-
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
OK....
Improved analysis. What does that mean? Video analysis? Because that's a 21st century improvement, not via T20.
Fitness. That's got zero to go with T20. Again, 21st century.
Hitting ability. Given Test batting totals are down, can you really cite that? Or is it potentially limited to late innings hitting and setting up run chases? Has runs per over gone up in Test cricket over the last few years, and by how much?
Versality of players, what does that mean?
Variety of deliveries? The three quarter ball is probably the biggest improvement in variety, and that's not a T20 delivery. Are slower balls really a major part of Test cricket?
cnerd123
likes this
I actually think improvements in pace bowling stocks around the world can in some part be attributed to the rise in T20 cricket tbh.
A) Franchises now investing into scouting/developing quick bowlers, adding a layer above the work already done by existing cricket structures. Has been a huge factor in India, maybe no so much elsewhere
B) T20 workload and format actually suits young pacers better. At grassroots levels this means more coaches/selectors backing raw pace over someone who hit a length all day. At the professional level, lucrative T20 contracts incentives youngsters to take up fast bowling and sustain their speed, because even if their body can't handle the rigors of FC cricket there is still money to be made. More kids bowling fast eventually leads to more fast bowling talent at Test level.
T20 cricket can also be connected to the improvement in fielding standards, tho tbf ODI cricket started this trend, and fielding just generally gets better over time as cricket gets more and more professional.
Shady Slim
International Coach
can't wait for someone to say the wobble seamer never existed before like two years ago and tell on themselves
_00_deathscar
International Regular
cnerd123
likes this
Should also credit T20 keeping Wrist Spin alive, tho tbf the benefits haven't really been felt in Test level yet.
For a while it felt like Warne/Kumble would be the end of leggies at the professional level, but T20 cricket made them a hot commodity again, and now there are several who are pretty good at ODI level, but no one really who has cracked Tests. Maybe that will change in this decade.
For a while it felt like Warne/Kumble would be the end of leggies at the professional level, but T20 cricket made them a hot commodity again, and now there are several who are pretty good at ODI level, but no one really who has cracked Tests. Maybe that will change in this decade.
CricAddict
Cricketer Of The Year
Rashid Khan has a great test record too. But don't know if he can sustain it.
T20 cannibalised Test cricket, yet it's keeping it financially alive. Ahuh. I don't agree with that for a million reasons.
But are we talking quality wrist spin? Because who's a quality wicket-taking wrist spinner? As you say, none have cracked Test cricket. Who actually spins the ball nowadays? Who consistently flights the ball? I watched Swepson the other day and bemoaned this very point. Flat as a biscuit. Hardly any revs on it, apart potentially from over spin. I see Ish Sodhi as a classic example from my country. Promising young guy, very tall, used to spin it a bit as a youngster. Debuted as a youngster in Tests, was raw as hell but had a bit there...but it was never going to develop, because he was going hand-in-hand with his T20 focus. Played his last Test as a 25 year old to become a T20 franchise player and nowadays isn't even a dominant FC presence.
cnerd123
likes this
T20 wrist-spin skills perhaps don't translated as easily to Tests as T20 pace-bowling skills, but the increase in raw talent and kids bowling legspin across the globe is bound to create a test quality player or two eventually.
As noted above, Rashid Khan has put up good numbers, while guys like Swepson, Kuldeep, Crane have worked their way into the Test squads and who knows if they would have made it that far if not for the platform/opportunities provided by T20. Leggies were a rare luxury back when Warne/Kumble were at their prime, now it's become essential for every T20 franchise to have one. Several have turned into good ODI players (Chahal, Zampa, Sodhi, Kuldeep, etc), hopefully within the decade we see a few step up into Tests.
I completely agree, T20 wrist spin skills don't translate. Putting flight and rip on the ball creates inconsistencies at times (even if you are as good as Warne) and that's not desirable in T20. I hope you're right and I love the positivity, but I just don't see how quality wrist spin is going to develop unless a kid says right, bugger the T20 cash, I want to be a Test great. And why would that happen? The new generation don't have the nostalgia for Test cricket. Furthermore, how much quality wrist spin coaching is there?
