The lack of competitiveness of Test teams away from home

[srbhkshk]

What are the columns of that table?

There are headers man :P

Home record btw.

 

[Daemon]

It's the margins that teams are losing by that is particularly apalling.

Teams are also losing in Bangladesh now lol.

Pakistan's 2-2 and Australia's competitive display in India have balanced things somewhat though imo.

 

[Spark]

Definitely seems to backup Furball's point that the lack of draws is a big contributor. The win/loss ratio seems to have hovered around the same mark for several decades, but the number of draws has plummeted. But even then, that's on the touring sides: the ability to hold on in tough conditions for a draw is an enormously underrated skill, I'd reckon that the vast majority of significant away series wins over the last decade or two have involved the away team holding a game that they were behind in.

 

[vcs]

There are headers man :P

Home record btw.

Ok, now I get it, cumulative home record.

Took a worryingly large amount of time.

 

[vcs]

Definitely seems to backup Furball's point that the lack of draws is a big contributor. The win/loss ratio seems to have hovered around the same mark for several decades, but the number of draws has plummeted. But even then, that's on the touring sides: the ability to hold on in tough conditions for a draw is an enormously underrated skill, I'd reckon that the vast majority of significant away series wins over the last decade or two have involved the away team holding a game that they were behind in.

Yeah, there's no team right now that I'd back to bat out 80 overs on day 5, leave alone pulling off a 4 session blocking job, which SA were quite good at when they had their unbeaten away run going.

 

[Spark]

Yeah, there's no team right now that I'd back to bat out 80 overs on day 5, leave alone pulling off a 4 session blocking job, which SA were quite good at when they had their unbeaten away run going.

In fairness, when we did at Ranchi I thought we were odds on to win the series after that. So frustrating that we threw away wickets to Kuldeep Yadav on Day 1 in the final Test.

 

[Furball]

Has anyone mentioned how having games so close to each other in the schedule, without tour games in between, means team's have less time after a loss to adjust and adapt before the next game?

I feel this is a big issue. Not only do they have to hit the ground running, but if they stumble they don't have the time to catch themselves and regroup.

Yes.

 

[Furball]

That’s a very good point. There’s just no room for tour games these days.

It's not just a lack of room for tour games, it's a lack of room for anything.

Typical schedule has day 5 of the first Test being on say, a Monday. You spend the Tuesday flying to the next venue. Wednesday and Thursday you get a wee bit of practice in and then the 2nd Test starts on Friday. Now if you're a batsman who's maybe had a wee technical glitch exposed, when do you actually get the time to iron that out? People might point out that there's 2 days worth of practice time in my example, but then you also have no opportunity to get a rest and mentally switch off from the tour for a couple of days and clear your head.

 

[S.Kennedy]

View attachment 23850

Is there an away one?

 

[Furball]

Definitely seems to backup Furball's point that the lack of draws is a big contributor. The win/loss ratio seems to have hovered around the same mark for several decades, but the number of draws has plummeted. But even then, that's on the touring sides: the ability to hold on in tough conditions for a draw is an enormously underrated skill, I'd reckon that the vast majority of significant away series wins over the last decade or two have involved the away team holding a game that they were behind in.

I don't think it's necessarily a lack of being able to hold on, the game just moves faster now. England in the last 12 months have lost 3 Tests by an innings despite scoring 400+ batting first. Back in the 60s scoring 400 first up would probably take you at least 2 days and make a draw almost nailed on. Now 400 in 4 sessions is easily doable which leaves so much more time in the game for teams to force a win.

 

[GotSpin]

In fairness, when we did at Ranchi I thought we were odds on to win the series after that. So frustrating that we threw away wickets to Kuldeep Yadav on Day 1 in the final Test.

What a series JFC

 

[vcs]

Is there an away one?

Just need to switch the Won and Lost columns.

EDIT : How about neutral venue Tests? I would count UAE as home for Pakistan from 2009 onwards.

