How do you explain these super spin friendly pitches in England?

[the Great Khan]

I really don't understand this place sometimes.

For the last four years fans have screamed about bat-ball balance in ODIs.

Now we have a World Cup with bat-ball balance but that's a problem too. These batsmen should have to work hard for their runs on surfaces that challenge them.

only a couple of loud ppers are saying this..I think most of us are loving these pitches..I hate the phatta pitches..anyone who thinks thats cricket is fooling themselves..

 

[aukhan]

These pitches are made to assist subcontinental sides.

The most unluckiest side here is England. This was their best chance but ICC/BCCI screwed them over here.

 

[angeldsoul]

Totally agree with OP. ICC have completely taken home advantage away from England with these rubbish UAE style pitches.

Too bad their “neutral curators” were sleeping when India and Australia benefited from home conditions in 2011 and 2015, and you would see classic Indian pitches in 2023 as well.

England have been robbed in this World Cup. Injuries, bad luck and poor pitches. The universe seems to have conspired to ensure that England do not win the World Cup in spite of working so hard since the 2015 World Cup.

Everything has come crashing down at the last moment. England will have to play out of their skins in these two games to defy the odds since everything is going against them at the moment.

Stop being crybaby lol

 

[the Great Khan]

Did ICC have a weather machine that ensured the wettest June in years ? If anything the more sporting pitches we've seen in this World Cup are down to British weather and also the need to reuse some surfaces for television.

What UAE style pitches, they had flat batting tracks vs SAF, PAK, BAN and AFG. The only slow, gripping pitch England received was at Leeds vs Sri Lanka which England would've won if they batted with brains.

And why should Asian style pitches be a problem for a team that's beaten Pakistan in UAE, and beaten Sri Lanka and Bangladesh away ? They were #1 ranked for a reason.

At Lord's they bowled first on a seaming pitch which you'd have thought would've played into the hands of their seamers who proceeded to bowl back of a length rubbish, whereas Australia pitched it up. That's on England, not conditions.

Nobody put a gun to Ed Smith's head demanding he pick the English Umar Akmal in James Vince. There were other backup batsmen he could've picked like Sam Billings. India have also had injuries to Dhawan and Kumar but their bench strength is solid.

your wasting your breath with cuptaan negative..your reasoning is sound and anyone who has wathed cricket in england for a sustained period knows whats going on..ignore his depressive rants..

 

[the Great Khan]

These pitches are made to assist subcontinental sides.

The most unluckiest side here is England. This was their best chance but ICC/BCCI screwed them over here.

hunh? they should have beaten lanka. stop whingeing. they know the conditions, they know the pitches..people like bairstow should stop moaning and make runs..

 

[cricketfanfirst]

Are you Basit Ali by any chance?

 

[Pakhs]

Those are typical subcontinent conditions. You cannot call it advantageous. If you convert them into a minefield you can call it advantageous. Same way England's typical conditions are Edgbaston turns old trafford turns, Oval turns, Lords have bounce, Leeds has more movement. What England wants is flat tracks everywhere. That is called home advantage. Changing the basic nature of the pitches. That is not what subcontinent teams did.

It doesnt turn as much as it has turned, And before you get too defensive about India. Its not about India at all its about home team having some advantage. And the general pitches are turning way more than it turns in normal England conditions i.e bilateral where home team makes their normal wickets and get used to playing on them.

 

[Titan24]

There are only 3 spinners in top 15-20 wicket takers, its not like spinners are ripping through as generally the spin is not that fast like in India or Srl.

Even it would have been seaming tracks Eng would have still struggled as they dont play that any better. They want flat, fast surfaces and even if a little thing is slightly off they become less effective in ODIs.

 

[Thinking_Cap]

only a couple of loud ppers are saying this..I think most of us are loving these pitches..I hate the phatta pitches..anyone who thinks thats cricket is fooling themselves..

Agree! Also, England is a bit of a strange case. They are very gung-ho about having a very strong batting line up. On paper, their batting should be able to counter the conditions and score more than the opposition. But a lot of their dismissals has come down to soft dismissals and pressure.....something beyond the pitches.

 

[topspin]

Flat tracks is not what English tracks are not known for. In a global event there are certain variables not going to change. First ball. Kookaburra ball. There is a big difference between Kookaburra and Duke. That will negate the swing. Second swing is not dependent on pitch. It depends on overcast conditions. Behavior of the pitch changes based on how dry it is. Any professional cricketer will know. These guys play their cricket in England. They should know these variables better than others.

Most important fact is do you have the bowlers to exploit the conditions. OP is whining about "ENgland is known for swing". Against Australia England got the perfectly swinging and seaming conditions. Anybody who saw the match can tell how atrocious the bowling was from England on that pitch. Someone like Anderson would have run through Australian top order. On the same pitch later Australia showed how to bowl on that pitch.

IDon't blame the stage if the dancers are bad.

They deserved to lose against Australia for not utilising the swing and seam friendly conditions they had the other day. So I do not disagree with you on this point whatsoever.

However against Sri Lanka, it seemed like they were playing in Abu Dhabi, with the sluggish wicket they were playing on.

As Mamoon has mentioned, India and Australia got home conditions by these "neutral" ICC curators in the last two world cups they hosted (respectively), but this time around where is the home advantage?

Conventional English ODI wickets have changed and become very batting friendly, so ICC should have factored this is in, to ensure home conditions did not deviate so significantly from the new norm (since 2015).

I understand ICC wants to achieve a better balance between bat and ball but 300-330 should be the par score for England's matches not 240-260 like we saw against Sri Lanka. As a Pakistan fan, I'm happy they lost that game, but they don't deserve to lose in this manner.

Even though Edgbaston pitch won't be a used one, I still expect it to be a dry wicket, which should offer more than enough assistance to Indian spinners. Moreover, England fans will also be heavily outnumbered by Indian supporters. I'll be a very happy man if India win, however it just doesn't feel like a home World Cup for England does it?

 

[jnaveen1980]

It doesnt turn as much as it has turned, And before you get too defensive about India. Its not about India at all its about home team having some advantage. And the general pitches are turning way more than it turns in normal England conditions i.e bilateral where home team makes their normal wickets and get used to playing on them.

