Hi All,
Am interested to hear why people consider pitches play slow & low. All feedback welcome.
Cheers, Vic.
mine play slow and low due to a complete separation 2.5 inch (ish) down.
Some tracks play slow and low because they're rolled to death - imo you can roll all the life out of a pitch in a matter of hours.
Of course there's no bounce, bend your back and put some bloody effort in.
Compaction i'm thinking mate, over rolled, rolled when conditions arnt ideal!, by the way ascott can i bat at your ground next season?, runs galore!
Robbie, great season fella with HCC and another ton in the last game you could bat on anything. CCCC made it in 2nd place.
Fun watching batsmen score double hundreds and at least they weren't bore draws, however, there has to be a better balance between bat and ball.
We never stop learning and the best way is to ask people in the field.
23 Sep 2009 by MAVO
A lot of pitches i,ve played on away seem to be under rolled!
If you press the surface,it gives which surely will cushion the ball??if you tap a bat on a pitch you should get a fair idea if its hard enough,some sound hollow,others no sound at all.
The pitch must be compact to make ball bounce off it!
Pace will come by maybe leaving more grass on or by having a solid 3-4inch or more in some cases loam base with no breaks.
I,ve had bouncy quick tracks on 1half inch Kaloam,i did it by leaving 5mm grass on wicket and not allowing pitch to dry out too quick by using roll on covers,rolling at the right times,i even roll with heavy roller on matchday(only have the 1 roller anyway!),which some people don't dream of doing in case it "deadens"the pitch.
Everyone have their different ways of doing the job.
23 Sep 2009 by pacman75cricket
I have a couple of rootbreaks that trying to address so believe this effects pace & bounce.
Reading other comments believe I should be leaving a bit more grass on.
But ground was always known as a bit of a road.
Think its hard to judge in club cricket as sometimes players not able to extract pace & pounce from pitches.
23 Sep 2009 by paul.
Ascott
From the openended question ,something is on your mind!
I have one for you though?I think it was you who had experiance of mixing k loam with ongar. Is this correct???
Mavo how did the season go???
Paul,
Good to hear from you again, just picking peoples brains really as to why pitches are slow & low.
The ground you are referring to had Kaloam as a base and was later dressed with Ongar but never mixed together.
Where I am now also has a Kaloam base but with Surrey on top.
Mavo, agree thoroughly about leaving grass on, best on my pitches is 5mm or more.
Interested in the over rolling theory, can life really be rolled out of pitches? What happens to a pitches characteristics if it is rolled to much?
23 Sep 2009 by MAVO
Paul,i sent you a pm weeks ago,believe you played at mine for your 2s?not a bad season pitchwise,didn't have a good start to season we lost 8 on the spin!then we went on a run of wins thanks to our aussie!finished 4th from bottom in the end.I see you guys stayed in prem 1,Knowle went down!not looking forward to playing there again!
I think you can overoll pitches definately,my old man used to roll our pitches a lot more than i do,he also used to shave grass off too!,pitches were lower and slower i remember,but then he didn't get the seed to put down for autumn renovation in the first place because club wouldn't get it!
Do you normally find pitches sometimes play better 2nd or 3rd time round though?they've probably had more rolling and cutting done to them over the weeks,...its a tough one to work out!
Breaks surely the main problem in lack of bounce when dry. Still damp below dry surface another, where 'crusting' has occurred from rolling when too wet. This sounds like your 'giving' scenario, Mavo. It's all in the timing!
Pitch never drying out due to lack of covering in wet weather, particularly if a lot of thatch may be yet another and 'dead' ground from too much heavy rolling suggested from Cranfield report, I think.
Also - remember the reported work done in the Windies to make a playable replacement test pitch at 2 days notice after the abandonement of the original venue? Non-stop heavy rolling which took all the life out of what was expected to be a minefield.
Proud to serve grassroots cricket
hi,
a pitch needing to provide bounce has to be dry and hard.
rolling does not make a pitch dry or hard.
heat from the sun provides the method of drying.
grass roots remove the profile moisture, as like a tree on a lawn.
if you consider the 3 hardness materials are metal, cement and ceramic, these will be your benchmark.
none of these materials need to be rolled to make them hard.
i'm sure if you bounced a cricket ball on them they will bounce.
one thing for sure is that cricket pitch maintenance is proberly the same now as it was many moons ago.
they experienced the same problems and come up with some handy ideas, marl . cow dung etc.
the thing is with cricket pitch preparation is we are doing our dammest to kill the grass and dead grass results in a poor quality soil profile.