 

[Spark]

I don't think it's necessarily a lack of being able to hold on, the game just moves faster now. England in the last 12 months have lost 3 Tests by an innings despite scoring 400+ batting first. Back in the 60s scoring 400 first up would probably take you at least 2 days and make a draw almost nailed on. Now 400 in 4 sessions is easily doable which leaves so much more time in the game for teams to force a win.

Which makes the ability to hold games for draws all the more vital.

 

[SeamUp]

Just need to switch the Won and Lost columns.

EDIT : How about neutral venue Tests? I would count UAE as home for Pakistan from 2009 onwards.

Besides that Aus v Pak in England.

I wonder where the tri test series between Eng, Aus and Saf would count.

 

[SeamUp]

Which makes the ability to hold games for draws all the more vital.

I think draws aren't looked upon as a 'success'. Not that they ever were but away teams certainly would try make it harder for home teams - you got to get me out attitude.

Collapses to spin, seam, swing or bounce just seems to not be stopped maybe because of the attitude of teams now.

 

[Spark]

I think draws aren't looked upon as a 'success'. Not that they ever were but away teams certainly would try make it harder for home teams - you got to get me out attitude.

Collapses to spin, seam, swing or bounce just seems to not be stopped maybe because of the attitude of teams now.

Which is mad because you think of some of the most team-lifting results over the last few years, so many of them have been draws.

 

[S.Kennedy]

Just need to switch the Won and Lost columns.

EDIT : How about neutral venue Tests? I would count UAE as home for Pakistan from 2009 onwards.

Of course. Silly me.

So from that I can see that,

- Number of wins at their highest ever by 5%

- since 2000 the number of home losses has jumped-up by around 6% from what it had been since basically the 60s although interestingly it had been this way before (1930s, 1950s) and far worse in the 1910s (when there was hardly any draws). Maybe we should discount the golden age or even the sticky wicket era in toto?

- Number of draws at their lowest since 1910-1919 (which does seem a bit of a freak decade).

 

[cnerd123]

I think something must be said about the way sides and players are coached in the modern day too. A lot of it now is about executing particular set skills and game plans, so much so that I think it may be taking away from the players ability to adapt and improvise on the field.

What this means is that if a team's plans don't work, they're more prone to giving up and just accepting the loss. This links up to the issue with tight schedules - you don't have much rest between games, so instead of exerting mental and emotional resources to salvage a losing cause, they just switch off, go through the motions, and get ready to show up to the next game and hopefully execute better plans or execute the same plans better. This means more drastic one-sided losses and less draws (and why salvaging a draw or win from behind is such a big confidence boost to modern sides)

Now obviously I haven't actually been in the dressing rooms or coaching sessions of any Test teams, so all this might be BS, but it's the impression I've been getting over the last few years.

 

[Spark]

I think something must be said about the way sides and players are coached in the modern day too. A lot of it now is about executing particular set skills and game plans, so much so that I think it may be taking away from the players ability to adapt and improvise on the field.

What this means is that if a team's plans don't work, they're more prone to giving up and just accepting the loss. This links up to the issue with tight schedules - you don't have much rest between games, so instead of exerting mental and emotional resources to salvage a losing cause, they just switch off, go through the motions, and get ready to show up to the next game and hopefully execute better plans or execute the same plans better. This means more drastic one-sided losses and less draws (and why salvaging a draw or win from behind is such a big confidence boost to modern sides)

Now obviously I haven't actually been in the dressing rooms or coaching sessions of any Test teams, so all this might be BS, but it's the impression I've been getting over the last few years.

IMO this has been a big problem with the English and Australian teams in particular. Way overcoached to play a certain way and execute certain plans, hopeless at adapting to new and unusual/extreme conditions. It's the main thing I hope Smith as captain imbues in the Australian team.

 

[Furball]

IMO this has been a big problem with the English and Australian teams in particular. Way overcoached to play a certain way and execute certain plans, hopeless at adapting to new and unusual/extreme conditions. It's the main thing I hope Smith as captain imbues in the Australian team.

Probably not a coincidence that they're the two teams with the most consistently insane schedules.