This is slow turn. NOt even close to what you see in subcontinent. Besides ENgland's loss was mostly against seamers. Malinga, Udana, Beherendoff, Starc, Amir. Unless they consider Sohaib Malik and Hafeez as world class spinners there is no reason why they should be complaining about pitches. Bairstow, Butler, Root, Stokes are all quality players. They are freaking great test players as well. Morgan is not a test player. He is the one who claims to have found out this new way of batting. Keep attacking no matter what. That kind of logic free cricket probably works against some teams. Not against all teams. The same England team roasted Australia by winning 10 out of 11 matches against them. Moment Australia got all their big guns back, they are found wanting. If they continue listening to this fool Eion Morgan they will be going home. Adaptability is the key in all world cups. You play one opposition once. You play on different surfaces. You should be prepared for anything. Guys like Malinga take pitch out of the equation. Starc's wicket of STokes has nothing to do with pitch. Bhernedoff wicket of Vince nothing to do with pitch. Just a full swinging ball.

 

[Mamoon]

Did ICC have a weather machine that ensured the wettest June in years ? If anything the more sporting pitches we've seen in this World Cup are down to British weather and also the need to reuse some surfaces for television.

What UAE style pitches, they had flat batting tracks vs SAF, PAK, BAN and AFG. The only slow, gripping pitch England received was at Leeds vs Sri Lanka which England would've won if they batted with brains.

And why should Asian style pitches be a problem for a team that's beaten Pakistan in UAE, and beaten Sri Lanka and Bangladesh away ? They were #1 ranked for a reason.

At Lord's they bowled first on a seaming pitch which you'd have thought would've played into the hands of their seamers who proceeded to bowl back of a length rubbish, whereas Australia pitched it up. That's on England, not conditions.

Nobody put a gun to Ed Smith's head demanding he pick the English Umar Akmal in James Vince. There were other backup batsmen he could've picked like Sam Billings. India have also had injuries to Dhawan and Kumar but their bench strength is solid.

There is no doubt that England should have adapted better, and it was also stupid to drop Hales from the squad. He wouldn’t have done worse than Vince, and his presence could have been the difference in a tight match like the ones against Sri Lanka.

However, there is also no doubt that England are getting screwed over by the curators here. They ranked 1 and shouldn’t have lost to a circus team like Sri Lanka, but it was a very poor pitch, just like the farmer pitch that Pakistan beat New Zealand on.

Where was these so-called neutral and sporting pitches in the previous World Cups? India beat Australia at Ahmedabad in the 2011 QF where even D. Hussey was bowling like Lyon. Both Pakistan and India got favorable wickets to ensure that they meet in the blockbuster SF.

In the 2015 SF, Johnson was bouncing Kohli out on a Sydney pitch that was clearly designed by the neutral ICC curators to benefit Australia.

New Zealand also made the final by playing on typical New Zealand pitches where they have been imperious for years now.

I don’t have a taste for conspiracy theories, but it appears that ICC is ensuring that India and Pakistan meet again in the knockouts. They also screwed England in the Champions Trophy SF with another sluggish pitch to ensure an India vs Pakistan Final.

These two teams have insane support in England and the ICC are trying everything they can to make it happen again. I am not sure how ticket allocation works, but it was ridiculous to see Edgbaston turn into Faisalabad (PAK vs NZ) both in terms of pitch and the distribution of tickets.

 

[Thinking_Cap]

They deserved to lose against Australia for not utilising the swing and seam friendly conditions they had the other day. So I do not disagree with you on this point whatsoever.

However against Sri Lanka, it seemed like they were playing in Abu Dhabi, with the sluggish wicket they were playing on.

As Mamoon has mentioned, India and Australia got home conditions by these "neutral" ICC curators in the last two world cups they hosted (respectively), but this time around where is the home advantage?

Conventional English ODI wickets have changed and become very batting friendly, so ICC should have factored this is in, to ensure home conditions did not deviate so significantly from the new norm (since 2015).

I understand ICC wants to achieve a better balance between bat and ball but 300-330 should be the par score for England's matches not 240-260 like we saw against Sri Lanka. As a Pakistan fan, I'm happy they lost that game, but they don't deserve to lose in this manner.

Even though Edgbaston pitch won't be a used one, I still expect it to be a dry wicket, which should offer more than enough assistance to Indian spinners. Moreover, England fans will also be heavily outnumbered by Indian supporters. I'll be a very happy man if India win, however it just doesn't feel like a home World Cup for England does it?

I agree that the pitch was not completely flat, but it wasn't that hard to get 230-odd runs either. If Root had stayed at the wicket a bit longer, the others would have ensured the target was chased in 45 overs. I think there is a 'chasing-under-pressure' aspect which is getting neglected.

 

[cricketfanfirst]

Was England vs Pakistan and England vs Australia not played on good sporting pitches? The only tricky pitch which they really played on was against Sri Lanka.

England have to blame themselves for their defeats and not the pitches. If they had shown more application they would have won those matches.

Also, due to the English weather, with moisture and cloudy conditions, we do expect some assistance for bowlers.

When the pressure is truly on in a crunch match, I expect England to crumble. Aus/Ind/Pak can win in crunch situations when it really matters but I don't see this England team can do that. Already, players started moaning about the situation rather than facing bravely the situation.

 

[Markhor]

They deserved to lose against Australia for not utilising the swing and seam friendly conditions they had the other day. So I do not disagree with you on this point whatsoever.

However against Sri Lanka, it seemed like they were playing in Abu Dhabi, with the sluggish wicket they were playing on.

As Mamoon has mentioned, India and Australia got home conditions by these "neutral" ICC curators in the last two world cups they hosted (respectively), but this time around where is the home advantage?

Conventional English ODI wickets have changed and become very batting friendly, so ICC should have factored this is in, to ensure home conditions did not deviate so significantly from the new norm (since 2015).

