ankitj
Hall of Fame Member
Now that test cricket has returned to Pakistan, yes
-
Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.
You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.
Averaging 35 will be accepted again
- Thread starter Flem274*
- Start date
CricAddict
Cricketer Of The Year
It looked like we had a century drought for some time now. But with the Pak series and this eng-wi test and Jadeja 175, the big scores seem to be back again.
honestbharani
Whatever it takes!!!
You gotta wonder if the WTC is making the boards go back to some of those CEO pitches again. PCB clearly seemed to have prioritized not losing to Australia than beating them. But in the Windies, it seems more natural that the pitches have slowed there, but again I am wondering if they wanted to ensure they did not give anything that can be capitalized by the opposition attack.
_00_deathscar
International Regular
The fact that it was a dumb theory doesn't help that theory.
Not if you want to use a two week stretch to override a decade long trend.
Or Blackwood? Who mightve scored a ton here but mowed his 3rd ball across the line in one of the filthiest slogs of all time.
Incidentally, Braithwaite fits my theory perfectly.
Daemon
Request Your Custom Title Now!
Meh I think the single biggest factor is friendlier pitches. It dwarfs everything else.
The rest of the stuff like D/N games, better depth in bowling lineups, T20 effect etc has an impact sure but to varying degrees that are often situation/player/team specific and not always applicable.
Ok, that's cool. You've got an opinion, so do I, so do others. By friendly, do you mean friendlier for bowlers which is why the batting averages are down? And that's happened across the world in the last few years, where it wasn't before that?
Of the dominant Test players in the last 4 years (who average over 45) only two - Marnus and Rizwan- are in their 20s. I excluded Latham because his record is absolutely hopeless v the top six nations. 11 others are in their 30s and I've said previously, the vast majority started their FC careers before or around 2008 when franchise cricket took off.
Now, I'm sure there's people who will say 'well duh, more experienced batsmen will do better than 20 something year olds'. I haven't looked back in time, but I would wager if you looked back at the so called golden periods for batting, there'd be plenty of guys in their mid to late 20s averaging high numbers. Now there's **** all. I've articulated, with reasoning and stats to back it up, why I believe that is. I'm not saying I'm right. No one can really be 'right'.
But if in 10 years, the trend continues and those 20 something year olds are still averaging low 40s & high 30s, and the batting statistics across the board continue to be barren, then I'd reckon I've got a point. Again, hard to absolutely quantify given the variables of pitches, quality of bowlers etc. But I reckon the thread title is right, and that will continue to be born out because techniques just ain't as good as they used to be, nor is the ability to build an innings etc.
cnerd123
likes this
The flat pitches we've had in Pak and West Indies should have really seen more 500 or 600+ scores with more big hundreds. Pakistan imploded for 100 a/o in one of the innings. The batters did manage to score runs but you expect that on those pitches from international batsmen of any technique - even Afridi averaged 37 on these sorts of pitches.
The players involved matter too. A lot of runs scored by guys who have given up on T20s (Braithwaite, Azhar Ali, Khawaja, etc) while Babar Azam's weakest format is probably T20s.
T20s very much a factor, but not the only factor. If pitches remained consistent throughout the emergene of T20s I think we'd still see averages drop a bit across the board. The severe drop we've had has a lot to do with the pitches as well. Hope we're not seeing an overcorrection with dead tracks making a return. It's boring.
The players involved matter too. A lot of runs scored by guys who have given up on T20s (Braithwaite, Azhar Ali, Khawaja, etc) while Babar Azam's weakest format is probably T20s.
T20s very much a factor, but not the only factor. If pitches remained consistent throughout the emergene of T20s I think we'd still see averages drop a bit across the board. The severe drop we've had has a lot to do with the pitches as well. Hope we're not seeing an overcorrection with dead tracks making a return. It's boring.
CricAddict
Cricketer Of The Year
500, 400, 250,250 tests will be good. 1400 runs over 5 days with a result.
honestbharani
Whatever it takes!!!
