IN fairness, I doubt there's been many spinners in the history of the game who'd have relished bowling on a day 1 and day 2 Adelaide pitch: there's not enough bounce to work with... and there's no appreciable rough... so even if one defeats the batsman in the air, it doesn't really cause the batsman a problem - and to compound matters, the boundaries square of the wicket are ridiculously short, so giving the ball some air is just asking for trouble.

Hogg may not have impressed... but Laker would almost certainly not have impressed either.

I'd not criticise the seamers either: batsmen rack up huge scores with ease at Adelaide no matter WHAT the attack looks like - the venue simply fails (and has failed for generations) to offer any sort of contest between bat and ball.

Now, I agree that a pitch where 500 isn't a safe score probably isn't the best possible pitch, but I'm a big believer in the traditions of cricket, and a Test at Adelaide Oval- particularly on the Australia Day weekend- is one of those traditions that should be continued. Besides which, I know how I'd feel if they decided that no more Tests would be played in Perth for whatever reason. One of the great things about the Australian season is that each city gets to host a Test, and be the focus of the country for at least five days of the year.

Unfortunately Hogg's big problem is that he has failed to impress in the test format full stop.

His wickets were only when India tried forcing the pace on the wrong track to do it, and most of them were tail-enders jag's.

As Symonds and Clarke showed today and during the last day at Sydney. Hogg does not offer much if not anything in the test format of the game.

So no matter HOW badly the venue caters for a major sporting event... backing should continue?

It's not as if Adelaide being absolutely awful as a venue is anything new: even in Boycott's day it sucked.

One can question the merit of ANY venue with such short boundaries square of the wicket... but that's no excuse for the dire pitch.... and as far as I'm aware the ground has never had long grass on the outfield to slow the ball up and give fielders a chance.

Radical thought: if the square boundaries have to be so short... how about ensuring the pitch is sufficiently two-paced to add an element of risk to cross-batted shots?

I'm not suggesting that the other venues are blameless: pitches failing to wear and break up as they should is a common enough problem - but that's about the only thing the Adelaide pitch has EVER done right!

I think it is more that Adelaide and is one of the true cricket pitches and is playing like a true cricket pitch.

Melbourne, Sydney and Brisbane are all "drop in" pitches at the mercy of the end of the Aussie Rules final's series.

Perth (WACA) is in the majority a pitch with a full preparation, with exception to like lately Perth teams are involved in Aussie Rules final's which puts pressure on the venue. Even though it is because it limits access to "Subiaco" the major aussie rules venue. Which causes a domino effect.

Of bigger interest is the fact that normally we would be well into the One Day series by now.

It is a very unusual summer of cricket down under down here. And the blockbuster 1st February 20/20 at the MCG which apparently is already close to being sold out to 90-100 thousand people may re-define cricket as we currently know it.

By the way Rach

Aust Open is

Djokavic (Serb) v Tsonga (Fra)

And believe it or not I reckon Tsonga will do it and Wimbledon.

Hold on! I'm sure somewhere above the context is clear, and you're probably talking about some pitch characteristics, Rachael - but the Adelaide Oval is a beautiful place to watch cricket and the only regular test pitch in Australia still to be in a traditional cricket ground rather than a concrete stadium. Don't knock it as a venue, please!

I saw your comment about the short square boundaries: memory is that they took them pretty well all the way to the fence when I saw England there last time. They might have been able to add a yard or two either side, but after that they would have been in the stands with me, I think. It's a small-ish ground (certainly by Australian standards), but all the more pleasant for it in my opinion.

__________________
Money won't buy you friends. But it gets you a better class of enemy.
Spike Milligan

Well, I certainly don't believe that the South Australian cricket fans should be punished because the curator doesn't prepare a perfect pitch. And as O.F. said, the venue itself is one of the most picturesque in the world, so it would certainly be a tragedy, if you ask me, if Adelaide Oval were to stop hosting Test matches.

I've just been browsing today's Torygraph... Boycott used to "love" the Adelaide Oval... not because the cricket there was any good but because batting was so damn easy on a pitch that sapped all the threat from even the best bowlers.

The Adelaide Oval has witness 45 single innings totals of in excess of (a surely absurd) 450... and 50 players average 75 or more in Test cricket there. Simpson posted 50 or more in 8 out of 11 innings at the ground. Looking at the same total I note Hill (7/11), Walters (7/12),Bradman (6/10) and Richards (6/10) amongst a host of players to cash in routinely. Barrington never once failed to make 50 in 4 innings! Hutton was weak by comparison: 2 scores of under 50 in 6 efforts.

Three partnerships at the Adelaide Oval have been in excess of 300. A further 16 have been 200+. There's an entire pageful of examples of 150+ partnerships: the numbers are staggering. Even IMran Khan and Wasim Akram posted 191 here!

The bowling figures are even more striking. Dennis Lillee once went for 171 in a single innings, and another time went for 163. Warne has been carted for 167 in an innings and only bagged one wicket from 53 overs. Kumble went for 154. Lance Gibbs once bowled 43 x 8 ball overs and took 4/163. I doubt Craig McDermott looks back on the place with much glee either: figures of 3/131 and 4/135 leap off the page. Did better than Abdul Qadir though: 2/132 off 47 overs.

I've not bothered listing the likes of Henderson, Lee, Patterson and Pathan, Wiseman, Mailey (twice) and Hafeez (all of whom doubtless contributed to their own downfall on their way to the spectacular double of conceding 100+ in an innings and going at more than 4 an over): I'm struck that some GREAT bowlers really had to toil.

I'll acknowledge that Ambrose took 14 wickets at 18.35 and that Marshall took 11 at 18.54... but you shouldn't have to be in that class to take wickets on a regular basis: there's no way a Courtney Walsh's record at ANY ground should read 14 victims costing 38.92 a piece!

interesting points rachael
so adelaide oval traditionally offers good first innings total
what about second innings?and how often the match ends with a result?

__________________
Heat Sucks-Red Death