I understand ICC wants to achieve a better balance between bat and ball but 300-330 should be the par score for England's matches not 240-260 like we saw against Sri Lanka. As a Pakistan fan, I'm happy they lost that game, but they don't deserve to lose in this manner.

Even though Edgbaston pitch won't be a used one, I still expect it to be a dry wicket, which should offer more than enough assistance to Indian spinners. Moreover, England fans will also be heavily outnumbered by Indian supporters. I'll be a very happy man if India win, however it just doesn't feel like a home World Cup for England does it?

You live in England so you know this has been the wettest June in years which has hampered pitch preparation. How was ICC meant to control the rain ?

 

[Robert]

This is a joke!
English pitches are supposed to favour medium pace swing bowlers!
Icc is doing everything to make india get to the final!
If icc wants indian money so much, then just scrap these global tournaments and just hold indian club tournaments!
And by the way, none of these pitches are like uae pitches, those pitches are dead, low and slow, with only slight slow spin, not this fast spin pitches, which you only get in india!

English pitches traditionally favour medium paced seamers. The surface has nothing to do with swing.

You also get the odd turning wicket such as OT and the Oval.

 

[Pakhs]

This is slow turn. NOt even close to what you see in subcontinent. Besides ENgland's loss was mostly against seamers. Malinga, Udana, Beherendoff, Starc, Amir. Unless they consider Sohaib Malik and Hafeez as world class spinners there is no reason why they should be complaining about pitches. Bairstow, Butler, Root, Stokes are all quality players. They are freaking great test players as well. Morgan is not a test player. He is the one who claims to have found out this new way of batting. Keep attacking no matter what. That kind of logic free cricket probably works against some teams. Not against all teams. The same England team roasted Australia by winning 10 out of 11 matches against them. Moment Australia got all their big guns back, they are found wanting. If they continue listening to this fool Eion Morgan they will be going home. Adaptability is the key in all world cups. You play one opposition once. You play on different surfaces. You should be prepared for anything. Guys like Malinga take pitch out of the equation. Starc's wicket of STokes has nothing to do with pitch. Bhernedoff wicket of Vince nothing to do with pitch. Just a full swinging ball.

All of these might be valid points, but atleast let them have their normal pitches.. going by your comments they may still lose all the games they have lost. I have a feeling on flat wickets they can still beat most teams.

 

[Markhor]

There is no doubt that England should have adapted better, and it was also stupid to drop Hales from the squad. He wouldn’t have done worse than Vince, and his presence could have been the difference in a tight match like the ones against Sri Lanka.

However, there is also no doubt that England are getting screwed over by the curators here. They ranked 1 and shouldn’t have lost to a circus team like Sri Lanka, but it was a very poor pitch, just like the farmer pitch that Pakistan beat New Zealand on.

Where was these so-called neutral and sporting pitches in the previous World Cups? India beat Australia at Ahmedabad in the 2011 QF where even D. Hussey was bowling like Lyon. Both Pakistan and India got favorable wickets to ensure that they meet in the blockbuster SF.

In the 2015 SF, Johnson was bouncing Kohli out on a Sydney pitch that was clearly designed by the neutral ICC curators to benefit Australia.

New Zealand also made the final by playing on typical New Zealand pitches where they have been imperious for years now.

I don’t have a taste for conspiracy theories, but it appears that ICC is ensuring that India and Pakistan meet again in the knockouts. They also screwed England in the Champions Trophy SF with another sluggish pitch to ensure an India vs Pakistan Final.

These two teams have insane support in England and the ICC are trying everything they can to make it happen again. I am not sure how ticket allocation works, but it was ridiculous to see Edgbaston turn into Faisalabad (PAK vs NZ) both in terms of pitch and the distribution of tickets.

And were those World Cups played in months where there was record rainfall like this World Cup ?

Even if the weather was clear, you can't have fresh pitches for every match unless you want to have matches on pitches where the boundary is 30m on one side. Those centre wickets had to be reused for television purposes.

 

[jnaveen1980]

They deserved to lose against Australia for not utilising the swing and seam friendly conditions they had the other day. So I do not disagree with you on this point whatsoever.

However against Sri Lanka, it seemed like they were playing in Abu Dhabi, with the sluggish wicket they were playing on.

As Mamoon has mentioned, India and Australia got home conditions by these "neutral" ICC curators in the last two world cups they hosted (respectively), but this time around where is the home advantage?

Conventional English ODI wickets have changed and become very batting friendly, so ICC should have factored this is in, to ensure home conditions did not deviate so significantly from the new norm (since 2015).

I understand ICC wants to achieve a better balance between bat and ball but 300-330 should be the par score for England's matches not 240-260 like we saw against Sri Lanka. As a Pakistan fan, I'm happy they lost that game, but they don't deserve to lose in this manner.

Even though Edgbaston pitch won't be a used one, I still expect it to be a dry wicket, which should offer more than enough assistance to Indian spinners. Moreover, England fans will also be heavily outnumbered by Indian supporters. I'll be a very happy man if India win, however it just doesn't feel like a home World Cup for England does it?

Some of the wickets that fell were to full balls. Not exactly sluggish. Isrul Udana is an uber trundler who mixes up his pace very well on any surface. Shot executions were utterly daft Some of them are test match players. First of all to chase such a small totals you don't have to play uber aggressively. You just take your time rotate the strike. These are basic rules. One guy got out to full toss. Butler fell to a yorker. Root tickle down to keeper down the leg side. Pitch had nothing to do with their dismissals. I cannot agree that England's failure was due to pitch. It is because they are far too one-dimensional. Everyone was claiming WI to be dark horse with so many hit or miss batsmen. What happened. The two teams that were supposed to score big in every match failed big time. Reason is simple. One-dimensional teams cannot whine about pitches. They just have to pray their slogathan method comes off against India and NZ.

Another aspect we keep ignoring. In world cups there is something called PRESSURE. Some teams handle well. Some teams don't handle well. England/SA never handle well. Showed in CT. Showed in World cup. Even in CT against Pakistan they were whining about the pitch. England was 127/3 at 30th over. They needed 106 in 20 overs with 7 in hand. Any half decent team (including Afhganistan) would ave won from there. You cannot collapse for 85/7

 

[Enforcer]

These pitches suit India more than England which is the point here. Not if India cant make it to final on other types of wickets etc thats not the point. These pitches suit subcontinental sides including India but it makes chances of India getting into final bigger more so because England are not that great on these types of wickets.

