Winning at home is sadly not a priority

My last column was about England Test cricket failings...

I don’t agree with the notion that pitches with pace and bounce would have resulted in anything different. Steven Finn was aweful, Stuart Broad well below par and James Anderson had one good game. England would have played into Pakistan hands by preparing fast wickets considering Alex Hales, Gary Ballance and James Vince’s batting abilities. Mrlogic

You’re bang on re pitches. Pakistan are used to slow, low pitches in the UEA, and that’s what we gave them for three of four Tests. Only in Manchester did we have a fast pitch with good carry to the keeper and it worked well. In the sub-continent, all pitches are prepared for the host nation - see Australia’s trou- bles in Sri Lanka. We’ll have similar issues in India, especially with no top class spinner of our own. The Windies used to prepare fast, variable bounce pitches for their quicks, as do Australia and South Africa now. If the priority is to see five days regardless( and your slow over rate point is sound) then achieving home wins is only secondary. A shame as most supporters would be happier to see seaming, fast pitches even if it means matches end on the third or fourth day.

Vonnegut

The Test series against Pakistan was a great example of two well- matched teams producing competitive and compelling cricket. The 2-2 draw was a better advert for Test cricket then the thumping of Sri Lanka. I agree about the overrate and the exorbinant pricing.

aylesburyposh