At Trent Bridge on 13th July 2014 at around 5pm, the first test of England’s summer series against India finished as a draw. India were on 385 for 8, having played 120 overs of the third innings in a match where the first two concluded after lunch on day four, having produced a total of 953 runs for 20 wickets from 305.5 overs. Besides Alastair Cook’s two over bowling spell, during which he picked up his only test wicket, this test match is notable for nothing much happening, and was perhaps the dullest five days of English test cricket in living memory.
Fast-forward to this year’s Trent Bridge test and after just one day there have been 334 runs and 14 wickets in fewer than 83 overs in a remarkable day’s play. Records were smashed, with Australia’s 60 all out coming from just 18 overs and three balls — the fewest number of balls faced in a Test innings in history. Stuart Broad, in picking up 8 for 15 from 9.3 overs, became the first player to have picked up more than six wickets in the first session of a test match.
The contrast between the two tests could not be more marked. For a long time, as England under Andrew Strauss and Andy Flower reached the pinnacle of the ICC Test rankings, their success was based on playing a very attritional brand of cricket. More often than not, this was on dry, lifeless pitches in England where Anderson and Broad could get a little assistance with the new ball, and Graeme Swann would hold up an end for the majority of an innings, picking up wickets along the way. Whilst this tactic undoubtedly was a big factor in England’s successes during this period, it led to some of the least interesting Test matches I can remember, and continued into Alastair Cook’s captaincy, particularly against the Australians, presumably in an attempt to blunt their fast bowlers.
During the current Ashes series, there have been three tests on pitches which have been fairly atypical of those in England over the last five or so years, in that they were what you would expect for typical English pitches. It is no coincidence that these pitches were used in the tests won by England; in Anderson and Broad they have two experienced bowlers tailor-made for these English conditions, and a batting line-up who cut their teeth on similar pitches growing up.
What England have done this series is emphasize their home conditions, giving themselves as big a chance of winning as possible. This is increasing in International cricket, and is evident in the fact that teams are finding it more and more difficult to win, and even compete, away from home. There are other elements to this, of course, particularly the shorter nature of tours with few warm-up games being played giving players less chance to get used to the conditions, but the poor performance of visiting sides is a worrying trend in Test match cricket.
While close, competitive matches would be the ideal, the one-sidedness of recent test series cannot be blamed solely on the pitches. Instead the players need to be held responsible for their inability to adapt to foreign conditions. This was evident in the performance of the Australian batsmen during their first innings at Trent Bridge, where all of the top-order fell through going hard at the ball, a method of batting that has brought considerable success in Australian conditions, but is completely inappropriate for a green, seaming wicket in England.
Test cricket is supposed to be just that: a test. A test of the ability, character and courage of those involved, and a big part of that test is in adapting to unfamiliar conditions. For spectators, seeing how players respond when faced with the challenges that difficult pitches and foreign conditions is a key reason behind watching test cricket. English groundsmen producing lively pitches can only contribute to making Test cricket more entertaining, particularly for an English public who have been starved of entertaining cricket at home for some time now.
Long may it continue.