Only super roads/ flat pitches suit England. Do you want to see world cup on super flat pitches?

 

[Mamoon]

And were those World Cups played in months where there was record rainfall like this World Cup ?

Even if the weather was clear, you can't have fresh pitches for every match unless you want to have matches on pitches where the boundary is 30m on one side. Those centre wickets had to be reused for television purposes.

The rain seems like too much of an excuse for me, and it is interesting how it only benefits the Asian teams. If ICC cannot help but produce farmer wickets because of the rain, then perhaps they should not host the World Cup in England.

 

[jnaveen1980]

All of these might be valid points, but atleast let them have their normal pitches.. going by your comments they may still lose all the games they have lost. I have a feeling on flat wickets they can still beat most teams.

So far they have beaten Afghanistan and BD. That's it on flat wickets. SA possibly. That was more to do with SA rather than England. They even came close there. Just check the recent bowling performances of England. They have the worst economy rate (including minnows) among all the countries. They conceded 371 to scotland, WI battered their bowling by scoring 360, 389. Later Pak piled series of 340s against England. Their bowling is crap. That is why they lost. Their side is not a balanced side. You cannot win matches purely with batting. If you cannot chase even such a paltry total like 232 against such a weak side like Srilanka then you are not as good as you claim to be.

 

[Pakhs]

Only super roads/ flat pitches suit England. Do you want to see world cup on super flat pitches?

I dont want to but thats not the point again. point is I think the poster is right there is not much home advantage for England.

 

[Mamoon]

All this bickering is pointless. The bottom-line is that whatever the reason, England have not had the same home advantage that India and Australia had in 2011 and 2015, and it is only normal that they feel aggrieved.

 

[jnaveen1980]

I dont want to but thats not the point again. point is I think the poster is right there is not much home advantage for England.

Only way they will have home advantage by playing only against teams like Afghanistan and other weak teams. They lost to Pakistan on a super flat track. They lost to Srilanka on a sluggish track. They lost to Australia on a seaming track. lol They failed in all different conditions. They don't have anything called "home advantage".

 

[Pakhs]

So far they have beaten Afghanistan and BD. That's it on flat wickets. SA possibly. That was more to do with SA rather than England. They even came close there. Just check the recent bowling performances of England. They have the worst economy rate (including minnows) among all the countries. They conceded 371 to scotland, WI battered their bowling by scoring 360, 389. Later Pak piled series of 340s against England. Their bowling is crap. That is why they lost. Their side is not a balanced side. You cannot win matches purely with batting. If you cannot chase even such a paltry total like 232 against such a weak side like Srilanka then you are not as good as you claim to be.

All that might be true but the wickets should still be normal English wickets and some of the wicket even if those matches didnt actually involve England have turned too much.

 

[Pakhs]

All this bickering is pointless. The bottom-line is that whatever the reason, England have not had the same home advantage that India and Australia had in 2011 and 2015, and it is only normal that they feel aggrieved.

For once I agree with you.

 

[jnaveen1980]

All that might be true but the wickets should still be normal English wickets and some of the wicket even if those matches didnt actually involve England have turned too much.

Only match that i saw prodigious turn was the match between NZ and Pakistan where Hafeez turned square. Other matches turn was pretty slow. Wrist spinners will turn on any surface. They don't need help from the pitch.

 

[jnaveen1980]

My god. Can't believe how many go with this non-existent theory. Basically they think England bowled superbly, They think England batted superbly, They fielded superbly. Morgan captained superbly (like choosing to field first in two crucial matches) Just that pitch undid them lol Somehow pitch helped Malinga land his yorker perfectly.

 

[Pakhs]

Only match that i saw prodigious turn was the match between NZ and Pakistan where Hafeez turned square. Other matches turn was pretty slow. Wrist spinners will turn on any surface. They don't need help from the pitch.

Yes wrist spinners will turn it on most wickets but there has been unusual amount of spin. And the pitches have been too dry and slow. Evan WI game i knew there is no way they can chase down 250+ on that wicket. in 99 WC England had home advantage even though they were still knocked out in this first round.

 

[Pakhs]

My god. Can't believe how many go with this non-existent theory. Basically they think England bowled superbly, They think England batted superbly, They fielded superbly. Morgan captained superbly (like choosing to field first in two crucial matches) Just that pitch undid them lol Somehow pitch helped Malinga land his yorker perfectly.

You are going on about completely different topic yes they may have not played well. But they should still have normal English wickets if the WC is in England.

 

[IAJ]

Many were screaming out for more balance between bat and ball and now we finally are seeing that balance and people are still complaining. Both batsmen and bowlers are made to work hard now, love this.

 

[jnaveen1980]

Yes wrist spinners will turn it on most wickets but there has been unusual amount of spin. And the pitches have been too dry and slow. Evan WI game i knew there is no way they can chase down 250+ on that wicket. in 99 WC England had home advantage even though they were still knocked out in this first round.

Happens when you are up against top flight spinners who did well in SA, Australia, NZ, England in bilaterals. They don't rely on pitch. They rely on speed, flight, guile. Check the record of Warne, Muralitharan in England. Even in the world cup 1999 Warnie was the star in the later stages. Good bowlers will take the pitch out of the equation.

 

[jnaveen1980]

You are going on about completely different topic yes they may have not played well. But they should still have normal English wickets if the WC is in England.

They played on normal English wicket against Australia. They sucked both with ball and bat. They lost because they played badly. Opposition played better cricket. Stop taking credit away from the opposition. Especially a team like Srilanka. They showed great spirit in defending 232 when England was 127/3. Let us not dilute their incredible performance. Australia played on pattas. But look at their bowlers. Starc he was able to deal with the opposition. Who can do the same for England? Archer? mhe. He went for plenty on a flat track. Only reason England is in this position because they have the worst bowling unit in the world.