In fact the only grass that performs well is AGM.
Picture your cricket pitches pre-season and look at the grass coverage end of season.
unless you have experienced a wet summer or have irrigated a lot. the pitches will be void of any quality grass.
what dies above will die below.
taking this all in account, a profile with less than 30% clay the rest being sand, silt and dead root it's a no wonder the ball struggles to bounce.
solution? replace profile, start again until the next time and so on.
end of season reno, koro, scarifying all pretty cosmetic really.
chris
AMG
Chris,
I would suggest that the 'cosmetics' referred to are the only way for most to be able to try to get the pitches back to life, as replacing the profile is prohibitively expensive and takes areas so treated out of action for a couple of years.
The scarification process minimises the buildup of dead root, to help retain bounce in the future. Renovation replaces the grass removed and destroyed in pitch preparation.
It is difficult to comprehend the comparison of a pitch with metal etc and as for the 'handy idea' of using marl, that is the biggest cause of root breaks in this area thanks to the handiwork of our predecessors and much modern maintenance is trying to undo their 'good' work.
Of course, if the profile is rubbish anyway, quality pitches cannot be produced. Retaining the quality and making the optimum out of what you have is what it's all about.
Proud to serve grassroots cricket
The 3 main problems with slow & low pitches in the UK are:
1) Thatch - too many blocks have far too much thatch. This is only picked away at with poor quality scarifying machines. The blocks need to have their tops completely removed & the remaining soil re-levelled.
2) Soil - far too many of the loams sold in a generic term such as 'Surrey' have too low a clay content. Soil needs to be sampled at source & tested before being purchased.
3) Money - There are not the funds available to complete heavy end of season renovations. Unlike in Aus / Nz where the councils own & maintain virtually every ground including stadiums, UK clubs have to pay for any work themselves. This is simply too expensive, hence the usual 3 passes with the scarifier, seed, top dress and spike later on.
The ECB are being made aware of this from looking overseas, but it's a huge issue to address & requires a total sea change. Don't hold your breath...
Mavo, have always thought that a second day pitch is better than the first, probably because it has dried a bit more.
Could it just be certain characteristics of grounds? Philmort mentions the West Indies pitch but wasn't the ARG always a batsman friendly pitch or was it that heavy roller?
Chris/Willard, understand stripping squares and levelling is the way to go but who can afford that each year when times are tight and there are buildings to maintain etc? One would imagine that every year is excessive and we should be able to manage surfaces for say 10 years before stripping.
Willard point2, I am awaiting Loamy to come in and offer his thoughts.
Thanks for all your interesting comments so far and please keep them coming.
24 Sep 2009 by Mal
I'm with you Vic on the second day pitch being better. Here our first team always insist on playing on a brand new wicket and then the second team play on it. I am slowly getting them round to the idea that they are missing out a better mature wicket.
Geography is everywhere
l have this last season persuaded the first team to play on the pitch second time round they always insisted on playing on a new pitch the pitches have played better second time around
24 Sep 2009 by vid Last edited 24 Sep 2009
Hi Vic, I would say that if the pitches play better second time round then the preparation 1st time round must be inadequate just by the logic of it (this is my free thought please dont take offence), most likely I would think that the preseason rolling was misapplied - too wet, too dry, too long rolling in one spell, burying winter thatch etc.
There have been examples on here of doing over 10 hours rolling in the preparation of a pitch - far too long and would result in parts of the pitch being rock hard and others being low and slow having lost their cohesion due to crushing damage.
I have regularly achieved shoulder high bounce from 1.5 hours prematch rolling on 27% Surrey loam so I dont go along with the must be 30%+ argument although there is no doubt a wicket of 30%+ would be harder still.
Thatch /buried thatch/ layering are the biggest culprits of consistently low bounce however even this can be addressed less drastically by hollow coring or deep linear aerating so long as care is taken that soil exchange takes place at and below the layering/thatch problem or no improvement can occur.
