LANCASHIRE chief executive Jim Cumbes has reacted angrily to the abandonment of the Twenty20 at Old Trafford, suggesting the format may not have an international future unless changes are made.
Cumbes watched in dismay as officials called an end to proceedings at around 8pm, with a capacity 19,500 crowd leaving the stadium without a ball being bowled.
Sunday's match in Manchester went the same way, with the game abandoned only seven balls into the second innings.
Cumbes believes a domestic match would have been allowed to go ahead in the same conditions and insists international teams should either follow suit or step away from the shortest format of the game.
"I'm angry and bitterly disappointed. It's my view that for a Twenty20 match we should have played a game out there tonight," he said.
"When we started playing Twenty20 cricket a few years ago we were told to be prepared to play cricket in conditions you wouldn't normally play in in first-class cricket.
"To my mind, if that was Yorkshire against Lancashire on a Friday night in front of 16,000 people we would have been playing.
"If we can't do that at international level I accept that, but in that case let's not play it at all at international level.
"If it's not the case that we can play in these conditions then I would advocate we don't play it (internationally) and we leave it as a hit and giggle at domestic level to draw the crowds in.
"If we're not expected to play in those conditions then that's a problem because we're going to come up against them more often than not, especially in this country."
Cumbes opinion
Cumbes refused to apportion blame specifically to either the officials or the captains, but was visibly unhappy after conducting his own inspection of the bowlers' run-ups at the Brian Statham End - the worst affected area of the pitch.
"It's not a question of blame, it's a matter of opinion. But when I went to look at the spot that was causing bother I fully expected to put my foot down and bring water up, but there was no water there," he said.
"It's up to the umpires to consult the two captains. Player safety is important, of course it is, but the conditions we are expected to play Twenty20 cricket in are less than perfect.
"I know umpires have a tough decision to make and I know we have to think about players' injuries, because I played the game for 20 years, but there's a time when you have to think about the people who paid £50 to come and see a game.
"Sometimes I think we'd rather be playing in front of empty stadiums.
"Twenty20 cricket was invented on village greens 50 years ago on a Wednesday night when it was pouring with rain. I know that's club cricket and it's probably stretching the point but we've played domestic cricket here in much worse conditions than that."
England skipper Paul Collingwood, however, felt the right decision was made.
"I absolutely sympathise with the fans who turned up. Obviously there was another full house tonight and people wanted to watch at home," Collingwood said.
"The umpires came up to us and said they think it's unfit for international cricket.
"When you've got a lot of people in the crowd, it's a brave call to make but it's good that they are making those calls."
It is a frustrating way for the series to finish and leaves both sides short of Twenty20 practise ahead of next April's World Twenty20 in the West Indies.
Thunderstorms in Manchester in mid-afternoon ensured play was always likely to be under threat and further showers in the evening meant an umpires' inspection occurred at 7pm, the advertised start time.
A second inspection followed at 7.45pm and by then it became apparent that the work of the groundstaff in preparing the run-ups had been in vain.
The one-day leg of the tour continues with seven one-day internationals, the first of which takes place at The Oval on Friday.
Were you at OT? What did you think of the decision? Send us your comments.
Lancashire furious over T20 abandonment
September 01, 2009
Comments
Login or Register to comment
Stop trying to cover it up Jim, you were wrongly advised by Peter Marron that you didnt need a new outfield drainage system the same as Lords, so went with a cheaper version, and now its coming back to haunt you and bringing more bad publicity to Lancs. Seems to have been a lot of football played in the area tonight though looking at the results, clearly they arent struggling to get games on.
Sorry Mr Cumbes but it is only you that I am furious at.
Put simply you have to accept that you cannot expect International cricketers to tip toe through a patch of mud on the run up that the inadequacies of either the covers or your ground staff allowed to occur. Brett Lee has just had over a year out injured from the game and if I were him I would be disappointed if my captain allowed me to put myself at risk by running through such soft ground. More so, I disagree, having seen the pictures on Sky that you could have safely played domestic cricket on that pitch tonight – very simply it just wasn’t fit.
