Completely disagree on all counts: good ODI cricket (like all cricket) requires a wicket on which batsmen are too worried to hit through the line to good deliveries: that is the essence of "a contest between bat and ball".

The best ODIs are those on two-paced greentops with huge boundaries and overcast skies: the best batsmen adapt, building a decent total through strokes involving minimal backlift and great touch; the imposters fail.Hardly relevent: the question is... would Ryan Sidebottom or Glen Chapple have struggled on that pitch: if they would have done... it was NOT fit for ODI cricket... because they are BOTH decent bowlers.

You shouldn't have to be better than that to be able to do a decent job for your captain in International cricket!

Come on Rach, ODI cricket is a spectator sport and in its modern incaration its about bat v bat like it or not. Modern ODI cricket is aout team a scoring 350 and team b getting pretty close. The days of someone like Gavaskar batting 60 overs for 30odd runs are hopfully left in the past, that is what test cricket is for. I think your opinion of ODI cricket is in the massive minority.

I enjoy watching ODI cricket as a spectacle but i enjoy test cricket far, far more and on differant levels.

Ryan Sidebottom is not quite at the level of the bowlers on display but i imagine he would have done better than either of the two Aussie left armers, both of whom every time i watch them seem less impressive .


With all of his experience i would be surprised if Cahpple didnt come away with figures of 4-45 to 4-50 ish, so in that case then it must have been a decent pitch. Just as the inexperienced Aussie and New Zealant bowlers lacked class, bowled badly and got hammered.

__________________
Mark.

The last 2-3 years have seen a LOT of good ODIs based around low-middling totals: I'm not sure there's EVER been a good high-scoring ODI.

Why pander to the lowest common denominator? ODI cricket can be EXCELLENT cricket: all that's needed is the guts to trust the punters to value a contest between bat and ball. Stick the boundaries as deep as possible, liven up the pitches and let's see what the bowlers can do as well as what the batsmen can do!

I agree that boundarys should be made larger, it makes sloggers less effective and rewards good bats who can find the gaps. It also shows who the really good captains are.


I suppose a "good" ODI for the typical punter is judged on two things:

A good first innings score and a tight finish i.e team b are 8 - 9 wickets down off last couple of overs needing a gettable total.

__________________
Mark.

I agree that the boundaries should be as large as possible, but preparing a wicket to be consistantly lively throughout the entire 100 overs is an unrealistic expectation. If you prepare a lively wicket, it is inevitable that it will flatten out throughout the day, thus, the team batting first is disadvantaged

When you prepare a ODI wicket, consistancy is what you need to strive for and that is exactly what the groundsman achieved for this match

__________________

Plus there was a brief spell of good bowling by Bracken and Shaun Tait in the first ten overs or so, and New Zealand were rightly struggling at 41-4. The high scores certainly didn't come down to a poor pitch, if the ball was put in the right places, wickets were gettable.

__________________
- VVVRulz..

How many finals at Lords in Sept have been ruined by the pitch?? Team a wins the toss and inserts team b (oo-er!). Team b gets skittled. Team a then knocks the runs off to win.

Result no one is happy with the game, i would dare say even the winning team dont want to win by the toss of a coin.

__________________
Mark.

Very true. In tests at least, if you have to bat on a difficult first day wicket you often get the chance to bowl on a wearing fifth day wicket. No such oppurtunities in ODI's

__________________

Not if you're aiming for LBW's and bowled as your primary source of wickets. Tait is always aiming to crush toes at this stage of his career, he'll mature into a better bowler once he stops doing it but I'm not going to hold it against him. At least he's getting the ball to move, so all he needs is refinement, coaching and maturing.

Tait and Bracken took 4 quick New Zealand wickets, so I wouldn't say they didn't take advantage of the conditions. I think you'll find that once the ball stopped swinging, the batsmen took advantage of the utterly dead pitch and the miniscule ground to go to town.