I also think you are right to queston the validity of clay percentages in each type of loam. Being somewhat close to a big loam supplier I know how the process works. The loam generally comes from a field where the percentage has tested correctly. The grass and fibre is then rotovated and removed and the exposed top soil then stripped and graded ready for dispatch. This initial percentage therefore is only representative of the area/s wher the sample was taken; if the fields are on a slope it is very likely that the clay content will vary top to bottom and the depth of top soil might vary where more subsoil and therfore more clay gets in to the loam (or more sand / silt etc). I know of some companies using the soil being excavated from building sites including the footings - there is no way the percentages will be consistent. It would be a help if the suppler indicated what site the soil had come from and when the most recent sample was tested. There are not many that add clay to improve percentage as the mixing would have to be extremely good.
When Chris woods did tests on the standard supplies of all the known main suppliers he was surprised to find that some samples contained a lot less clay than indicated, ie 22/23% rather than 27% claimed. I have heard recently that a sample from a supplier contained less than 15% clay! The fact that the suppliers are responsible for this will not help you much if the product has already been applied.
I think the rolling argument has been well and truly examined on this site before but certainly one of the biggest causes of poor and inconsistent bounce is the way the roller is used and water/drying is controlled.
In fact virtually everything the groundsman does or doesnt do to a cricket strip during preparation will affect bounce one way or another.
Big subject Vic I think I'll stop there
Thanks vid, an extremely interesting post. Regarding second day pitches, if one thinks of a test or County game, the perfect situation would be for the bowlers to get some help early on before the batters cash in but then spin starts to take effect later in the game. This would indicate that days 2 & 3 may be the best for batting.
You certainly put in a lot less rolling than me but if it works that's great. I am also aware of the claims around clay content of loams and am lead to wonder if you are in the South of the Country.
Indeed a big subject but we all seek to gain as much knowledge as possible after all we all aim for perfection but fall a long way short.
24 Sep 2009 by vid Last edited 24 Sep 2009
Hi Vic, very much south coast orientated. I get your point now on second day usage, I dont really agree as I think the pitch would be more likely to deteriorate for the second innings (on the that second day), as a player I would want the pitch to start out looking as new as possible regardless. Difficult one really.
As for the loams it worries me greatly that the same supplier can supply different quality loam from one season to the next, and in some cases one load to the next. Multiply that by the big national company's usual practise of getting the supplies from up to 3 different sources but arriving in exactly the same bag and you can see why the result is so inconsistent. For those that care about such things I think it is vital to use a source that produces its own loam rather than a national retailer and even then have a close conversation about the current batch of loam - a good supplier will happily give you the most recent tested sample. Personally I think a producer who wants the business should be testing his loams twice per week in season and making the results available on their website or on application. I think there is no excuse to claim one thing and supply another when this % is so completely vital to the resultant playing surface - that is the game we are in after all
Hi vid, my theory about pitches is that on the first morning of a 4/5 day game there may be some moisture around and a little bit of live grass from which the bowlers may profit. After lunch day 1, the pitch hopefully will have dried - if weather is fine - and become easier for batting. Also many pitches tend to get a bit quicker resulting in the ball coming onto the bat and allowing good players to play strokes. As for the deterioration of pitches, this is another area of concern as modern loams don't tend to break up allowing spinners to come into play and certainly not by day 2.
Can't argue about anything you say regarding loams and in fact what you say causes greater concern as one is a trusting soul who believes what he is told by companies.
I wonder if perhaps the requirements for 1st class cricket are for pitches offering more pace and bounce than in the recreational game?
24 Sep 2009 by vid Last edited 24 Sep 2009
At the end of the day of course the 1st class game has higher requirements and most if not all county grounds will have loams with clay contents over 32%. However the higher the clay content the harder the ongoing maintenance. a high clay loam is a lot harder to recover and as I said above a very good wicket can be made out of 27% clay loam - it has lasted for a 3day 2nd 11 game without breaking up for me on numerous occasions and the over requirement was somewhere around the 105 mark for the first 2 days. So for the recreational game where attention to recovery is not on a 5 day a week basis the lower clay loams will allow quicker recovery because of their lesser tendancy to cap and their slightly higher pore space to carry water. It is widely accepted that if the wicket is not getting regular daily attention then it is unwise to up the clay content much above 30%.
