Reverse Scoreboard Pressure

The concept of scoreboard pressure is one that has drifted around the environs of cricket for a good few seasons. In its most simplest of terms, scoreboard pressure occurs when Team A bats first on a batting friendly wicket, achieves a significantly high score (usually in excess of 500) and then, more often than not, declares. Team B, despite the wicket remaining particularly friendly for batting, struggles under the weight of pressure exerted by the high first innings score (and the vertiginous follow-on target) and can only muster a modest response.

   In theory, such an occurrence should not take place as the batters from Team B should possess enough skill and playing nous to take advantage of the batting friendly conditions but sport, particularly at the highest levels, is often dictated by the capricious nature of what takes place between the respective ears of those tasked with performing. Hence why scoreboard pressure remains a viable proposition in modern day red ball cricket.

   Recent times have perhaps witnessed an alternative scoreboard pressure developing though. In this instance, Team A is bowled out for a particularly low score on a pitch that is supposedly conducive to bowling. Said occurrence is particularly relevant if the captain from Team B has won the toss and elected to bowl. Upon returning to the field post the ten minute break in innings, is there now added pressure on the bowling attack of Team A to replicate the performance of their equivalents from Team B? In reality, the bowlers of Team A should be relieved of any pressure due to the failings of the batters but is there now an expectation for them to skittle out the batters of Team B in the same manner? Particularly if the pitch has proved more favourable to the bowlers as opposed to the batters.  

   On the opening morning of the County Championship match between Hampshire and Essex at the Ageas Bowl, visiting skipper Tom Westley invites the hosts to bat first on a potentially bowling conducive wicket. Jamie Porter, arms pumping akin to pistons, claims a trio of early wickets as he and Sam Cook expertly utilise the conditions. Hampshire subside to 72-6 at lunch and lose two further wickets, both to Porter, within a dozen minutes of the restart. Almost inevitably, Simon Harmer works his way through the hosts’ tail and Hampshire have mustered just 120 runs from their first innings.

   Convention dictates that focus for the failings will fall upon the batters but is there also now an expectation that Hampshire’s bowlers exploit the conditions in the same manner and replicate the bowling performance of Porter, Harmer et al? And if they are unable to match their opponent’s efforts, will the aforementioned focus shift from the batters toward the bowling unit? Such a notion first came to mind during a test match from a few summers previous when, after England had been bundled out for a low score, one commentator mooted whether England’s bowlers would be able to match the efforts of their peers.

   Hampshire’s opening duo, Mohammad Abbas and Kyle Abbott, are as proficient as any in the competition at grasping any advantage and their early efforts leave Essex’s openers struggling to connect willow to leather. Not even the redoubtable Alastair Cook, a man honed for such passages of patience and endurance, is without toil. Many a time Cook and Nick Browne play and miss, provoking thoughts of that old commentary bon mot of playing down the Bakerloo line when the ball was heading down the Northern equivalent. For a dozen overs Hampshire appear to be exploiting the conditions. Under brooding skies affected by a slow drifting bank of cloud, even the experience and technique of Cook is not enough as the erstwhile England captain feathers a delivery through to Ben Brown. ­

   Runs may have been gleaned and collected at a premium but Cook and skipper Tom Westley have at least negotiated the hosts’ frontline bowlers. In combination with Matt Critchley, Westley manoeuvres Essex through a more comfortable passage of play under azure skies and against less probing bowling. 

   Post tea Abbott and Abbas, and some handy cloud cover, return along with hopes of the status quo ante regarding the moving ball and resultant wickets. Matt Critchley bats with great control and skill though in resisting the experienced pair and the expectation of his and Michael Pepper’s demise. Not even the requirement of a change of ball, the scourge of the last two seasons, alters the narrative. On a couple of occasions, Pepper advances down the wicket to thwart any potential movement, providing an interesting moment or two for those in attendance. ­

   Essex slowly edge their way beyond the Hampshire total as the day drifts into an additional hour of play, despite a spell full of questions from John Turner that emphasises the bowling friendly atmosphere and the sense that the hosts haven’t quite utilised the conditions in the same manner as their brethren from the east of the capital. In truth, any criticism or ire should be focused on the failure of Hampshire’s batters but one cannot help but feel that there may be a pondering or two regarding the bowling unit. Thus, one could argue that the recent phenomenon of reverse scoreboard pressure has wreaked its influence.