Having paid my £53 to attend I therefore have a couple of questions for you:
a) Having no doubt seen this patch when the covers came off late afternoon why were intensive efforts not made to dry it out? In truly embarrassing scenes, whilst 19,500 people waited patiently, 3 ground staff were sent out at 19.30 with a bin liner of sawdust and a shovel - it beggared belief and I would say it was reminiscent of something you would see in the Caribbean, but I seem to remember they flew a helicopter over a square at low level not so long ago over there to hasten the drying process - could we not have at least managed a hot air blower?
b) Given it didn't rain from about 5 o'clock onwards surely this area was never going to improve sufficiently in time (you could tell that from the body language of the players and umpires from a very early stage), so why was the game not abandoned then rather than letting everyone travel? Don't worry about answering that one - I know the answer and it involves exploiting those 19,500 people who all turned up and paid their £8 for the car park still and paid £3 each for the pies and beer that would have been thrown away otherwise. I call that quite outrageous exploitation I am afraid.
I am sorry but I don’t buy this theory that the onus was on the players to produce some cricket – I have heard talk that they should have played a 10 overs per side exhibition match from one end but that would have only led to more problems with ticket refunding etc and to be honest most of the public still going home thoroughly unsatisfied.
Very simply the onus was on LCCC to either do the right thing in providing a pitch that was worthy of being played upon OR to do the right thing and be honest with the public and postpone at the earliest possible opportunity.
Mr Cumbes did neither and as his encore he did the one thing that will surely put the nail in the coffin of seeing top quality test cricket at Old Trafford in the near future – he criticised the England players in an attempt to cover the hopeless inadequacies of the organisation that he is in charge of. What a fool.
A very disgruntled cricket fan….
We pay these cricketers' wages. Those of us who watch at the ground. Those who watch Sky. Those who are only able to watch highlights on terrestrial TV. Players with the attitude of Paul Collingwood should remember this as they get rich on their bloated salaries and sponsorship deals whilst sitting in cosiness of the pavilion.
Put sawdust down on the bowler's run-up. Put matting down. Bowl off a shortened run-up (as fast bowlers used to do in the old John Player League). Even bowl from one end only. Cricket is meant to be entertainment and 19,500 spectators have paid to be entertained by a cricket match.
Twenty20 is meant to be a bit of fun, a 'hit and giggle' competition as Jim puts it. It is marketed towards bringing in spectators who would not normally consider going to a cricket game. This audience will quickly disappear if matches get called off similar circumstances to this game. I don't know the rules of Twenty20 well enough to comment on the existing powers of the umpires to get the game started. However, perhaps they need to have more power to use their imagination and initiative to adapt the rules to suit the conditions of the day and direct that some form of match is played.
A terrible few days for Old Trafford's national image. Shouldn't Manchester, Lancashire of all places and not Lords - have the "top notch" best drainage system possible? The OT groundstaff also need to take a lesson from Lords & even Wimbledon too, on how to get play started a.s.a.p after rain!!!
Old Trafford, Manchester, Lancashire - seems to have a lot of enemies in the national media. They don't like us. Competitive grounds & regions must be laughing at all this?
And those uninspiring "tin shed" development plans won't help either.
Where's the "off field" leadership & imagination been for the past 15 years? Two miles from a booming city centre with its conference & hotel trade, good transport links, lots of land - yet why have we fallen so far behind other grounds? Seems Lancashire is run by "apathetic amateurs" with no imagination!!
The real question is why that area was so wet. The sky commentators seem to suggest rain had seeped through the covers, Cumbes said it was rising moisture caused by sweating under the covers. Which was it.
As for the drainage system, I read that the drainage system has not yet been installed round the square pending the turning of the square. Perhaps Lancs should concentrate on that and the ground redevelopment before applying for more international fixtures rather than leaving the club open to such embarrassing scenes as last night. I can remember as a kid spending many hours sheltering under the stands at OT in the summer. As Bumble said last night, it does rain around OT!
Seems more like village cricket to me, Mr Cumbes!
Well said Mark! Sadly, Manchester and cricket do not set well together because of one thing ..... weather!! Stats about lost days may say otherwise for international cricket but as far as Lanky are concerned we are at a distinct disadvantage to most counties. This innovative, forward thinking city of ours should have insisted on one mind blowing condition for planning approval for a revamped OT and that had to be a roof to guarantee play.
I accept logistics of acceptable wickets and considerations of light etc etc (that list goes on) but 19,500 spectators says it all. Can you imagine financial return if you could GUARANTEE cricket at OT?
Thinking outside the metaphorical box is needed and something really extraordinary is needed to end the "Manchester Rain" headlines (not really bothered from a weather perspective - if you have it flaunt it - just cricket!) as we are at a definite disadvantage.