And believe me Vic if you visited a few sites where loam is being graded you would be shocked at the material being used. There are some that can be trusted and do their best to provide the product that they are claiming, there are a few however who are trying to make big fast bucks out of their muckaway operations and you may be getting anything from 10% to 40% sometimes in the same loose load. So I would say take a day out and go and visit your supplier. If it is a national ask to look at samples from 2 different delivery loads and see if the loam even looks the same. Experience has bitten me on the b*m too many times now Vic and I am now generally a distrusting soul!! Hey ho!
Vid
My main square was tested in 2006 (28% clay), '07 (22%) & '08 (14.5%). Non of the materials has been changed during that time. We have about 5 inches of one material below 1 inch of the current dressing which was changed about 10 years ago. When pressed I was told that the testing method used was not good enough.
The approved method seems to be to strip and relay a couple of pitches but if one cannot trust the make up of the soil going in we could be going to a large expense for little gain.
Loamy, you are very quiet!!
24 Sep 2009 by pacman75cricket
Very interesting point re loam content as I like Vic would be trusting of clay content provided by suppliers.
Especially as on Kaloam & characteristics different to other loams I would be loathe to change, due to compatability but if im getting different product in each bag let alone each year why should i be concerned but then again when talk is about changing loams its mentioned about soil exchange to avoid problems .
24 Sep 2009 by Mal Last edited 24 Sep 2009
it does make a very interesting point in that you can get comfortable in using a product. very often you could be taken in I supose in how fine the soil has been screened and the colour. If the soil you are using in appearance is consistantly the same in both counts then you would no doubt percieve that the product was consistant. I have noted with amazement how the clay content of one of my squares has dropped in clay content by several percentage points in one year only to rise again. this leads me to suspect that while clay content can vary from top dressing to top dressing, some soil texture testing can also be inconsistant particularly if different labs are used. On this score it would be prudent to ensure that your testing is carried out by the same method and lab. check also that you take a sample from the full 4 inches of the profile. I can imagine that at this time of year if you were to try and get a soil sample you would be hard pushed to get a sampler below the top 1 inch particularly down here in the parched south, and of course you may feel that this was ok. It would be interesting to find out what the differences would be to samples taken at 1, 2, 3 and 4 to get a definitive answer as I am thinking that if a previous years topdressing was not incorporated fully this would make a difference if a shallow sample was taken. If you take the amount of percentaqge points that can change in clay content allied to the proportion of topdressing applied in a season to the total volume of soil in the profile of a square then the maths probably do not add up.
Geography is everywhere
The 'meister' must be taking a holiday.
What goes around, comes around
I was thinking about the original question a bit last night.
When you think that we've had a pretty decent summer (here anyway), with good drying weather, we should have been playing on some pretty decent tracks - but quite often that hasn't been the case. It is my belief that this is down to many groundsmen not being able (or knowing how) to control the moisture levels within the playing surface.
In a lot of cases it is down to not knowing how to manage the moisture levels to stop a cap forming. This isn't a dig at those groundsmen. There are three parts to managing the moisture to ensure good drying to depth; 1) having the knowledge to do it, 2) having the equipment to do it, and 3) having the time to actually do it.
I had a discussion with Len Smith recently on this very subject - 'why isn't the effective use of covers taught on the IOG courses ?'. His answer made a lot of sense, yet I still think it is the wrong answer. Because the vast majority of groundsmen attending these courses are part time (evening only or whatever) there is no way that they can manage the covers to control the moisture levels within the surface so why waste time explaining it - to the majority of groundsmen covers exist to try and keep the rain off, many don't ever consider putting them on to keep the sun off.
Many committees are now asking (having seen the tracks on tv) why their tracks are low/slow. The groundsman often has no answer because they don't know. IMO if you want fast tracks then you've got to manage the moisture levels within the surface. The major advantage that the full time groundsman has is that he can be there to take the covers on and off as he sees fit to try and ensure that a cap doesn't form and thus give the best chance of drying to depth.
During the summer I'm practically full time and attempting to manage covers is still a nightmare to achieve. There is simply no way a part time groundsman could do it.
Of course there's no bounce, bend your back and put some bloody effort in.
25 Sep 2009 by Zippy
In response to jlawrence,
I would also add that in order to be able to dry a profile properly, it is essential that the square has the right grass with the correct root density down to at least 100mm, so the plant can actually draw moisture from the ground at this depth, however totally agree with all the other points raised.
agree 100%. Without enough roots you'll never dry a track to depth.