 

[Syed1]

Second innings of Pak vs NZ felt like Day 5 Nagpur or Chennai pitch. The ball was turning square at a rapid rate and was also bouncing. We got lucky NZ only played one proper spinner and that too a left armer so left-handed Haris Sohail could just come down the track and smash him.

I wonder how ICC achieved this amazing feat of having India like pitches in England. I wonder if England will ever see a pitch like that in this tournament.

 

[jnaveen1980]

If anything ENgland had the highest number of flat pitches in this world cup. THey piled up several 300 plus totals in this world cup. ONly slow pitch they had was against Srilanka. Against such a weak team , England should not have even depended on pitch helping them. They were glorifying how Morgan was able to hit 17 sixes against world class bowler like Rashid khan. Suddenly they were up against seasoned pro Malinga they got exposed.

 

[MMHS]

It was expected actually. That’s one reason I wanted Wahab to be in squad and a genuine spinner instead of all-rounder Imad.

There are few reasons for that. Apart from weather (climate), the drainage system has improved over the years and they protect wickets better during rain these days. Also, most of the venues are used multiple times and even fresh wickets are getting lots of sunshine during other games, being “spiked” by the fielders.

One main reason which isn’t mentioned here is the composition of the wickets. English wickets are prepared with best quality fine grain clay and the clay % is over 80% for every venue. And, the tracks are well built on hard, solid base. This makes the wicket true and compact, with good carry & bounce. To make the ODI game high scoring, they are shaving off the grass and putting heavy rollers on it. These wickets will always give some purchase to genuine spinners who can flight, loop & turn. Add to that multiple games on single venue and warm, dry weather - it was bound to happen.

However, one big difference with Asian (spin) wicket is that, Asian wickets are slow & low, but offers big turn, which is suitable for faster spinners. Here in UK, despite all their success in Asia 3 spinners are struggling alarmingly - Rasheed, Miraz & Imad. Because, those three used to bowl a bit faster, but accurate spin, which were difficult to maneuverer on such wickets for singles, and it’s not easy to use feet against dart on slow turners (to loft). This WC, wickets are helpful for spinners definitely, but it’s for the the genuine turners.

 

[Pakhs]

Happens when you are up against top flight spinners who did well in SA, Australia, NZ, England in bilaterals. They don't rely on pitch. They rely on speed, flight, guile. Check the record of Warne, Muralitharan in England. Even in the world cup 1999 Warnie was the star in the later stages. Good bowlers will take the pitch out of the equation.

Who said wrist spinners wont take wickets? I am just saying the wickets made are not what normal bilateral wickets you will get in England hence no home advantage. Whatever you might say about England bowling and you do have a point they still beat both India and Australia in bilateral cricket.

 

[Robert]

These pitches are made to assist subcontinental sides.

The most unluckiest side here is England. This was their best chance but ICC/BCCI screwed them over here.

I hardly think so. English batters grow up playing on low slow seamers.

 

[topspin]

You live in England so you know this has been the wettest June in years which has hampered pitch preparation. How was ICC meant to control the rain ?

Drop-in wickets could have helped. For e.g ICC's HQ in Dubai (not the stadium), they have all the technology and have manufactured various kind of pitches. If the rain was hampering ICC's preparations so much, why couldn't they use a suitable drop-in pitch?

 

[Markhor]

Who said wrist spinners wont take wickets? I am just saying the wickets made are not what normal bilateral wickets you will get in England hence no home advantage. Whatever you might say about England bowling and you do have a point they still beat both India and Australia in bilateral cricket.

You cannot compare pitches in a bilateral series where you can use five fresh wickets to a six week global tournament where the centre pitches for television have to be reused.

Nor can you compare the weather between the bilateral series vs Pak to the weather a month later in the World Cup where it was the wettest June in years. Not sure how many times this point has to be repeated.

 

[Robert]

Drop-in wickets could have helped. For e.g ICC's HQ in Dubai (not the stadium), they have all the technology and have manufactured various kind of pitches. If the rain was hampering ICC's preparations so much, why couldn't they use a suitable drop-in pitch?

No time. May was lovely. The unseasonal rain came out of nowhere and then was gone in ten days.

 

[jnaveen1980]

Who said wrist spinners wont take wickets? I am just saying the wickets made are not what normal bilateral wickets you will get in England hence no home advantage. Whatever you might say about England bowling and you do have a point they still beat both India and Australia in bilateral cricket.

They didn't beat the full strength India. This is not the team they beat. India was opening with Pandya, Sid Kaul and others. Even in the 3 match series they were ripped open by Kuldeep in one match with a 6 for 25.

 

[jnaveen1980]

Many were screaming out for more balance between bat and ball and now we finally are seeing that balance and people are still complaining. Both batsmen and bowlers are made to work hard now, love this.

Exactly. Everyone was complaining about teams piling up 350 plus in every goddamn innings. Now suddenly they can't do. Funny thing is, it is not the English fans that complain. It is the fans from other countries complain lol. Not sure why?

 

[Pakhs]

They didn't beat the full strength India. This is not the team they beat. India was opening with Pandya, Sid Kaul and others. Even in the 3 match series they were ripped open by Kuldeep in one match with a 6 for 25.

It doesnt matter, the point is England should get normal English wickets win or lose. All your arguments should really be on another thread.

 

[Pakhs]

Exactly. Everyone was complaining about teams piling up 350 plus in every goddamn innings. Now suddenly they can't do. Funny thing is, it is not the English fans that complain. It is the fans from other countries complain lol. Not sure why?

Not complaining just saying that its should be fare and the thread is valid that England have not got the home advantage.

 

[jadaja]

Not complaining just saying that its should be fare and the thread is valid that England have not got the home advantage.

What exactly is England home advantage, They have gotten most batting friendly wickets so far, what else do you need, at the first sign of swing, seam or spin they fold like cheap tent.Their two fast bowlers are among leadfing wicket takers which shows that they are getting wickets conducive to their bowling.

 

[jnaveen1980]

Not complaining just saying that its should be fare and the thread is valid that England have not got the home advantage.