Lets have something unique in Manchester!!!!
Pipe down Jim. The fault lies with the Lancs managment and ground staff, no one else. The bowlers run in was un-fit to play on and it should have been. End of story. You have really helped the cause for getting test cricket back to OT with this debacle. Well done
Heavy rain showers hit large parts of Britain yesterday afternoon and the weather was bleak across most parts on Sunday too. However according to the national media, there's this unique thing called MANCHESTER RAIN. They won't shut up about it, as if the rest of the country has some sort of Mediterranean climate!!
So "bad luck" with the weather, but more pertinently, lets not forget just how "bad" Old Trafford has become!!
I see Man City managed to play their reserve game the same night at the City of Manchester Stadium after having the same weather, I believe the game at Lancs was abandoned as City were well into the second half-City must have better groundsmen!
IF it was that bad last night how come play started on time this morning in the Lancs v Sussex game. Seems to me that the umpires and both the England and Australia players just didnt fancy it and Lancashires chances of staging international matches in the future have been severly damaged.
Bloody disgrace, i wasted a full day down at Old Trafford, all it needed was the clowns and the circus would have been complete.
Jim Cumbes, please take note of the points I shall raise about the embarrassment that Old Tafford has become. I will number the issues to make is easy for you. I have have been fortunate enough to have visited most first class cricket grounds. We are by far the worst "international ground" in the country and that comes from a Lancastrian who frequently attends OT to watch county cricket.
1) I was lucky enough to get tickets to watch the test matches at Cardiff and Edgbaston. I found the stewards at both venues to be personable and helpful. Contrast this with the jobsworths from Group 4 Security who have the demeanor of night club bouncers. A warm welcome to first time visitors to our home of cricket! If other clubs can get it right why can't we?
2) The first thing that greated me as I arrived on Sunday was the huge queue snaking it's way from Greatstone Road around to Talbot Road stretching a good 150 metres long. Was this the only entrance? I can confirm that queuing was not an issue at either Cardiff or Edgbaston.
3) Having finally entered the ground I was seated in a temporary stand. They have less leg room that conventional stands and have a far shallower gradient meaning that when someone stands up 3 rows down from you you miss the action.
4) Once again, large queuing was an issue for a beer. Sorry to labour the point but I didn't queue for beer at Cardiff or Edgbaston which, by the way, charged only £3 for a pint of larger compared to the £3.50 at OT. Why so expensive? Make hay while you can at my expense!
5) Portaloo toilets at an international ground? Did you notice the queues streaching at least 50 deep at the interval? Was this reasonable? What must our visitors think or, more to the point, the ECB?
Jim, you may live in a time warp but the game and venues have moved on. You would know this if you visited any of this years Test Matches and compared what was on offer at the various venues compared with the embarrassment that is Old Trafford. I fear we've fell so far behind we'll never be considered as one of the top 5 grounds again.
The fundamental problem here is that the whole concept was wrong. Just think of the risk of putting on a 20-20 game starting in the evening with virtually no room for manouevre in case of bad weather. Talk about tempting fate! How much of the £50 per ticket went to the insurers? And how much more will they demand in future after this fiasco? (Incidentally, I cannot understand why anyone would pay that kind of money to watch a short slogging match in which the bowlers are simply slaughtered.)
I have it on good authority that groundstaff were phoning Peter Maron asking for his advice once the damp area was the main problem. Any groundsman worth his salt would have realised that area needed some serious work on it, Paul Allott's foot and tip of his brolly were clearly moving the sodden turf. There is no way that was caused by the covers sweating, more likely spillage at the joints. If the wet area had be tined and the holes filled with Mireton Ongar loam in six inch drills and hammered in with a wooden mallet, the whole are would have been solid within ten minutes, saw dust was never an option.
Having said that Collingwood should have hidden his glee at helping get the game abandoned, OT is not a happy hunting ground for him, only one score over 50 in his career in 18 innings, he clearly wasnt looking forward to facing Brett Lee on their who was never going to help his cause.
I fear the worse for the seven match series that starts on Friday.
As a life long Lancashire fan I was ashamed by everything I saw last night. The ground looks shabby there was no Information about the prospect of play.They allowed people into the ground to buy beer and food when really there must of been no chance of play.If the pitch wasnt fit it wasnt going to chance in a few hours of cold night air. Its not hard to see why we are not getting test matches at the moment.