Don't be a plank - there was a slight green tinge, and although there was seam movement, it didn't go much more than a few inches or so. The scorecard was slanted so far in favour of the ball because the Australians played with leaden feet and hard hands, while the
ball didn't actually move enough to miss the edge. Broad was rewarded for an exceptional spell of bowling.
Shortly afterwards, Starc, Hazlewood and Johnson - three of the world's finest fast bowlers - were unable to stop an English batting line-up that contained only two reliable batsmen from getting 391. The Australians themselves then went on to post over 250 in the second innings, despite Ben Stokes bowling a world-class spell of swing bowling.
Your argument that this pitch, which provided even pace and bounce, and on which
only truly world-class spells of bowling were rewarded could be deemed unfit is laughably, demonstrably and obviously false.
I can understand people saying that wkt is not my cup of tea or too result oriented in favor of spin but unfit
"Too result orientated" doesn't cover it.
TWENTY wickets fell in a single day of a five-day Test match. This means that to go the distance, the match would need to offer five innings to each team, possibly more if the pitch continues to deteriorate. It is a pitch which (as has been amply demonstrated) would reward an average spin bowler just as much as one with real skill in their craft. All that Ravi Jadeja had to do was sling it into the middle of the pitch and let it do the rest, as alternate balls turn square and bounce, then keep low and straight.
The only slight thing that goes in its favour is that it was so laughably spin-friendly that India had already batted twice before Morne Morkel could start going through the top and hitting cracks. Because then it would have become physically dangerous, and not just dangerous for the well-being of the game.
Yeah England vs Australia, Trent Bridge game over in 2 days, England vs India, Manchester a pitch so green that most people wouldn't be able tell the difference between the pitch and their garden, match over in 3 days best pitches ever
I'm not in favour of "pitches so green that most people wouldn't be able to tell the difference between the pitch and their garden". I think that is also wrong, and certainly not "the best pitch ever". But the difference between a green pitch and this one is that you can reliably put the bad balls away on a green pitch; batsmen can still score runs on green pitches. And that's speaking as an Irish fan, where the weather is so wet that green pitches almost cannot be avoided.
... but a pitch that helps spinners spin the ball - thats a poor wicket.
Similarly, I like to see a pitch that spins, not just as a spinner but also as someone who firmly believes that most Test teams should include two spinners.
But, when the wicket itself does not reward skilful spin bowling, and instead offers four-for-thirty just because you turned up and bowled some darts, that is completely unfit to call itself a cricket wicket, let alone a Test wicket.
I don't know what is worse, your bad pitch rant or that you actually think there are people on this series forum who haven't seen the highlights of today's play.
Because... oh I don't know, they work full time or something? That was the first I had seen of it because I'd just got in from work. If people with jobs are somehow less important in your world, then fine.
Yeah pitches in India aid spin, have you just started watching cricket?
And I'm not even going to dignify
that with a response.