Since 2015 world cups let me list how many times England scored 340 plus totals

http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/en...eam=1;template=results;type=team;view=innings


All their high scoring came against weaker sides. Australia did not have their main players. They scored against Pakistan, Windies, BD, Afghanistan. Basically they needed weaker opposition more than batting pitches.

 

[jnaveen1980]

If only the world cup had only weaker opposition they would not have complained about pitches lol. They didn't have problem scoring 396 against afghanistan 386 against BD, Malinga is a world class bowler even though he plays for a weaker side. On his day he can rip through batting line up. He can take pitch out of the equation.

The way Morgan bowled by Hafeez on a flat track tells you they are mental midgets while chasing.

 

[Pakhs]

What exactly is England home advantage, They have gotten most batting friendly wickets so far, what else do you need, at the first sign of swing, seam or spin they fold like cheap tent.Their two fast bowlers are among leadfing wicket takers which shows that they are getting wickets conducive to their bowling.

Since 2015 world cups let me list how many times England scored 340 plus totals

http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/en...eam=1;template=results;type=team;view=innings


All their high scoring came against weaker sides. Australia did not have their main players. They scored against Pakistan, Windies, BD, Afghanistan. Basically they needed weaker opposition more than batting pitches.

They beat India twice which was a fair Indians side, They also beat NZ which was a fair NZ side. They also did very well in bilateral in India I think lost by one match. I think they should get the wickets according to how cricket was played in England in the last two years.

 

[Pakhs]

If only the world cup had only weaker opposition they would not have complained about pitches lol. They didn't have problem scoring 396 against afghanistan 386 against BD, Malinga is a world class bowler even though he plays for a weaker side. On his day he can rip through batting line up. He can take pitch out of the equation.

The way Morgan bowled by Hafeez on a flat track tells you they are mental midgets while chasing.

Anyway they might even be the worst side in the World they should still get the pitches according to cricket played in England.

 

[anikrc1]

They beat India twice which was a fair Indians side, They also beat NZ which was a fair NZ side. They also did very well in bilateral in India I think lost by one match. I think they should get the wickets according to how cricket was played in England in the last two years.

They got a traditional english wicket and a traditional english weather against the aussies. The only pitch they can compalin about is the srilanka one. Even then it was slow rather than turning

 

[BunnyRabbit]

There is no doubt that England should have adapted better, and it was also stupid to drop Hales from the squad. He wouldn’t have done worse than Vince, and his presence could have been the difference in a tight match like the ones against Sri Lanka.

However, there is also no doubt that England are getting screwed over by the curators here. They ranked 1 and shouldn’t have lost to a circus team like Sri Lanka, but it was a very poor pitch, just like the farmer pitch that Pakistan beat New Zealand on.

Where was these so-called neutral and sporting pitches in the previous World Cups? India beat Australia at Ahmedabad in the 2011 QF where even D. Hussey was bowling like Lyon. Both Pakistan and India got favorable wickets to ensure that they meet in the blockbuster SF.

In the 2015 SF, Johnson was bouncing Kohli out on a Sydney pitch that was clearly designed by the neutral ICC curators to benefit Australia.

New Zealand also made the final by playing on typical New Zealand pitches where they have been imperious for years now.

I don’t have a taste for conspiracy theories, but it appears that ICC is ensuring that India and Pakistan meet again in the knockouts. They also screwed England in the Champions Trophy SF with another sluggish pitch to ensure an India vs Pakistan Final.

These two teams have insane support in England and the ICC are trying everything they can to make it happen again. I am not sure how ticket allocation works, but it was ridiculous to see Edgbaston turn into Faisalabad (PAK vs NZ) both in terms of pitch and the distribution of tickets.

Yes, it was a matter of great frustration for the visiting teams in 2011 and 2015 WC where the home teams got that huge advantage with wickets favoring them. Aus only seemed beatable when they got to play in NZ, and likewise. But the thing is, WC is meant to be a neutral thing. Too bad that ICC didn't have the balls to make neutral and sporting pitches in WC11 and WC15, but the way they are going this time, is the way they SHOULD do in all the world cups.
Yes, there is merit in Bairstow's moaning but being the no.1 team, they won series everywhere in all the conditions, it still should be no excuse to lose here. They beat Australia 5-0 in Aus, 2-1 in Bangladesh on the traditional Bangladeshi wickets that too without Morgan and Hales, so it should not be used as an excuse. There is definitely some weightage in the point that the surfaces have not been home sided-favorable. But this is how it should have been in all the world cups before. If ICC has started doing it from now on, they should follow it in the next WC's as well, so I direly hope the wickets in Aus in next year Wt20 be 140-150 pitches rather than 200plus ones favoring the BBL guns.

But to be the best team in the world, you have to beat everyone everywhere and England has the capability to do that. It's just because of mental strength(lack of), and the squad selection that has led to their receding performance. Dropping Hales seemed foolish, but correct. But picking Vince seemed like a blunder. Not giving Dawson a go even after Rashid's poor form has been a weird decision.

Going for a 90+MPH attack IMO has been a total decision England management made because of their obsession to have 90mph bowlers. They dropped Willey, arguably their most underrated bowler and one who offered consistent swing and variation early on, coupled with more than decent death bowling and hard hitting prowess. The decision to not give Tom Curran a go is so baffling as he is their arguably their best death bowler and comes off well in batting in pressure situations unlike Woakes who has bottled in most, and Archer's hard hitting has only been a myth till now. And Mark Wood, he is not an ODI bowler atleast in my eyes. Horses for courses should be the way rather than getting 145kph guys.

 

[jadaja]

They beat India twice which was a fair Indians side, They also beat NZ which was a fair NZ side. They also did very well in bilateral in India I think lost by one match. I think they should get the wickets according to how cricket was played in England in the last two years.

No they did not get to face full Indian bowling,Bumrah was injured,Shami was not there, Bhuvi was injured too.But they won the series , it is not their job to make sure Indian team is fully fit.

All England has done in recent past is bash weak bowling attacks.Aussies on other hand did not play Starc or Cummins in any odis till last two series.

