Do you agree with Michael Holding?

During the ODI series between England and Sri Lanka, Michael Holding was making lots of comments about pitches and the purpose of an ODI. He basically said that they should all be designed to produce high scores and lots of runs as the purpose of the format was entertainment.

Personally, I don't agree. There have been many very close ODI's from low scoring games on wickets that helped the seamers or spinners. What I like to see every now and then is a good cricket wicket that gives help to bowlers who put it in the right areas but also rewards batsmen for good shot selection and gives good value for shots. How many people are going to want to be bowlers when all there are around the world are flat roadlike batting tracks designed to make high scoring games?

If you want a game purely to be played on flat tracks and designed to produce high scores then look no further than T20.

Of course Holding can say that now, as he is no longer playing. Also, he wasn't really a bowler that relied that much on movement or uneven bounce - he simply bowled the ball so fast you didn't see it until your stumps were scattered aroung the ground.

I kind of half agree though - most ODIs should be played on wickets where scores around 300 are possible, but there is still room for matches where the likes of Anderson or Swann can influence the game and swing it to a 220 run a side match. Indeed, it is arguably a better test of a batsman's skill to score at 4.5 an over on a tricky wicket as to score at 6 or 7 an over on a road.

na i dont think it particuarly matters to be honest.

As long as the pitch plays the same for both innings then it's fine for me.

exactly

Highly opinonated Mickey has been saying a lot of things, about every thing now a days. Some it good some it BS.

Carrot is spot on. The pitch just needs to play the same for both innings.

In line with your opening comments, cricketfan, you don't always need a lot of runs to have a good game and an exciting finish.

Would rather prefer a more balanced pitch where the bowlers also have some say. Some of the best ODI cricket I've seen took place on tracks that had something for everyone. The Lanka-India match where Lanka almost chased down 414 was one of the most borring ODI I've watched. the SA Aus one at that time was a novelty and therefore interesting, but if that is going to be the norm, I just wouldn't even bother with the scorecards.

Just repalce the players with a series of moderatly talented kareokee singers with tragic life stories and have a phone vote to deciede the result. That is far more popular enterntainment.

I can't see that ever catching on, Peter ....

As long as pitch behaves similar for both innings of a ODI..its ok. However on a personal level I like those kind of pitches where 220 to 250 is competitive score to defend rather pitches where even 300 is not safe or pitches where scoring 100 is impossible. On pitches where 220 to 250 is defend-able it is fair on bowlers as well as batters with good technique who can build innings and accelerate as needed

I think you would like to see all kinds of different pitches and not the same for each match.