Having a controlled and varied bowling attack with a spinner probably helps.

Our attack has been seamer heavy with little variation and too many fourballs taking off the pressure (except when Andy C was bowling in his pomp) for some years.

Good bowlers don't seem to have that much trouble. Johnson on form, Caddick, Ahmed, Warne, Onions plus the 'odd' bit bowler who offered something a little less ordinary or someone like Willoughby the lefty who comes from somewhere a little different. They've all made Taunton work for them.

The dirt used I'm sure helps but you have to bowl wicket taking balls to have any chance at all and we simply don't bowl enough of them. Nor do other sides in anything like sufficient quantity acrss their whole attack - except Durham

---

I agree our bowling has been indifferent much of the time and good practioners like Willoughby and Onions can deliver.

However opposition bowlers have on the whole struggled too and I'm not sure there's evidence bowling as a whole has become weaker as a whole across the CC.

What we do have is a series of changes that margely mitigate against bowlers; flatter pitches, bigger bats, faster and smaller outfields.

Taken together they amount to a significant change. We see it more at Taunton because of the extreme nature the geographical conditions tied to indifferent bowling.

To class bowlers like Garner, Caddick, Mushtaq, Johnson (sometimes) will take wickets whatever the conditions.

But how, for example, would players like Colin Dredge, Matty Bulbeck, Neil Mallender, Graham Rose or the Steffan Jones of 2001 have fared on the Taunton pitches of 2009?

Well they might have done better than Phillips, Trego or Thomas but how much? I think they would have struggled a bit with the less helpful conditions.

The people who could really tell us why Taunton's become harder to bowl at are the players and ntheir insights along with groundstaff would be fascinating..

Oh I think you'd have problems backing up that "bowling hasn't got worse" point KT. In fact your premis about bat friendly pitches stands on the demoralisation of the bowling fraternity doesn't it?

We'll never know how bowlers in their pomp would bowl on wickets later on. The Steffan of 2001/2 fared worse than the one who returned in 2007 didn't he? The 2009 version was 7 years older and a little less edgy because of it. Graham Rose would have taken wickets anywhere as well. Matt Bulbeck never became the finished article and is a poor example of a bowler of quality - he simply never got there.

You have little or no factual basis for this affecting Taunton more than any other county (unless you pick Durham of course) - except your own bias in this particular area. I don't understand the geographical reference - is this a new slant on an old argument?

Other sides contributed to draws at Taunton in 2009 because of the poor value of their bowling. Warwickshire, Hampshire, Notts and Northants were all guilty of this.

---

Grockle, what's the evidence for implied assertion that bowling in the CC has got worse overall?

Of course we'll never know how the bowlers in the past would have got on today.

Our bowling attack now is undeniably weaker than in 2001 say.

But the figures show a significant rise in batting totals at Taunton both for us and the opposition, that's leading to a large number of drawn games.

Is Marcus a better batsman than he was then? Or is he like others benefiting from friendly conditions to plunder big scores?

It's no longer a fair contest at Taunton in the CC. We can't change bat sizes but we can change the pitch. The last groundsman wasn't willing or willing enough to change. He's gone. Now perhaps our long suffering bowlers will fget the help they need.

Your last sentence needs deleting; I would say it could be libellous.

Where is your evidence to back it up?

Well the dearth of bowlers of long term quality coming into the England setup may be one indicator (unless they play for Durham). Your Taunton blinkers seem to stop you from seeing the developments across the board and Taunton's only marginal difference from pitches elsewhere.

I'll say it again. Large totals are not the only reason for draws...getting 2 and a half days out of four also helps.

Not every game has large totals
Not every game is a draw
Not every side is full of wonderful players producing top class performances

Marcus Trescothick is a much much better batsman now than he was in 2001. He is a world class player of the game and he's developed into that.

He's not the only quality batsman we have in the side now. We now have a much better top order than in 2000 and they fire as a side more often at home and away.

And every now and again you dump some more blame on the groundsman while lording pitch expertise on a captain who was liable to change his tactics and team on the morning of a game and a member of the cricketing committee whose opinions on the pitch were pronounced from hundreds of miles away at a Test Match doing his other job.

You have no factual data on Phil's willingness to do the job he was paid for. In fact if anything the facts show that he did what he was told wherever possible and he himself identified time working on the pitch as his main problem in producing what was required.

It's all to do with water with you isn't it KT and 'rock hardness' - you keep bringing this up. Well I've personally seen PF watering the pitch on many occasions...maybe he was doing that to spite the management he alledgedly refused to co-operate with enough in your eyes!!

---

"It's no longer a fair contest at Taunton in the CC. We can't change bat sizes but we can change the pitch. The last groundsman wasn't willing or willing enough to change. He's gone. Now perhaps our long suffering bowlers will fget the help they need."

Is that a fair or correct thing to be saying when you have no evidence?
I think Mike and Grockle are spot on.

---

Trego for England

And our long suffering bowlers are getting the help they need. The coaches are teaching them to bowl a consistent line, onsistent length and to restrict the number of long hop half volleys they present to batsmen on a bat friendly surface. You mention Graham Rose as one of the many who seem to have had a golden age at the start of this century on the home strip.

Oh for his level of consistency in some of our bowlers now. He'd keep the score down and he'd take wickets on this because he know how to bowl on it. It's a shame you can't get that kind of reasoning into your head.

Rather than manipulating the surface to make a medoicre bowler look international class why not buy/develop classy bowlers and let them do the business wherever and whenever we play?

Along the lines of those you mention in the glory days. Jamie Grove, Jason Kerr, Adrian Pierson, Ian Jones, Joe Tucker, Kevin Shine, Ben Trott, Paul Jarvis and even Andre

All of whom played phenomenally well on that surface of far superior quality (?) produced by Mr Frost I do believe.

---

would KT like to explain to us why Somerset have NEVER won the CC.Even with the likes of Alley,Wellard,J.White,Botham,Richards,Garner,ROSE,All prior to Phil Frost being the groundsman. KT obviously believes the groundsman has more importance than the players.PF should feel flatered that KT brings him into every topic on grockles.

flattered, was not the word I heard uttered.

It was more like

Whatever the word is mike I doubt he was paid a players salary.

Perhaps I've missed it but how heavy is a heavy roller? and come to think of it how heavy is a light roller?

Also how many rollers are you allowed to have. For example you have, say, three - 30 ton, 25 ton and 10 ton. So if you really wanted the benefit of a heavyish roller you could use 25 ton AFTER the start of the match! I may be out of order of course if the weights are pacifically laid down.
OLDBOYBA

We did have two heavy roller at one time I can’t remember the weight, one of them had building blocks on the back to make it heavier.

I would say the definition between the light/small and heavy/larger roller is the small can be pulled by one person, and heavy has an engine.

I can't find any definition on either the ECB or lords.org sites os what constitutes a "heavy" roller.

I have found it FE,

Extract from the rules.

10.1 Law 10.1(c) is replaced by:
A roller heavier than 254kg may not be used after the
commencement of the match.

Thanks Mike. Quarter of a tonne isn't much at all, is it.

No, it can only be the roller with a handle that one person uses.

Thanks Mike BOS

Afterthought - now we know what is the max weight of roller allowed - a money making scheme - suggest to SCCC that they install a weighbridge which could be used for a thousand commerical purposes and bring in some useful pennies!

OLDBOYBA