Close menu

England v Pakistan: How do you solve a problem like bad light?

By Matthew HenryBBC Sport at the Ageas Bowl

Last updated on .From the section Cricketcomments533

The second Test between England and Pakistan at the Ageas Bowl will be remembered for one thing: the weather.

Bad light and rain ruined the match. It was the shortest Test in England since 1987, with the stoppages making a positive result impossible.

The issue of bad light forcing the players off the field - and an apparent lack of urgency from officials to get them back on it - was a major talking point throughout.

"Disgraceful" and "appalling" were two words used to describe the situation.

After all, there has been more effort to get cricket played in this coronavirus summer than ever before - and at great expense.

It is undoubtedly a bad look for the game. So what can be done about it?

Get brighter floodlights

Bad light is one of cricket's oldest problems.

In recent years, floodlights have been used to help play continue for longer but, bizarrely to outsiders, play is still halted when artificial light overpowers natural light.

BBC cricket correspondent Jonathan Agnew thinks improving floodlights is the "first place to start", while England captain Joe Root says a minimum standard of floodlight should be introduced worldwide.

"When these lights [at the Ageas Bowl] were put in, they will have been state of the art, but these things do get quickly taken over by new technology," Agnew said.

"Test grounds need the latest high-intensity floodlights and they have to get on there and play to the close using them."

Hampshire chairman Rod Bransgrove said the floodlights are "more than fit for purpose", but that he has considered "creating more wattage".

"I haven't heard any complaints directly linked to the floodlights," he said. "The issue is the response to light - and at what stage we respond to it. That seems to be the crunch point."

Be flexible with the times

On paper, the easiest step to playing more would be to alter the start time.

In England, a Test rigidly begins at 11:00 BST regardless of the weather forecast. Issues for broadcast schedules and fans' travel arrangements are often cited as reasons for this.

But on day four in Southampton - with no fans in the ground - two hours of good weather before 11:00 were wasted. Rain arrived at 12:00 and forced the players off after 10 overs. The teams were not seen again all day.

"Wouldn't it be great if they said 'we've missed cricket so tomorrow we'll start at 10:30'?" said Vaughan.

Former England women's bowler and BBC cricket presenter Isa Guha said: "In golf they look at the weather and bring the tee times forward if needed.

"Broadcasters are happy to be flexible, especially in the current situation.

"There would be an argument about the dew in English conditions, but after rain there is also a bit of moisture. Just deal with it."

Change the ball

The colour of the ball used in Test cricket is the most discussed option for solving the bad light issue. The traditional red ball is regarded as difficult to see in gloomy conditions and under floodlights.

Pink balls are used in day-night Tests and former England captain Michael Vaughan says they could be used in all Tests to allow the game to continue when light is an issue.

Test Match Special commentator Simon Mann suggests trialling using a red ball until the light fades, then swapping it for a pink ball - and switching back if the light improves.

"I know it would not be to everyone's liking but bad light should be a thing of the past," Mann said.

"We have got to find ways of playing rather than not playing."

James Anderson and Stuart Broad, England's two leading wicket-takers, said during the second Test that they were against the idea.

Whether the pink ball is used all or some of the time, there are other problems - it behaves differently to the red ball and is often said to lose its shape and hardness more quickly.

"I don't think the pink ball is the answer," Agnew said. "The red ball is the proven model for what makes a good game of cricket."

Change the mentality

The main reason umpires stop play for bad light is because they deem it is "dangerous" to continue.

Former England spinner Phil Tufnell says, although safety is the priority, the increased use of protective equipment should allow play in gloomier conditions.

"If is gets really dark then play should stop," he said. "It is those spells where there are subtle dips - that is where you might have to just plough through.

"We are playing a dangerous game. When I went out to face Curtly Ambrose at 12:30 in the afternoon it was dangerous - and that was bright sunshine."

Bad light stops play
Play was stopped on day two shortly after Mohammad Rizwan (far right) had hit Stuart Broad through the covers for four

The umpires take a reading on the light meter and the level recorded when they first take players off is used as a benchmark for the rest of the Test.

Former England batsman Marcus Trescothick says that level should be lowered. "It seems stupid that we play day-night cricket, but when the lights come on and it's a red ball that we go off so quickly," he said.

Tufnell says it requires a change in mindset from players and umpires.

He said: "Back in the day we were playing so much cricket - one-day cricket, three-day cricket, Tests - that when you did see a bit of bad light you thought 'let's go off, I'm a little tired'.

"Nowadays with central contracts, this is the event - this is the Test match. There needs to be an attitude change - they have to be a little more up for it.

"Let's get out there and play. Just get the game on."

Impose financial penalties

Despite all the headlines for the wrong reasons over the past week, Vaughan says "until money comes in to play, I don't think anything will be done about it".

He suggests if a period of play is lost to bad light, organisers must return money paid by broadcasters to cover the Test.

"The broadcast deals are huge," Vaughan said.

"If the bosses of all TV channels who have written cheques got together and said 'if we go off for bad light we want a percentage of the money back', I would guarantee a solution would be considered very quickly."