Of course there's no bounce, bend your back and put some bloody effort in.
JL, thanks for bringing me back to the beginning. My surfaces - cricket, bowls & tennis - all dried incredibly early this season and as a result have performed well. Had a T/20 early June and markings were excellent. However in September the cricket pitches have been poor, much to my disgust.
Using your 3 points to managing moisture, I have the equipment and time but believe it may have been the knowledge where the problem existed. We didn't get the sun but had high drying winds. Never did the surfaces get hard, you could always feel some give, yet they were very dry. Cores looked okay, no breaks, no thatch, good roots and dry to a depth.
We live and learn yet not sure what I would do differently if given 10 days out of 11 again in Sept.
25 Sep 2009 by jlawrence Last edited 25 Sep 2009
If you could feel some give then they weren't consistently dry to depth.
For certain I'm still learning how to manage covers - especially when the schedule gets a bit hectic. I need to rework my track schedule a bit better next season I think - at times this season I had 3 tracks under prep on one square which is impossible with the covers I've got.
The only knowledge I've got about managing covers comes from speaking to guys on here - it seems that it's not something that the IOG are interested in teaching people. Thinking about it though, it could be that it's a bit too variable to actually teach. The basic idea is to use sheeting to draw the moisture upwards then remove the sheeting to allow the moisture to evaporate then, and only then, when you're happy with the lower profile use the roll on covers to control the drying of the upper profile.
It would I think be a good subject for an article by someone who really knows what they're doing.
added:
I can easily tell the tracks which I've got the moisture content right on during prep - come the thursday before a match they're litterally like concrete, there will be crack but the edges won't move at all and a ball thrown down will come well above waist height.
Of course there's no bounce, bend your back and put some bloody effort in.
JL when was the last time a bowler pitched his ball at 90 degrees to the track, I think that method of judging a wicket is nothing more than mundane, unless of course we have 30 foot tall bowlers. The track must be judged by a ball hitting it at pace but at a tangent, 30 degress or less, most people can bounce balls up and down but it does nothing to show how a strip will play
A Freudian slip is when you say one thing but mean your mother
25 Sep 2009 by paul.
All
Great post !! like to use my sheets to bring that moisture up from deep and keep the top from drying too Quickly!
Ascott nice to hear the sound off your keypad ! ,
Your right about sept and those drying winds ,got caught out with those, and then over compensated with a wicket that was a day away from drying last w/end, with heavy dews and temp fading etc .Oh well if we got it right every week i`m sure interest would fade! but it would be nice to find out..
Strange year did`nt think i learn`t as much from this season ,or perhaps i`m just making bad choices ..
Mavo, dont know what happened to my email notification but i shall look now !
Loamy and Bath must be on holiday together!
Keep up the good work.
25 Sep 2009 by paul.
Sorry back again!
As for clay content i believe in Aus these can be 60 -70%!I`m told that these would struggle to dry out over here,
However once my higher clay strips have received there pre season roll,i have problems getting enough water into them for the rest of the summer,and they dry out far quicker than my old strips which have less clay content ,but far more grass/roots..
It seems to me that they dont accept the water and it just runs off elsewhere!
The soil in Australia (some is dredged from rivers)certainly doesn`t seem to be the over priced commodity,that might be what it is claimed to be,delivered with a level of service that you would expect having bought a penny chew!
Indeed it might be cheaper to buy a private plane ,loaded with soil from Australia !At least you would know when it was coming,and that it would be dry!!(do like a rant on this subject)
JL, interesting to guess when a pitch is ready for use. I for example try to get one day pitches to a state where I would be happy starting a game 3 days prior to the said date. However, would that last for a 4 day game for example? Think the bowlers should have a bit of moisture to work with on the first morning of a longer game.
Tony, I used to argue with my Kiwi mate last year over bouncing a ball on the pitch. Never used it myself and also I believe it may be outlawed now in certain competitions.
Paul, glad I wasn't the only one to look a fool!! Perhaps Loamy & Bath are too busy renovating to get involved. Spoke at length to my Kiwi about clays, could probably have got away with it given the weather down South this season. Would like to trial a pitch here - any suppliers watching? Agree about run off problems.
hi all,
yes Willard spot on.
county tracks will have the same soil as as village pitch.
soil is a mineral.
soil is soil it's just sold under different product names.