Rashid is a good example but he doesn't play top tier Test cricket. Otherwise, you're churning out guys bowling flat leggies who seemingly spin their wrong-un as much as their stock delivery. It's a hellishly hard art to master anyway. But honestly, I don't think you're getting back an era with Warne, Kumble, Mushtaq, MacGill, Yasir Shah, even Kaneria/Mishra. Nowadays, your top-tier wrist spinners (Zampa, Adil Rashid, Sodhi, Kuldeep, Chahal, Shadab, Shamsi, Walsh jnr etc) not one of them is playing Test cricket.
Rashid is a good example but he doesn't play top tier Test cricket. Otherwise, you're churning out guys bowling flat leggies who seemingly spin their wrong-un as much as their stock delivery. It's a hellishly hard art to master anyway. But honestly, I don't think you're getting back an era with Warne, Kumble, Mushtaq, MacGill, Yasir Shah, even Kaneria/Mishra. Nowadays, your top-tier wrist spinners (Zampa, Adil Rashid, Sodhi, Kuldeep, Chahal, Shadab, Shamsi, Walsh jnr etc) not one of them is playing Test cricket.
_00_deathscar
International Regular
How has it done that?
The tests in the last few years have been some of the most exciting years by the way - with record viewing numbers.
I'll concede that it was more that quite a few things have developed alongside each other to help players (mainly bowlers) in Test cricket. And ultimately like Flem said there are other major factors involved that doesn't seem to be discussed much by most people here. Or at the very least to the extent T20 cricket hurting Test cricket is.
As for players being versatile, I meant more along the lines people being able to change gears and so on.
I mean it's not just the fact that people are able to vary pace/angle/etc but also that they are willing to if things call for it. Bumrah's a pretty good example of how he mixes in slower cutters with his regular deliveries, how his awkward angles trouble people and so on.
And like deathscar said, the financial reason is a massive enough reason to counterbalance the talent/skill drain that people perceive is happening with Test cricket.
cnerd123
likes this
The financial argument doesn't sit well with me either. I don't think it's that Test cricket was unprofitable, it's just that T20 makes more money, and so really the only reason it's been getting precedence over Tests is corporate greed from business-minded cricket boards.
You could debate that the excess profit from T20 gets funneled into grassroots cricket, and that in time this should lead to more people playing/watching cricket and therefore a large talent pool + audience for Tests...but at the same time you could also debate this excess profit is simply lining the pockets of CEOs, executives, administrators and broadcasters. Hard to say without actually looking at the finances. I'm skeptical.
What is clear tho is that players are getting paid a lot better thanks to T20, and so becoming a professional cricketer is more lucrative thanks to it. I don't know if this will link directly to Test cricket, but surely it's a good thing that talented young athletes might consider taking up cricket more seriously now.
You could debate that the excess profit from T20 gets funneled into grassroots cricket, and that in time this should lead to more people playing/watching cricket and therefore a large talent pool + audience for Tests...but at the same time you could also debate this excess profit is simply lining the pockets of CEOs, executives, administrators and broadcasters. Hard to say without actually looking at the finances. I'm skeptical.
What is clear tho is that players are getting paid a lot better thanks to T20, and so becoming a professional cricketer is more lucrative thanks to it. I don't know if this will link directly to Test cricket, but surely it's a good thing that talented young athletes might consider taking up cricket more seriously now.
_00_deathscar
International Regular
Most boards disagree with you.
Separately, as mentioned above, record viewing figures for (key) tests in recent years. A lot of that is down to tests becoming watchable again too though - even I lost interest for a while when teams were regularly racking up 500+ scores with lots of them ending in draws.
cnerd123
likes this
No board has actually said they lose money on Tests tho. Even NZC's statements are questionable - 16 tins of Spam said it better in the NZ/SA tour thread.
All boards make money from broadcast/sponsorship deals and they were doing that before the advent of T20 and even before the advent of ODIs. Tests obviously cost more money to run, but do they lose money? That's dubious.
By eroding the amount of Tests that are played in certain series and by certain countries. By reducing the amount of warm-up games and preparation that sides are able to play on Test tours. By the fact that players are rested for some Tests because of 'workload'. By reducing the ability of particularly batsmen (in my opinion). By ensuring players play little, if any long-form first class cricket - thus also eroding the competitions and their ability to produce good Test talent. I could go on with more time.
Fuller Pilch
Hall of Fame Member
Afghanistan need to play more tests though.