Given how long the debate about bad light has been going on, one thing seems certain: it won't be solved any time soon.

Around the BBC iPlayer bannerAround the BBC iPlayer footer

Comments

Join the conversation

These comments are now closed.

533 comments

  • Comment posted by Dunque, at 06:42 18 Aug 2020

    I think incidents like the day there was an announcement at 11.30 (I think) that play would commence t 12.30 and that lunch would be taken at 13.30 show how idiotic the administration is.

  • Comment posted by steve, at 06:47 18 Aug 2020

    Play should start earlier, lunch and tea need to be moved to when the players are off for bad light.

    Over rate needs to have run penalties every time it drops below 15 per hour.

    This game was farcical. When the lights are on they should stay on the field, otherwise what is the point of having lights

    • Reply posted by AHugeSportFan, at 07:05 18 Aug 2020

      AHugeSportFan replied:
      Exactly! Especially with the slow over rates (which really should be being cracked down on) how is it that play can't start until 11am? Seems way more logical to get half an hour to an hour in during the morning rather than risking the 'bad light' (it's never that bad) trying to get the overs in during the evening.

  • Comment posted by davidp2957, at 07:04 18 Aug 2020

    A starting point might be to return to the old rules on light. For the vast majority of the history of cricket it was only the batsmen who were considered and the onus was on them to ask the umpires if they felt the light was too poor to 'appeal against the light'. The fielding side had to just get on with it if the batsmen were happy to continue. No light meter tyranny by the umpires!

    • Reply posted by Plantsman, at 10:39 18 Aug 2020

      Plantsman replied:
      The problem with this is the batsmen would use it to their advantage by staying on if they were winning and only go off if they wanted to avoid defeat.

  • Comment posted by Positively 4th Street, at 07:42 18 Aug 2020

    Starting test matches an hour before noon is all very quaint and traditional. However, whilst preserving the integrity of test cricket, you must also move with the times. Surely an earlier start should be considered. Starting at 9.30am or similar, would almost remove standard early evening bad light.

    Others have mentioned various options for bad light during the day, they must be considered.

    • Reply posted by Scribbler, at 07:56 18 Aug 2020

      Scribbler replied:
      Listen to the commentators. Some give fair alternatives, and some just use their seniority to basically say no. Money is one barrier, and obviously you can't just magic it out of thin air. But many ideas putforward cost little/nothing, yet still they are not being tried. It seems that entrenched ideas of entilement are perhaps bigger barriers to something being done (not just talked about).

  • Comment posted by saddletramp , at 07:06 18 Aug 2020

    Wayne
    06:41
    Start earlier in the day and play later. Timings pander to the needs of Sky where as cricket must come first.

    ?????

    SKY have a dedicated Cricket channel,why would it concern them if cricket started earlier and finished later ?

    At 7 PM in June after a rain affected day,SKY know that more people will watch live Cricket, than ex players taking repeatedly about the rain.

    • Reply posted by Blade1310, at 09:14 18 Aug 2020

      Blade1310 replied:
      Appreciate the points being made on here but not many posters are giving consideration to the 'outside influences' like the staff who work at the grounds. Yes, it may be less of an issue without crowds at present but would need some very careful thought about flexible working hours and overtime payments by a game already in financial dire straits.

  • Comment posted by Daveylee, at 06:52 18 Aug 2020

    It should be the batsmen’s call not just automatically leave the field at a certain light reading., in the last test floodlights were on and light seemed good at one stage and the umpires were far to quick to want to leave the field , I remember England finishing a game in near darkness years ago after the home team slowed the game to try and play for light ...but then it was the batsmen’s call

    • Reply posted by Timmeh, at 22:33 18 Aug 2020

      Timmeh replied:
      That's was against Pakistan in Karachi. The Pakistan fielders complained they couldn't see the ball but Steve Bucknor refused to let them get away with time wasting. Sadly there have been very few umpires with his supreme authority!

  • Comment posted by DaveG, at 06:32 18 Aug 2020

    All good points , for me the main one is be more flexible on time... with no crowds to worry about ( very sad ! ) can't see any reason not to take advantage of the "good" weather, even at very short notice

    • Reply posted by toffeeforever, at 07:10 18 Aug 2020

      toffeeforever replied:
      Timings is one obvious area to fix quickly - taking lunch an hour after a delayed start and the like is just madness. Cricket makes itself look silly at times!

  • Comment posted by unification, at 08:31 18 Aug 2020

    Re. 'Start earlier' argument. 11am starts in the UK are to allow for spectators to travel outside of peak hours to matches. Earlier starts should have been considered for this summer's matches but it isn't a solution for when fans are allowed back.

    My issue is the wasted time between inspections and starts. If you can play and the outfield is fine, get out there! No 'start in 30 mins' nonsense.

    • Reply posted by Plantsman, at 10:46 18 Aug 2020

      Plantsman replied:
      Exactly, there are 10 minutes between innings and the pitch gets rolled as well during this time so why can’t cricket be started in 10 minutes after a delay?

