was cricket more fun in the 90's?

[Mard]

Was cricket more fun to watch in the 90's???


I really miss the battles between India and Pakistan. I remember every game use to be so important, that no body went to work during a India/Pakistan game. These days that kind of love for game is gone

 

[LA ICE-E]

'cause i read somewhere they weren't allowed to play each other for a while or something like that for political reasons and it didn't happen so often like it does now.

 

[silentstriker]

Was cricket more fun to watch in the 90's???


I really miss the battles between India and Pakistan. I remember every game use to be so important, that no body went to work during a India/Pakistan game. These days that kind of love for game is gone

India and Pakistan played only three Test matches during the entire decade of 1990s. And India were very **** throughout the nineties everywhere except home turf - so I'd say it wasn't as fun for me.

 

[Jono]

Nah, though equally I don't think cricket is categorically more fun nowadays either.

People say so because everything is generally seen as 'better back in the day', its only natural to think that. Nostalgia sometimes takes over what is the actual truth.

There were many good things about the 90s that are better nowadays, but equally some things are lacking.

I do think categorically that the elite bowlers of the 90s were better to watch than the last few years, well fast bowlers at least, so you can argue yes, and cricket probably wasn't as one-sided as its been whenever Australia played someone from 2001-2007 or so, but as I alluded to, you generally look back fondly about the good things of the past, but conveniently forget what was ****.

For AFL fans, I've often been one to say footy was better in the 90s, but I'm not so sure anymore. Like cricket, there are aspects that I miss (one on one footy, less flooding, actual contact allowed), but there are some aspects which I absolutely love of modern football (speed, half-backs running forward, better athletes).

 

[Richard]

Yes, I enjoyed cricket far more in the 1990s than any time since 2001. Doesn't mean the post-2001 stuff has been non-essential-viewing, all the same.

 

[Richard]

People say so because everything is generally seen as 'better back in the day', its only natural to think that. Nostalgia sometimes takes over what is the actual truth.

Never really agreed with that TBH. I've always been careful to separate the good memories from the good happenings. Obviously sometimes there's overlap.

I look back at much of the stuff 1991-1996 (the time I lived in the place I've always felt I was happiest in and wish we'd never left - pretty much nothing with anything to do with cricket) and there's barely a thing I look back upon without fondness. The good stuff (and there was plenty of it) remains wonderful to recall, and most of the memories of bad stuff seem "good" in their own way, because they're all part of the package, and none of it can hurt me any more.

"Better-back-in-the-day"-ism is something I despise. It basically implies that people can't think for themselves and allow the sands of time to obscure realities. I realise how things were, and of course there's bad stuff in there. But to recall it fondly isn't to forget that it was bad at the time.

 

[Sanz]

India and Pakistan played only three Test matches during the entire decade of 1990s. And India were very **** throughout the nineties everywhere except home turf - so I'd say it wasn't as fun for me.

And that one series in 90s was million times better than all India-Pak series played since. The Guy(sorry his nick is bit awkward to use is right, India-Pak games in 90s were a lot more fun, competitive and much more worth of your time and money.

Now-a-days India-Pak matches are worse than India-NZ.

 

[silentstriker]

And that one series in 90s was million times better than all India-Pak series played since.

That indeed was an epic series. But one series is not enough to make a decade.

 

[Jono]

Never really agreed with that TBH. I've always been careful to separate the good memories from the good happenings. Obviously sometimes there's overlap.

You're always an exception though Richard.

 

[sledger]

Tbh everything that happens when you were younger seems better than anything going on currently. Well, most things anyway, certainly anything sport related.

 

[Jono]

Tbh everything that happens when you were younger seems better than anything going on currently. Well, most things anyway, certainly anything sport related.

Yeah exactly.

I think the return of Gladiators here in Australia is an extremely good example. There's seriously no argument that it was actually much better in the 90s, I've looked up/seen clips, and it was pretty much similar. Yes the 2008 version is missing a large black man with dreadlocks (Vulcan ftw), but still, things are just generally better when you were younger/when it was a while ago.

I generally think you'd have a 80-90% 'yes' answer rate if you went around asking 40-50 year olds "Was cricket better in the 70s and 80s". That's just opinion of course based on experience of this issue in general, but I'm fairly confident. I bet if I asked my parents was TV better in the 80s, they'd definitely say yes.

Now sometimes in some things, sports, entertainment, movies etc. they were actually better, but not to the extent people suggest when looking back fondly.

IMO, just as there is a danger of teens/youths believing that whatever is happening in their time is automatically better (Warne best bowler ever, Tendulkar/Ponting best batsman, Judd best player ever, Geelong greatest AFL team ever, New England Patriots greatest NFL team ever etc.), there's also a danger of immediately overrating things from the past.