Aussies know fully well Starc would be devasting once he was back.They lost to the weakest SL bowling attack in recent times.Nobody can pity them.

 

[Enforcer]

They deserved to lose against Australia for not utilising the swing and seam friendly conditions they had the other day. So I do not disagree with you on this point whatsoever.

However against Sri Lanka, it seemed like they were playing in Abu Dhabi, with the sluggish wicket they were playing on.

As Mamoon has mentioned, India and Australia got home conditions by these "neutral" ICC curators in the last two world cups they hosted (respectively), but this time around where is the home advantage?

Conventional English ODI wickets have changed and become very batting friendly, so ICC should have factored this is in, to ensure home conditions did not deviate so significantly from the new norm (since 2015).

I understand ICC wants to achieve a better balance between bat and ball but 300-330 should be the par score for England's matches not 240-260 like we saw against Sri Lanka. As a Pakistan fan, I'm happy they lost that game, but they don't deserve to lose in this manner.

Even though Edgbaston pitch won't be a used one, I still expect it to be a dry wicket, which should offer more than enough assistance to Indian spinners. Moreover, England fans will also be heavily outnumbered by Indian supporters. I'll be a very happy man if India win, however it just doesn't feel like a home World Cup for England does it?

They had home advantage against pakistan. But given way too much runs and then couldn't win despite Root's and buttler's heroics. They got home advantage against Australia, when they bowl first on seaming conditions. What they did? Nothing. So I don't get it how England did not get any home advantage?

 

[Pakhs]

They got a traditional english wicket and a traditional english weather against the aussies. The only pitch they can compalin about is the srilanka one. Even then it was slow rather than turning

Traditional yes but not the flat wickets cricket has been played in England last 2 years.

 

[Pakhs]

No they did not get to face full Indian bowling,Bumrah was injured,Shami was not there, Bhuvi was injured too.But they won the series , it is not their job to make sure Indian team is fully fit.

All England has done in recent past is bash weak bowling attacks.Aussies on other hand did not play Starc or Cummins in any odis till last two series.

Aussies know fully well Starc would be devasting once he was back.They lost to the weakest SL bowling attack in recent times.Nobody can pity them.

That doesnt matter Shami is not even first choice bowler in ODIs and all he has done so far is performed against Afghan and WI. But point is on flat wickets they are not so bad,

 

[jnaveen1980]

They beat India twice which was a fair Indians side, They also beat NZ which was a fair NZ side. They also did very well in bilateral in India I think lost by one match. I think they should get the wickets according to how cricket was played in England in the last two years.

No they didn’t exactly score 340 plus against even the weak Indian pace unit. All those wickets offered a slight turn like any pitch. Pakistan didn’t have quality spinners to trouble England in that series. Even in Pakistan series there was some turn. Both sides lacked good spinners or inform spinners. Rashid Infact won the series for England against India. But for Rashid Indian would have won the series. Then he went off the boil. Why do you think they keep picking Moeen and Rashid in every match if they don’t think pitch will turn. Just because a batsman gets out to a spinner it doesn’t mean it is a spin pitch. England lost wicket to Hafeez, Malik. All teams have at least one spin option. Even Australia realized that they needed a specialist spinner and included Lyon. Check the T20 bowling ranking. Almost all the top ranked bowlers are leggiers We know on which type of pitches T20s are played. They bowl with reasonably brand new ball and get wickets. Tahir opened the bowling. Hardly a wicket taking delivery Bairstow got out to him. Jason Roy got out to full toss from Shadsb. Why do you guys keep making excuses for perennially poor players of spin bowling. Bairstow struggled even in IPL against spin.

 

[jadaja]

That doesnt matter Shami is not even first choice bowler in ODIs and all he has done so far is performed against Afghan and WI. But point is on flat wickets they are not so bad,

Point is Shami is better than all bowlers who played in that series.India was resting him for test series.No one said they are bad.To be a good odi side you need to adapt.England have not done that and stop with pitch nonsense.

SL is one who should complain, they got green tracks which no side got.

 

[thanuu]

Traditional yes but not the flat wickets cricket has been played in England last 2 years.

u-turns you took are nothing less than sensational. English beat a depleted Indian side and that too by a thin margin. They beat NZ 3-2 in a tightly matched affair in which english are supposed to win comfortably as they are purportedly and supposedly a much better team than the kiwis. You have to get down the hatred train mate.

 

[jnaveen1980]

Bairstow Root Butler stokes. These guys are test players too. Just to remind you in a test match they lost 8 wickets to a rank part timer Rolton chase and lost the test match.

 

[Enforcer]

They beat India twice which was a fair Indians side, They also beat NZ which was a fair NZ side. They also did very well in bilateral in India I think lost by one match. I think they should get the wickets according to how cricket was played in England in the last two years.

How that indian side was a 'fair' indian side? Make no mistake but in the last two years we are winning because of our bowling. But in that series we did n't had bumrah and shami. Even Bhuvi played only in third match, and he was half fit in that match. Bowlers like shardul thakur, sidharth kaul and Umesh yadav played in that series. England was lucky to win that series.

 

[jnaveen1980]

Pray hard it is not a road on Sunday. Lol it will be adios for Pakistan if they provide a road which has zero help for anyone.

 

[Enforcer]

That doesnt matter Shami is not even first choice bowler in ODIs and all he has done so far is performed against Afghan and WI. But point is on flat wickets they are not so bad,

Lol! Did you forgot shami's record in 2015 world cup.

 

[jnaveen1980]

This is the thing I like about Aussies. They never make excuses. They accept and move on. I don’t say English fans do here. More like pak fans are making excuses for English team. Weird to see given that aEngland must lose to India for them to have any semi final hope.