Pitches first time out will play at there best because of the quality of the root system.
If you go back on that track later in the season it will have been exposed to lots of things mainly traffic and weathering.
so the root system will have declined in quality.
is there a cricket ground in the country with a pop up system to irrigate the pitches.
day time watering is impossible to manage.
importing better soils from EU countries is something that could be done.
med countries have better minerals for cricket pitch construction.
grass selection, the leaf blade of perenial rye has over recent years become finer, is this a step in the right direction.
when you look at the best weeds they all produce a big leave, this gives the weed a better chance of survival.
i know DLF trifolium are working closer with clover,
i know the original question was about slow tracks but it is all relevant.
that aussies rules is a funny old game, very exciting.
26 Sep 2009 by Mike
Very interesting subject guys.
Our friend, the loammeister is very busy at the moment... or so he tells me anyway!!
I was lucky enough recently to spend a little time looking at how his loams are produced - very impressive set up, and quality - Vic, I was literally a stone's throw from your ground, and would loved to have got in to see you, but we just didn't get the chance unfortunately. I also spent some time looking at some other loams closely, and the inconsistency in some of them was clear to see - I was actually very alarmed to see what went in to some bags.
26 Sep 2009 by vid
Chris to be honest I dont quite get where you are coming from. Yes one or two village grounds will use a high clay soil above 33% but the majority use the easier to handle and maintain lower clay content soils under 30%. These different quality soils are readily available from many suppliers who spend a lot of time and money making sure that what they claim is true. There are a few who dont and are unlikely to bother, it is not always obvious which ones these are as quite often they have taken over a reputable supplier.
Soil is mineral in nature but is made up of a complex mix of many minerals not just one - no 2 loams from 2 different areas will be identical, similar yes, but not identical. It is up to us as consumers to ask for details, I am not aware of any specific definition of any of the generic names - Surrey for instance is supplied by almost all suppliers here in the south but is produced by several large producers, their products contain anywhere from 25% clay to 33% clay depending on which company you ask, all of them call the loam 'Surrey'. Chris Woods found that what was claimed was as often as not - not what was in the bag, so beware and check.
The cost of importing soil from Mediterranean sites would be colossal and I have never heard of anyone doing so or needing to do so. Within a few miles of each other in this country I have walked over fields that have near pure sand consitency, near pure peat, good cricket loam, or 50% clay all of them supporting healthy crops or plant life. The only reason these arent used in our industry is demand, there is no problem with supply.
Also Chris the second time out part of this thread is very sound - I dont think you will convince cricketers but the second days play is often the most consistent on a well managed cricket square. Once they have been rested and renovated then brought back in later in the season they quite often produce much more bounce because of the extra consolidation, the roots themselves are not a necessary part of 'bounce' itself only the means to help achieve it.
There are indeed many clubs that have pop-up systems to water their squares and I know that Sussex are thinking about watering their square and entire outfield with pop-ups due to its easily droughted nature. This is however not very good for pitch preparation due to the uneven coverage, especially in wind.
I also think that the move towards larger leafed plants would be a backward step for a cricket square. My entire time interested in groundsmanship has seen a steady progression toward stronger yet finer grass plants, to go back to the 'horror' age of cultivars such as 'sprinter' and 'score' where given the chance the ryegrass would produce large thick procumbent tufts of very coarse grass stems fills my night with nightmares!!(I know I should get out more!!)
It was also mentioned elsewhere that AMG is a good substitute - as an infill amongst good strongly rooted grasses I would agree, but on its own or as an established mature plant AMG has little or no resistance to wear and dislodges easily - probably the biggest cause of 'popping' in the game.
I am sure the ECB would be more than happy if we could switch to high clay content soils similar to those employed in hot countries. However we are a temperate climate where the sun is not strong enough to produce the baking required on a regular enough basis.
Mention was made above to poor quality product delivered.
I've been moving bags today before dressing in the next two days. At least one bag feels like it's filled with clay soup and several others feel very wet.
What do you guys do with todays expensive bags of loam when they are clearly not fit for purpose? At over £5 a shout, can we afford to just grin and bare it?
