|
|
New Zealand v England, 1st Test, Hamilton, 3rd day
David Lloyd: A poor pitch for Test cricket
March 7, 2008
The ghosts of the past continue to haunt England, as the top six batsmen failed to score a century. New Zealand stuck to their plan well, and even though England manage to avoid the follow-on it wasn't an impressive batting display. All said, this match is still heading for a boring draw
Download (1631k)
|
Listen (6:57)
| Read
 Read Comments (5)
|
|
Comments have now been closed for this article
|
|
I think David Lloyd's comments are off the mark. While there is not a lot of life in this pitch both teams have had roughly the same opportunity. He gives virtually no credit to New Zealand's attack and makes no mention of the fact that, in comparison with England's attack, they are bowling well and bowling to the conditions.
Put simply, England have failed to adjust to the pitch conditions both with bat and ball. Brendon McCullum showed on day 1 that you are able to take the attack to the bowlers on this pitch - something England have failed to do at any point. Pietersen was the only England batsman to even look like playing with any intent - regardless of his strike rate.
It is a shame that an ex-player with such a fine reputation blames the pitch, and not his own country-men for the slow nature of the 3rd day's play. England have batted negatively since the outset, intent on forcing a draw. He also gives no credit to New Zealands bowlers.
Posted by Mprezd on March 07 2008, 18:03 PM GMT
|
|
Following the game on cricinfo Japan on Cricinfo. Haven't seen any TV coverage but enjoy cricinfo commentary. Struggling to understand David Lloyd's comments about the pitch though (nothing to do with his accent!). It seemed that NZ were able to score at a more than average rate for test cricket for their innings of close to two days but when England bat and score at barely 2 runs an over it's the pitch's fault???
Posted by tatamimatt on March 07 2008, 16:27 PM GMT
|
|
Is'nt this the same pitch on which NZ batted, and appear to bowl better than England?
Professionals MUST learn to adopt to their environment use the conditions with which they are faced and not rely on eveything being PERFECT. The true measure of greatness comes when one overcome obstacles mentally.
Contin'd..
The game of cricket offers 3 results: WIN, DRAW or LOSE. This game almost certainly will end in a draw. The loser will be the team (management included) which fail to learn from it. Did we get the balance of the team right, and a number of other what ifs? will need to feature.
The word TEST should not be taken lightly!
Posted by delboy on March 07 2008, 15:27 PM GMT
|
|
Sorry David.. its not the pitch. but england batsman's quality that was poor.. They dont know how to play.. look how well vettori and taylor played.. wat abt mccullum.. then why kevin peterson was not able to play. dont blame the pitch
Posted by LKKingmaker on March 07 2008, 08:52 AM GMT
|
|
yeah for a team ranked well above nz,they didnt show much positive intent,even k.p.,when he did advance he blocked and it was his down fall,the pitch isnt great but if you let any side bowl nearly 50 maidens youd think it was a mine field,not the case when there is 470 in front of them,nz on the other hand looked sharp,after being thumped 2-0 by the proteas and a warm up against bangaldesh youd be mistaken for thinking england are the ones who have only played 4 tests in 2 years.
it sure is the ghosts of old for the poms,but one thinks they only need to get there bowling right and all will be revealed with nz and there top order,harmy ,hoggard really looked like a couple of fat cats that have been lying in the sun,broad has to get a run next test as does anderson,arratic as he is at least he has some fire in his belly,if ehgland takes this slow aaproach tommorow ,the barmy army better learn a new charnt for the next 2 tests,im thinking boooorrrrring
Posted by tezwah on March 07 2008, 07:06 AM GMT
|
|
|
| Top ^ |
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