 

[sledger]

Yeah exactly.

I think the return of Gladiators here in Australia is an extremely good example. There's seriously no argument that it was actually much better in the 90s, I've looked up/seen clips, and it was pretty much similar. Yes the 2008 version is missing a large black man with dreadlocks (Vulcan ftw), but still, things are just generally better when you were younger/when it was a while ago.

I generally think you'd have a 80-90% 'yes' answer rate if you went around asking 40-50 year olds "Was cricket better in the 70s and 80s". That's just opinion of course based on experience of this issue in general, but I'm fairly confident. I bet if I asked my parents was TV better in the 80s, they'd definitely say yes.

Now sometimes in some things, sports, entertainment, movies etc. they were actually better, but not to the extent people suggest when looking back fondly.

IMO, just as there is a danger of teens/youths believing that whatever is happening in their time is automatically better (Warne best bowler ever, Tendulkar/Ponting best batsman, Judd best player ever, Geelong greatest AFL team ever, New England Patriots greatest NFL team ever etc.), there's also a danger of immediately overrating things from the past.

Haha they relaunched Gladiators over there as well eh?

For me personally almost every sport/film/tv show or whatever from the mid 90s up till about 2003 is better than anything since, but yet there is no logical explanation for that, as all of those examples have come a long way since the 90s in terms of quality and style etc... I guess its just down to nostalgia in most cases, though I maintain that pro wrestling in general WAS in fact better about 10 years ago than it is now, don't think i'd find many who would dispute that either.

 

[sledger]

IMO, just as there is a danger of teens/youths believing that whatever is happening in their time is automatically better (Warne best bowler ever, Tendulkar/Ponting best batsman, Judd best player ever, Geelong greatest AFL team ever, New England Patriots greatest NFL team ever etc.), there's also a danger of immediately overrating things from the past.

Cena, John.

Batista, Dave.

Levesque, Paul.

 

[Jono]

I maintain that pro wrestling in general WAS in fact better about 10 years ago than it is now, don't think i'd find many who would dispute that either.

Yeah that's indisputable really.

*plugs in tape of Bret Hart vs. Mr Perfect*

 

[sledger]

Yeah that's indisputable really.

*plugs in tape of Bret Hart vs. Mr Perfect*

Have you seen the Bret vs 1-2-3 kid match? that was pretty good I thought, one of his less well known about matches.

 

[Jono]

Yeah I have.

Who would have thought Waltman was actually good back in the day, when you consider what he was like from 2001 onwards.

"You know you're dealing with the X-Factor"

 

[Top_Cat]

Never really agreed with that TBH. I've always been careful to separate the good memories from the good happenings. Obviously sometimes there's overlap.

I look back at much of the stuff 1991-1996 (the time I lived in the place I've always felt I was happiest in and wish we'd never left - pretty much nothing with anything to do with cricket) and there's barely a thing I look back upon without fondness. The good stuff (and there was plenty of it) remains wonderful to recall, and most of the memories of bad stuff seem "good" in their own way, because they're all part of the package, and none of it can hurt me any more.

"Better-back-in-the-day"-ism is something I despise. It basically implies that people can't think for themselves and allow the sands of time to obscure realities. I realise how things were, and of course there's bad stuff in there. But to recall it fondly isn't to forget that it was bad at the time.

Psychology says you're (unintentially) lying. Your brain is always far more likely to recall good stuff than bad to judge a period of time, especially when you're in a good frame of mind whilst recalling them.

 

[tooextracool]

Cricket in the 90s was definetly more fun for me than Cricket from 2001-06/07. The problem is simply that Australia got way too dominant especially in the limited over arena. Furthermore, batting simply got better, pitches simply got flatter, and bowling essentially got worse. The rules have slowly started to favor the batsmen more and more to the point where it became an uneven contest between bat and ball.

Since 2007 of course I think we have started to see improved bowlers and pitches that offer something for the bowlers (outside of Australia). I am very optimistic about the future as I think many teams have some genuine bowling talent across the world. It is unfortunate though that there are few spin bowling gems around that are not on the verge of retirement.

 

[sledger]

Yeah I have.

Who would have thought Waltman was actually good back in the day, when you consider what he was like from 2001 onwards.

"You know you're dealing with the X-Factor"

Haha poor sod, its a wonder that someone so well connected in the industry could have a promising career turn to crap in the space of about 4 years.

Heard he tried to commit suicide a few months ago, poor sod.

 

[Craig]

At least Zimbabwe were at least competitive somewhat and New Zealand had a really good coach and potentially a top draw bowling line-up that kept falling to pieces every ten minutes and nobody had discovered Shane Bond

And of course Heath