Should the first test have been played at Cardiff?
Conno Aussie asked:
For a historical and traditional match in a series that is widely regarded as the biggest in cricket to be played in a country that is not contending seems quite strange.
This entry was posted
on Friday, January 28th, 2011 at 7:14 am and is filed under English Cricket.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.
For a historical and traditional match in a series that is widely regarded as the biggest in cricket to be played in a country that is not contending seems quite strange.
I’d imagine this to be quite frustrating for some English cricket fans who were waiting for 4 years and now have to travel away from close areas.
Also, the field was shaped horrifically oddly, with boundaries set at ridiculous shapes.
Cricket ovals aren’t supposed to be circular, hence the name. They are designed to be ovular. this is so the length of the pitch doesn’t allow short boundaries at the long ends.
Diego
January 31st, 2011 at 12:46 pm
Audrey
Yes it was unusual and unfortunately, the pitch wasn’t the best. Surprisingly this affected the poms more than us.
February 2nd, 2011 at 5:39 pm
Abigail
As you indicated the choice of Cardiff as a venue was somewhat perplexing. Wales has only one county side in the English County Competition and it has been holding up the bottom of the lower division in all forms of cricket for a number of years. To give Wales the first match of the Ashes has left many die hard supporters in the north of England unhappy because Old Trafford and Nottingham will miss out on hosting a match this series. You are also spot on by mentioning the odd shape of the grounds. Not the MCG neither in shape nor seating capacity 16000 vs 100,000. Maybe like the State of Origin being taken to Melbourne it was a publicity exercise.
February 3rd, 2011 at 7:33 am
Evan
hmmm and people say Indians whinge…..
February 5th, 2011 at 6:55 pm
Noah
I would rather see a ground full of enthusiastic Welsh or English (or Australian) supporters than a half -empty ground full of old die-hards.
Fair play to the Welsh .Alright it wasn’t the best of pitches ,but it was the same for both sides.
February 9th, 2011 at 3:09 am
Ella
The shape of a lot of English grounds is not circular, look at Lords (apart from the fact it has a slope)
Travelling away from close areas, If you were to travel from Oval to Lords, Trent Bridge, Headingly and Old Trafford by the shortest route it would be around 500 km total.
Brisbane, Sydney, Melbourne, Adelaide, Perth is about 5500 km.
there are 5 tests and the ground should not matter, the best team will prevail. The ashes in England gives Australia one advantage,
Lords is like a home ground to the Aussies, look at the record. It is of emmense national and personal pride to play as an Aussie at Lords.
Failure is not an option, this is the pinnacle of Australian cricket bred into us convicts from Birth and I cant see the ECB cancelling the Lords match for Durham or Newcastle. The other four grounds are whatever they want.
Send more convicts, they make better cricketers
February 9th, 2011 at 1:46 pm
Elijah
NO, Old Trafford was better than Cardiff.
February 10th, 2011 at 11:42 am
Landon
The pitch was average, I’ve seen better, mind you I’ve also seen worse.
The shape, look at aerial shots of a number of Test Cricket grounds in England and you will notice quite a few of them are a similar shape. Very few have that traditional Oval shape you see on other grounds around the world. Edgbasten and Trent Bridge for example.