  • Comment posted by confuse-us, at 09:53 18 Aug 2020

    All these former players stoking the fires. Winding people up. They want 8 slips and a gully but when they were playing they were more cautious. They want reckless declarations with a lead of 8 runs but when they were playing they were more cautious. They want play in pitch darkness but when they were playing...….
    The game is fine, one freak game, calm down everybody. 3 draws in last 6 years

    • Reply posted by rememberscarborough, at 10:02 18 Aug 2020

      rememberscarborough replied:
      Too true. Mind you, if you put all these people in front of Jofra in that light they'd be running for the hills...

  • Comment posted by Dave, at 12:58 18 Aug 2020

    I played club cricket for nearly 35 years, some at top level. We played on when it was nearly dark on many occasions. Does anybody else think that Test cricket and cricketers have become far too obsessed with "safety" ? After all, they have state of the art protective gear including helmets (which I didn't use for nearly all my career)

    • Reply posted by 617 Lincoln , at 13:09 18 Aug 2020

      617 Lincoln replied:
      Here, Here, in the same boat,,often finished at 8.30 ,,

  • Comment posted by User0515022528, at 09:44 18 Aug 2020

    the middle 9.35

    There's nothing as irritating as stuck-up people like yourself trying to correct grammar and spelling on HYS's.

    Your comment is irrelevant to the Subject in discussion.

    Not everyone has had the benefit of a top education.

    Is someone's right to express their viewpoint any less allowable because they use a capital letter in the wrong place ?

    Grow up !

  • Comment posted by Salgoud, at 08:01 18 Aug 2020

    You cannot tell with light meters or the naked eye when the artificial light has "taken over the natural light" without specialist scientific instruments. So what is the point of using them if 9 times out of 10 the umpires take the players off? People pay a lot of money for test cricket, and it's not to watch an empty ground when it's perfectly fit to play. It's health and safety b...ox.

    • Reply posted by KingCo, at 08:45 18 Aug 2020

      KingCo replied:
      Perhaps the use of the third umpire who could have use of ‘specialist scientific instruments’, should be considered. He would also have the use of radar facilities to see weather rain would have a long effect on playing conditions.

  • Comment posted by Sirben135, at 07:06 18 Aug 2020

    Much though I love the traditions of test cricket it's time for an in-depth review of rules that were thought up in a different world. Start times, meal breaks and the farcical light issues need calm, logical reviews with the underlying presumption of play unless there are overwhelming reasons to stop.

  • Comment posted by User0197334037, at 12:06 18 Aug 2020

    When people get fed up of wasting their time and money on the ridiculous idiosyncrasies of a handful of decision-makers, and consequently abandon the spectacle altogether, maybe they’ll do something about it.

    Meanwhile, the youth are getting their heads turned by Fortnite, etc.

    Cricket will die if it doesn’t pull its head out of its a**$

  • Comment posted by Alan, at 07:41 18 Aug 2020

    The umpires take their lead by those who govern the game so little point blaming them.

    What is required is more modern thinking, these decision makers are wedded to the past. They should start from a principle that states that bad light is not an excuse for not playing, and then consider the alternatives available. Pitch & weather variance over 5 days has always been part of the game.

  • Comment posted by Rockin_Rog, at 12:54 18 Aug 2020

    I think that the threshold for bad light should be reduced. Play could certainly have been possible - it just simply wasn't that dark.

    Yes - there is a slight disadvantage for the batsman but its evened out by the disadvantages to the fielding side (see Graham Thorpe v Pakistan!)

    The playing conditions do not have to be perfect to play cricket.

  • Comment posted by User0489111719, at 10:18 18 Aug 2020

    What is so difficult about getting a white ball or a pink ball to behave like a red ball. They can make Smarties in eight different colours and they all taste the same. I am sure there would be more involved in making coloured cricket balls but the principle is the same.

    • Reply posted by charlieboy, at 10:21 18 Aug 2020

      charlieboy replied:
      Yes I am sure cricket balls of different colours would taste the same too.

  • Comment posted by 6060 842, at 10:17 18 Aug 2020

    In England when the weather is fine, captains/umpires flatly refuse to ensure that 90 overs a day are bowled.

    If the powers that be can't enforce that simple one then what chance additional changes?

    • Reply posted by Mr, at 10:32 18 Aug 2020

      Mr replied:
      No one has ever flatly refused you FOOL. I played for 25 years and never experienced it once! All it needs is a 9:30am start

  • Comment posted by Kenny, at 11:20 18 Aug 2020

    Cricket is run by a bunch of stuck up dinosaurs who wont change

  • Comment posted by DemocratDale, at 12:05 18 Aug 2020

    There's a deeper problem: I recently saw an episode of Pointless in which one of the clues was England test match bowler with over 500 wickets. Only 8 of the 100 people asked could name him. Ie, England's most prolific wicket taker while he is still playing. what an indictment on those who organize and administer the game and the direction in which they have taken it in recent decades.

Also in Sport

Elsewhere on the BBC

Cricket on the BBC