Coin toss to be scrapped?
- Thread starter Aleem Dar
- Start date
- Status
J
johnson
Guest
Utterly ridiculous
Interesting idea and it will even things out pitchwise. May give the away team an advantage in terms of selection though knowing in advance whether they will be batting last. I wonder if you can delay selection until the away team announces their decision, otherwise it is unfair on the home side.
mackembhoy
Striker
ECB really don't have a clue.
Chappers
Striker
Always thought that in a test series it should work like this.
Test 1 - away team chooses
Test 2 - loser of test 1 chooses, if test 1 a draw away team chooses.
And so on.
robkitchuk
Central Defender
Where is this then?
Very valid point but doubt ECB will have thought of this?
Aleem Dar
Striker
LVCC division 2.
brandon
Striker
Think the idea is shite. Suppose we should wait and see how it goes down to cast full judgement but I think in principle it'll end up being a failure and we'll return to the coin toss for the foreseeable future.
Part of the beauty for me, of proper cricket is the way pitches and conditions are in different parts of the world. Even in different counties.
The coin toss is an integral part of that, plus for me you'll be getting all kinds of strange looking pitches in order to fool visiting captains. I just think groundsmen should always provide a sporting pitch.
Actually, on further inspection it makes even less sense. Read the article on the Beeb website: http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cricket/34917711
So, if the away captain can't decide he can ask for a toss anyway - surely that's just admitting he's got no clue and would be better off passing the decision to the home captain.
The ECB are implementing this (or looking too) because they want to guard against home teams preparing pitches to suit themselves, with the implication that substandard pitches are commonplace - YET, no points deduction for a poor pitch has been imposed since 2011.
f***ing muppets. Cricket is being ran by complete morons.
Part of the beauty for me, of proper cricket is the way pitches and conditions are in different parts of the world. Even in different counties.
The coin toss is an integral part of that, plus for me you'll be getting all kinds of strange looking pitches in order to fool visiting captains. I just think groundsmen should always provide a sporting pitch.
Actually, on further inspection it makes even less sense. Read the article on the Beeb website: http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cricket/34917711
So, if the away captain can't decide he can ask for a toss anyway - surely that's just admitting he's got no clue and would be better off passing the decision to the home captain.
The ECB are implementing this (or looking too) because they want to guard against home teams preparing pitches to suit themselves, with the implication that substandard pitches are commonplace - YET, no points deduction for a poor pitch has been imposed since 2011.
f***ing muppets. Cricket is being ran by complete morons.
Last edited:
J
johnson
Guest
The toss is a massive part of the game and always has been, leave it
That nonsense spouted in the ashes by the Aussies about this on absolutely normal English pitches, just because there technique wasn't good enough to deal with a tiny bit of Seam movement. Look at The pitches in India right now and the flat ones in UAE, home advantage is important, that's part of the joy and hard working of winning away from home, it's hard and should be.
That nonsense spouted in the ashes by the Aussies about this on absolutely normal English pitches, just because there technique wasn't good enough to deal with a tiny bit of Seam movement. Look at The pitches in India right now and the flat ones in UAE, home advantage is important, that's part of the joy and hard working of winning away from home, it's hard and should be.
Captain Capon
Central Defender
At least subcontinental teams will have to think twice about preparing sideways turners if they know they're going to have to bat last on it.
smoker
Striker
It has got ridiculous in recent years though. Look at the pitches in India - there is no attempt to put anything in the pitch for seam bowlers, ball is turning from day one, wicket unplayable from day four.
While T20I and ODI remains an even contest in comparison, paying punters are going to favour that.
J
johnson
Guest
Yeah but you have total morons like Michael Vaughan listing bad pitches and then naming Trent Bridge in the ashes, he's a clown, England were 274-4 on day 1
There is always the odd bad pitch but it's just an easy excuse for teams bad performances
I want pitches in Asia to spin though, it's why winning over there is so special!
smoker
Striker
You know my view on the wickets in the previous Ashes. We prepared two seriously seaming wickets that heavily favoured our bowlers at Edgbaston and TB. Also Cardiff was deliberately slow to negate Johnson and Starc but with enough seam and uneven bounce to give our bowlers something. In contrast, Lords and the Oval were total roads which inevitably favoured whoever won the toss.
OK that's home advantage if you like, but the one-sidedness of the tests made the series all about groundsmen, not cricketers which diminished it in my opinion.
Not much of a contest though, is it?