The thing about the really good players who play both T20 and tests, is that it gives these players a way to score big runs quickly once they are set, irrespective of conditions. It is the reason, for instance, you saw those blistering 200s from Stokes and Holder. So while the consistency will take a hit, as long as they get decent conditions, the T20 gen should be able to make a lot of runs when they are set and in.
Flem274*
123/5
Cricket is more environmentally controlled than anyone wants to admit. The 80s and 90s had some very spicy decks, so like 4 blokes averaged 50 and a handful averaged 40. The CEO era had homogenised roads, so something like 18 players averaged 50 and even more over 40. The current era has seen a return to result oriented cricket and the WTC gives extra incentive to maintain dominant home performances, so we're back to a handful of guys averaging 50.
I've chucked random youtube 80s and 90s cricket on just for something to watch and there are plenty of dubious techniques and whatever. The pitch almost always plays the most significant hand in dictating the performance of the median test player and therefore the match result, but that doesn't suit the narrative sport sells that it's all about the players.
I've chucked random youtube 80s and 90s cricket on just for something to watch and there are plenty of dubious techniques and whatever. The pitch almost always plays the most significant hand in dictating the performance of the median test player and therefore the match result, but that doesn't suit the narrative sport sells that it's all about the players.
trundler
Request Your Custom Title Now!
The best test batsmen in the world are Joe Root (ODI ATG, doesn't play T20s but is good at them), Marnus Labuschagne (very much part of the T20 gen), Babar Azam (has a ton in all 3 formats and is ranked in the top 10 in each ffs). Then you have Pant, Rohit and Rizwan. Karunaratne is the only test specialist in there. Azhar Ali won Pakistan a champions trophy too. Did you seriously try to pass off Babar Azam as someone who isn't good at T20s?
Given you've said there was a CEO era, why wouldn't there be now? Is there more financial incentive to win the WTC/make the final than there is to maximise TV revenue like was the case previously?
And you're right, dodgy techniques have always been around. However, I'd argue there's more kinks in them now, and the mindset to bat time has eroded too. Look at Andrew Jones. His technique was all over the show but he averaged 44 at Test level. He knew how to bat time, how to leave well etc. He debuted at 28 too, took all that time to learn his craft in the long version. That'll never happen now.
Last edited:
cnerd123
likes this
Didn't Babar stink it up in the latest PSL?The best test batsmen in the world are Joe Root (ODI ATG, doesn't play T20s but is good at them), Marnus Labuschagne (very much part of the T20 gen), Babar Azam (has a ton in all 3 formats and is ranked in the top 10 in each ffs). Then you have Pant, Rohit and Rizwan. Karunaratne is the only test specialist in there. Azhar Ali won Pakistan a champions trophy too. Did you seriously try to pass off Babar Azam as someone who isn't good at T20s?
Azhar Ali doesn't play T20s, no one's blaming ODI cricket - that ship sailed in the 90s. Marnus is part of T20 gen but also seems to have given up the format entirely.
I don't think the 'damage', so to speak, for T20 cricket is irreversible. Just that if you're trying to be one of the best in T20s your technique naturally has to adjust to the format, and constantly swapping between the formats is bound to lead to flaws seeping in. A youngster bred on T20s/limited overs cricket could still be a good Test batter but they really need to throw their lot in with it full time and cut down/eliminate T20s from their schedule. And I think that's what we're seeing now as well. Teams gradually moving away from multi format players and towards specialists.
Well he went from 554 runs, avg 69.25 SR 132.53 to 343 runs, avg 38.11 SR 118.68. He's had some prior runs with decent success though so it's not like he's bad (more Kohli-esque) than anything. And in internationals he's been good.
Yeah, waiting for this T20 ship to sail soon as well.
It's always damage to this or that from T20s to Tests. Never really see anything beyond brief murmurs on how T20s benefited Test cricket. At some point one has to wonder why this keeps happening.