CricInfo Home
News Home

NEWS FOCUS
Rsa in Pak
NZ in India
Zim in Aus

Domestic
Other Series

If we are to produce better cricketers in this country we must produce better pitches. The ideal scenario for the development of young players is four-day cricket played on good, fast pitches with even bounce, which start to take spin late in the afternoon of the third day and into the fourth. Such conditions provide the necessary encouragement for batsmen, fast bowlers, seamers and spinners to hone their skills.

It is, however, easier said than done, as the England and Wales Cricket Board are finding out. Having done the right thing by introducing four-day matches, they have been frustrated beyond belief to find far too many of them all over in two days. There is a growing feeling that the standard of pitches is to blame. They are far from the ideal I have outlined.

If matches are over in two days, the spinners are never going to have the opportunity to develop and improve their skills in conditions which suit them, and batsmen are never going to learn how to play top-quality spinners on a turning pitch. Far too often the journeymen seam bowlers are used to bowl sides out.

I am a big believer in the school of thought that says cricketers learn their trade on good pitches. That is what happens in Australia and South Africa, where the pitches are simply magnificent.

So, where are we going wrong? Why cannot we provide such pitches on which it is possible to have four-day matches which regularly go the distance? One of the problems is the wear and-tear on pitches throughout the country. They have taken such a hammering over the years that it is difficult for the groundsmen to produce the tracks the England and Wales Cricket Board are requesting.

Is there anything we can do about that?

The tendency these days is for counties to concentrate their fixtures at one particular ground and this may be adding to the problem. If matches were played at several grounds around the various counties it would give the squares more time to recover. The wear and tear would be reduced considerably and the groundsmen would have more time to work on them.

Compare Essex, who play on several venues and have an excellent pitch at their headquarters at Chelmsford, to Yorkshire, who play nearly every home match at Headingley where the pitch is taking a lot of stick. It does not help that it is not a very big square.

It could also be beneficial if wheel-on covers were used to cover a pitch days before a match instead of the plastic sheets which are usually used. Wheel-on covers allow the air to circulate instead of trapping moisture, like the plastic sheets.

Some have also advocated eliminating the toss and allowing the away team to have the choice of whether to bat or field. That, it is argued, would counter accusations of pitches being doctored to suit the home attacks. It used to be done that way, so it is not such a radical suggestion.

Yet we could be on the wrong track, as it were. The pitches may not be responsible for the early conclusion to so many matches. It could be down to a lack of technique on behalf of the players. Are the batsmen knocked over too easily because they have not acquired the necessary skills?

Another suggestion is that pitches should be left uncovered, at the mercy of the elements, to try to improve techniques.

There is a case to be made for that but if you leave a pitch uncovered and there is overnight rain, you could lose a day's play because of a saturated pitch. I fear that, with the summers we have in England, far too much play would be lost. For that reason alone the idea is a non-starter.

You have to think about the paying customers, particularly the members. They fork out a lot of money to watch their cricket and play a big part in keeping the game alive. So it would not be fair to rob them of more days of play than absolutely necessary.

In any case, the only way we are going to improve English cricket is by providing good pitches, whether covered or not, and we have to find a way to make that possible.

No doubt, however, even if we did produce the perfect pitch there would still be complaints from some batsmen or bowlers.

I remember Freddie Trueman once opening the Yorkshire attack and sending three express deliveries so far down the leg side that the batsman could hardly have reached them even if he so desired.

Of course, it could not possibly be Fred's fault. So he turned to the umpire, Dusty Rhodes, and growled: ``This bloody pitch isn't straight. The stumps aren't in line. Any fool can see that.''

He refused to carry on bowling until everything was thoroughly checked. So out trotted the groundsman with his chain and stretched it, with meticulous care, between the two middle stumps. Perfect. The creases were checked. Nothing wrong there, either. Everything was in apple-pie order.

Still by no means convinced, Fred snatched the ball, polished it more furiously than ever on his ample backside and began the long walk back to his mark.

As he passed the non-striker, who was gallantly trying to keep a straight face throughout all the palaver, Fred muttered: ``I'll bet thee a fiver there's summat wrong wi' that theer chain.''