The ciderman rolls
I wouldn't grin and bare it, Jon, you might get arrested!
I have dealt with tons of both Kaloam and Surrey in the past fortnight on a dozen different squares and have come across just a handful of poor quality bags of the former (hard lumps amongst) in hundreds.
The Kaloam has definitely been drier this year allowing spreading using the barrow and drop spreader to flow quite evenly. Last year it was frequently compacting and sticking making it hard work.
The odd bag can be used in holes in the outfield (rabbits, footballers and other pests) rather than be completely wasted.
Proud to serve grassroots cricket
26 Sep 2009 by Mike
Jon, I had a similar experience earlier this year - very annoying when this happens!
Your first port of call should be to your supplier/rep. If you receive a product that is unfit for purpose, then the onus is on your supplier to rectify the situation, at no cost to you.
26 Sep 2009 by Mal Last edited 26 Sep 2009
I have had the odd occasional bag in the past when I used to buy bagged products but used to put them aside for use in my foothole repairs during the next season as it dosn't realy matter that the soil is moist.
Geography is everywhere
Vic and gentlemen, apologies for my absence, daylight hours have all been spent renovating whilst night time after the guys and kit is all dropped off have been recovery period!
A very big subject indeed and more than can be coped with in one post, many good points made already, but consider not in any particular order:
1. Thatch
2. Rootbreaks
3. Layering
4. Moisture management
5. Rolling regimes
Each of these or combinations thereof either produce first rate pitches or through their mismanagement conspire to produce low and slow tracks.
Thatch in a profile is deadly for bounce and is not always dealt with well. Use of pedestrian scarifiers is virtually useless as they will bounce/not penetrate sufficiently, deep scarification isn't always carried out to Mario's patented guidelines for effectiveness, ergo problems with bounce being augmented year on year.
Rootbreaks and layering may seem like the same but can come from totally different causes. Where two different loams have not been integrated and prove incompatible then the p[roblem is obvious with sideways roots. Layering can also be historic with marl usage, and incorrebt top dressing methods can lead to similar problems if the soil is not worked in.
Moisture management is terrficially difficult for recreational cricket for time and resource reasons. Even if you have the covers and sheeting, they have to be used correctly and at different times of the day and night to be effective, always a challenge for the volunteer. Half of the problems we come across are down to faulty application of perfectly viable equipment in the pitch covering genre.
Rolling regimes have been well covered by the Cranfield report and many clubs have benefitted from its findings. All too many however are still making the same old mistakes which intelligent reading and use of the appropriate sections would help to make life simpler and more cricket useful.
The qualioty of different loams is an enormous subject and one into which we put a lot of effort in order to be abreast of the current state of supply at any one time. There are some interesting findings for sure but at £40/£50 per independent sample test to simply grade out a soil, plus much more if you need nutrient/strength/pH testing proves a little prohibitive to be as exhaustive as would be preferred. Perhaps we could persuade Mr. Wood to conduct a 'Watchdog/Which' type enquiry into the real truth about cricket soils?
Apologies for my absence Vic and everyone, but keep up the good work, I'm back off to renovate now the sun is up!
The light at the end of the tunnel is not a train
I am not suggesting using cricket soil with more than 30% clay content on UK cricket blocks. Far from it. They would never dry sufficiently in that climate.
What needs to be addressed is that many soils have clay content far below this. Particularly the 'Surrey' loams that I have used in the past. When tested we were getting readings between 18-24%. The lower readings were more common. Hence when you carry out major renovations, the blocks take a long time to re-settle.
In Aus & NZ where the clay content is always above 50%, sometimes as high as 80%, the blocks re-settle & re-consolidate very easily.
This is illustrated every year when we fully remove the organic matter on top, then 'rip' the soil below down to around 4 inches, never less than 2 inches to break up any layering and resulting root breaks. 5 to 6 months later these blocks are hard ready for play.
Because the cricket soil in the UK is fairly poor, it discourages clubs from carrying out heavier & more regular renovations resulting in slower & lower pitches.
Also, this work can be expensive, so it helps when the councils in Aus & NZ pick up the bill!
That's what the ECB are gradually being made aware of, not just the need for better quality soil...
Back to Top - Go to Next Unread Message
This Message is closed, you may not post a reply at this time
