsmen on a pitch which favoured the team who needed the draw. But that is the nature of sport as entertainment. Sport cannot mould itself for its audience and were each day covered in gloss, cricket, in particular, would lose its intoxicating spectacle of unpredictability.

In a way the last two humdrum days have made a point for cricket, which is that there is no point in preparing so perfect a surface when the players are no more than ordinary mortals. There may have been something in this pitch, but there were few who could find it. Only Sachin Tendulkar is extraordinary, though Dominic Cork has it in him. Michael Atherton and Javagal Srinath are very good without being quite so special.

If the pitch at Edgbaston for the start of the series offered too much for the bowler, then this one swung fully the other way. Somewhere between the two is ideal, unless there is a Lillee, a Holding or a Marshall to overcome it. It is an ironic thing that Edgbaston's status as a Test match venue is under threat when the Test in Birmingham made for compulsive viewing. The pitch at Trent Bridge will be applauded for its consistency, yet the match, notwithstanding a lively session after tea yesterday, was a yawn.

The contrasting success of bat and ball has been exaggerated by the defensive umpiring of two men new to Test cricket in this country. Both the convincing George Sharp and the charming Sri Lankan K T Francis understandably erred on the side of caution, though Francis a little too much so for the sake of the contest, and gave reprieves to batsmen who were already, in part, reprieved by the blandness of the surface.

Bowlers must have teeth for the game to retain its interest but there were times during the past five days when even the plumbest of the plumb lbw appeals were refused.

The umpires are marked for their performance by the captains, which is a strange state of affairs given the highly emotive levels of international sport. Now that a referee is in place could he not report on the umpires, after consultation with the captains and after a thorough review of televison replays? Would this not free the umpires from the threat of an irate captain and from the pressure put upon them by that giant screen giving its second opinion and by the television giving its third, fourth and fifth?

Bowlers must have teeth for the game to retain its interest but there were times during the past five days when even the plumbest of the plumb lbw appeals were refused. Neither indifferent bounce nor unlikely amounts of sideways movement could be blamed, as perhaps they could have been at Edgbaston and at times at Lord's, so perhaps concern for a captain's approval played on the subconscious of two men who were keen to be asked back.

England paid for the lack of conviction in their batting on the fourth afternoon, and for their resignation to the pitch and the necessity of the draw. They were better than India, and by a distance, but failed to understand as much and to press home their superiority. The scent of victory is not familiar to Atherton's men, but they are on the right road and it may become so if they are prepared to confront the wider possibilities that are before them.


Source: The Electronic Telegraph
Editorial comments can be sent to The Electronic Telegraph at et@telegraph.co.uk
Contributed by CricInfo Management
Date-stamped : 25 Feb1998 - 15:08