 

[Pakhs]

No they didn’t exactly score 340 plus against even the weak Indian pace unit. All those wickets offered a slight turn like any pitch. Pakistan didn’t have quality spinners to trouble England in that series. Even in Pakistan series there was some turn. Both sides lacked good spinners or inform spinners. Rashid Infact won the series for England against India. But for Rashid Indian would have won the series. Then he went off the boil. Why do you think they keep picking Moeen and Rashid in every match if they don’t think pitch will turn. Just because a batsman gets out to a spinner it doesn’t mean it is a spin pitch. England lost wicket to Hafeez, Malik. All teams have at least one spin option. Even Australia realized that they needed a specialist spinner and included Lyon. Check the T20 bowling ranking. Almost all the top ranked bowlers are leggiers We know on which type of pitches T20s are played. They bowl with reasonably brand new ball and get wickets. Tahir opened the bowling. Hardly a wicket taking delivery Bairstow got out to him. Jason Roy got out to full toss from Shadsb. Why do you guys keep making excuses for perennially poor players of spin bowling. Bairstow struggled even in IPL against spin.

Point is Shami is better than all bowlers who played in that series.India was resting him for test series.No one said they are bad.To be a good odi side you need to adapt.England have not done that and stop with pitch nonsense.

SL is one who should complain, they got green tracks which no side got.

u-turns you took are nothing less than sensational. English beat a depleted Indian side and that too by a thin margin. They beat NZ 3-2 in a tightly matched affair in which english are supposed to win comfortably as they are purportedly and supposedly a much better team than the kiwis. You have to get down the hatred train mate.

Hatred for who? I dont even support England. I just dont think they have any home advantage that's all.

SL got green pitches but they are not the home side.

The other comments India / NZ was not the strongest etc doesn't matter they have not even played India in the tournament yet and for all we know they may even beat them. But point still remains they are not getting the home advantage so far.

 

[topspin]

They had home advantage against pakistan. But given way too much runs and then couldn't win despite Root's and buttler's heroics. They got home advantage against Australia, when they bowl first on seaming conditions. What they did? Nothing. So I don't get it how England did not get any home advantage?

Agree England have themselves to blame for losing against Australia. But with the Sri Lanka pitch and what I expect on Sunday against India will nullify that home advantage.

 

[Pakhs]

This is the thing I like about Aussies. They never make excuses. They accept and move on. I don’t say English fans do here. More like pak fans are making excuses for English team. Weird to see given that aEngland must lose to India for them to have any semi final hope.

Mate its not all about who you are supporting and what is better for your team? Not all supporters are like Indian fan who are always so biased towards their own team they cant see straight. I would love the pitch for India and England match to be a ragging turner because that increases Pakistan chances but doesnt mean I will go round saying it was home advantage for England.

 

[jnaveen1980]

Hatred for who? I dont even support England. I just dont think they have any home advantage that's all.

SL got green pitches but they are not the home side.

The other comments India / NZ was not the strongest etc doesn't matter they have not even played India in the tournament yet and for all we know they may even beat them. But point still remains they are not getting the home advantage so far.

Hope they get “home advantage” against them and beat both of them lol India and NZ will still make the semis

 

[jnaveen1980]

Mate its not all about who you are supporting and what is better for your team? Not all supporters are like Indian fan who are always so biased towards their own team they cant see straight. I would love the pitch for India and England match to be a ragging turner because that increases Pakistan chances but doesnt mean I will go round saying it was home advantage for England.

Define home advantage for England.

 

[Pakhs]

Lol! Did you forgot shami's record in 2015 world cup.

I didn't forget and I think he is a good bowler but he is not regular for India and just because he performed in two match against WI and Afghan doesnt mean he should be a regular now.

Point here even if you are kenya and you dont beat anyone you should still get home advantage.

 

[Pakhs]

Define home advantage for England.

Home advantage in my opinion is very simple, the wickets they have been paying on for the last 2 years and gotten used to as a home side. In this case total flat wickets.

 

[jnaveen1980]

Home advantage in my opinion is very simple, the wickets they have been paying on for the last 2 years and gotten used to as a home side. In this case total flat wickets.

Kuldeep ran amok with 6 wickets. Rashid got a few wickets which helped England win the series. Those were part of those wickets.

 

[thanuu]

Hatred for who? I dont even support England. I just dont think they have any home advantage that's all.

I will come to the hatred point later. Please clarify me one thing. What is English Home advantage exactly? They slipped vs Aussies in seaming conditions. they didnt do jack in batting friendly conditions in Aus in the Last edition. They cant play spin. They cant play slow pitches. All they want is a cement road is it?

Regarding my hatred comment, Mate please start reading your posts backwards. You started with something and ended somewhere else. Purportedly wanted to show both AUS and Indians had the home advantage. This is what I felt. You are welcome to differ with me.

 

[jnaveen1980]

Home advantage in my opinion is very simple, the wickets they have been paying on for the last 2 years and gotten used to as a home side. In this case total flat wickets.

Only two teams that bore the brunt of England cowlashing were depleted Australia and Pakistan. You should add another factor like England should bat only against rubbish bowling attack.

 

[thanuu]

Home advantage, in my opinion, is very simple, the wickets they have been paying on for the last 2 years and gotten used to as a home side. In this case total flat wickets.

Pitches play according to the climatic conditions of the nations. Back in the days I used to love both kiwis and English pitches ic helped seam and pace bowlers. Nowadays both countries are making phattas.

 

[Pakhs]

Kuldeep ran amok with 6 wickets. Rashid got a few wickets which helped England win the series. Those were part of those wickets.

So what Kuldeep is good bowler! he can take wickets on any wickets. Why does that even come in the equation? Point here is England been playing on road in England and they are not getting roads anymore so no home advantage?

 

[jadaja]

Hatred for who? I dont even support England. I just dont think they have any home advantage that's all.

SL got green pitches but they are not the home side.

The other comments India / NZ was not the strongest etc doesn't matter they have not even played India in the tournament yet and for all we know they may even beat them. But point still remains they are not getting the home advantage so far.

What is their home advantage, you seem confused?

 

[zulfiqar]

I've enjoyed all of the lower-scoring games more than the high-scoring games, so I hope that it continues! That being said, I can see Eoin Morgan crying already

 

[jnaveen1980]

Pitches play according to the climatic conditions of the nations. Back in the days I used to love both kiwis and English pitches ic helped seam and pace bowlers. Nowadays both countries are making phattas.

If they had rolled out a phatta against pak would have never won CT 2017