Since we have rediscovered how to play one day cricket, we have had three awesome series against NZ, Australia and Pakistan, each one going to the wire. Why would you watch a one sided test match over five days when you could watch something a lot more keenly contested and takes a fraction of the time?
Last edited:
J
johnson
Guest
We prepared two seriously seaming wickets that heavily favoured our bowlers at Edgbaston and TB. Also Cardiff was deliberately slow to negate Johnson and Starc but with enough seam and uneven bounce to give our bowlers something. In contrast, Lords and the Oval were total roads which inevitably favoured whoever won the toss.
OK that's home advantage if you like, but the one-sidedness of the tests made the series all about groundsmen, not cricketers which diminished it in my opinion.
I'm not getting into an argument here but they were just Normal wickets, if they seemed so much then why did Clarke choose to bat first and on the other we were 270-4 on day one
It's a total total myth, nothing to do with Homs advantage , that's what English pitches are like
The only poor pitch in the ashes was lords which was a disgrace, yet you thought that was a true test!! Shows how much fans have got used to flat lifeless pitches. They are meant to have some grass on you know!
It was good bowling and bad batting nothing more, hence why England posted 390 was it? Not bad on a poor pitch
I really don't want to start an argument and it's nothing personal honestly but that's complete nonsense about the ashes pitches.
At Birmingham Clarke won the toss and batted!!! That says more than I ever could
brandon
Striker
I disagree completely with this talk of home pitches being a bad thing. That's the whole point? That's why it's called Test cricket. It tests all your skills.
I don't always agree with Johnson, but he's bang on, winning a Test Series away from home is special. It should be difficult. Our 2012 win in India was a fantastic achievement. We beat them at their own game, in their own backyard after losing the first Test.
So what if home sides prepare a pitch to suit their strengths, if you win the toss you can do whatever you want. I firmly believe we'd have got a result in the UAE had Cook won the toss at either Dubai or Abu Dhabi.
On the Ashes subject, did you watch any of the coverage? Because the Aussie batting failures were all about poor technique and shot selection. Even Aussie pundits were saying that.
I don't always agree with Johnson, but he's bang on, winning a Test Series away from home is special. It should be difficult. Our 2012 win in India was a fantastic achievement. We beat them at their own game, in their own backyard after losing the first Test.
So what if home sides prepare a pitch to suit their strengths, if you win the toss you can do whatever you want. I firmly believe we'd have got a result in the UAE had Cook won the toss at either Dubai or Abu Dhabi.
On the Ashes subject, did you watch any of the coverage? Because the Aussie batting failures were all about poor technique and shot selection. Even Aussie pundits were saying that.
smoker
Striker
None taken.I don't think Lords was a good wicket, it was a road and favoured whoever won the toss and batted first. It was a good opportunity to see how good the Australians were, away from difficult wickets.
Re: Edgbaston, IIRC Cook said he would have batted first too. Clarke was clearly hoping to weather the overcast conditions in the first session and then make runs, but the cloud hung about a bit and both captains were surprised by the amount of seam in the wicket. (remember we were about 180/7 in our first innings)
When Cook won the toss at Trent Bridge, he knew exactly what the score was and put the Aussies in.
This argument has been done to death like. Whether you think the home advantage was fair or not, the point remains that test cricket now overwhelmingly favours the home side which diminishes it as a spectacle to the cricket watcher.
Bri
Striker
I don't think Lords was a good wicket, it was a road and favoured whoever won the toss and batted first. It was a good opportunity to see how good the Australians were, away from difficult wickets.
Re: Edgbaston, IIRC Cook said he would have batted first too. Clarke was clearly hoping to weather the overcast conditions in the first session and then make runs, but the cloud hung about a bit and both captains were surprised by the amount of seam in the wicket. (remember we were about 180/7 in our first innings)
When Cook won the toss at Trent Bridge, he knew exactly what the score was and put the Aussies in.
This argument has been done to death like. Whether you think the home advantage was fair or not, the point remains that test cricket now overwhelmingly favours the home side which diminishes it as a spectacle to the cricket watcher.
I sort of agree with SMoker, there has to be something wrong when no Test goes into a 4th day. But, looking at the detail....
Lords: Isn't Lords often like that ..... except when it's cloudy and then the ball swings. As it happened this years the sky was clear and there was no swing so advantage Australia.
Trent Bridge: Has a reputation of swinging early and it did, the problem was that the Australians had pretty much lost the match by the time it stopped.
I don't know how you go about preparing a swinging pitch.
Rather than look at changing the coin toss maybe they should look at the ball.
- Status
