Recently a section of the media (who else but the English media
These claims coming from a besotted English press has been ably challenged by others.
Leaving Pietersen's debatable pioneering moment aside, I consider the employment of covers to protect the pitch from the elements as a pioneering moment.
Until then, the state of the pitch was a major factor in the game. As the match wore on, the exposed pitch used to exhibit contrasting behavior. There were marked differences in its behavior during the morning and the late afternoon session and a huge difference between the first days play and the finals days play.
The employment of the cover killed this unpredictability and tilted what was a tussle between the bat, ball and the elements into a uni-dimensional batsman's game.
It is certainly not a desired change, but a pioneering moment nevertheless.
Related Read: Lawrence Booth list six inventions that changed the game of cricket.
Technorati Tags Innovations,Cricket,switch-hitting
4 comments:
I proved here that the actual shot in that match was not a pioneering moment:
http://www.wellpitched.com/2008/06/switch-debate.html
Q,
I have read it.
To this day covering the pitch looks silly to me. The only purpose it serves is for the expers to talk abt "sweating " under the cover.
R,
Remember, Derek Underwood, he was lethal during the 'uncovered' days.
Even a wet patch, the size of a handkerchief, was enough for him to trigger a collapse.
I think Doug Walters(my memory is vague) was lethal on a wet pitch.
Post a Comment