I have had some interesting email exchanges and conversations in the past 24 hours, from people on both sides who were at the game at Chesterfield.
The consensus, and it is hard to deny, is that we lost the game on the first afternoon, when we bowled poorly and, having dropped Temba Bavuma, allowed him to get away, accompanied by some lusty-hitting partners.
They probably scored a hundred or so more than par as a result, and we were subsequently behind the game thereafter. It was a good toss to win, but the wicket was very poor for first-class cricket.
Over the course of a season, cricketers will expect to play on pitches that offer help to the bowlers and others that are batting-friendly. This was a bowling wicket, but as well as lateral movement, the bounce was variable. When you have two players bowled off their elbows and others undone by it keeping low, batting becomes something of a lottery. There was also considerable turn from the first day, something acceptable in bygone days, but more likely to see you run into trouble with modern regulations and pitch inspectors.
One or two have criticised the second innings approach, especially Billy Godleman running down the wicket each ball, but it was a valiant, though vain attempt to unsettle the bowlers and not allow them to get into a rhythm. We made the second highest score of the match in the fourth innings, which was a fair effort, in my opinion. It probably saved the pitch from being 'mentioned in despatches', because the two middle innings lasted only 77 overs between them.
I adore Chesterfield, as do most who attend matches there, and hope that the festival week continues to be a part of the cricketing landscape for a long time to come.
But the wicket has to be better. At a ground where cricket is traditionally well supported, we have lost two days gate money and two days beer money, something we can ill-afford in our situation. We lost the game too.
Next year, in all aspects, I hope we do better.
I do agree; for every pitch you want a fair competition between bat and ball. We've seen that at Chesterfield in the last couple of seasons where games have gone into their fourth day still in the balance. I'm sure the powers that be will be asking the question what's changed given the loss of receipts.
ReplyDeleteSon came with me on Monday he said that after the excitement of the World Cup on Sunday, 400 runs for 24 wickets isn't a bad follow up.
I still don't understand why we went gung ho in our second innings when we had the best part of two full days to get the target. So what if it would prove to be boring, it could've been a vital victory.
ReplyDelete