Are modern greats simply better?

[ankitj]

Yes. Jadeja is simply better.

 

[Coronis]

Yeah but Wilt played against plumbers.

Would anyone here argue that if we took Sachin, Lara or Wasim from the early 90s to play a test tomorrow that they'd really struggle?

Yes. Bazball would make Wasim look like a discount Starc.

 

[shortpitched713]

I mean this is actually a salient point worth discussing – and in general I think we do take it into account though perhaps not as much as we should (and I would be one guilty of that too); tally up inter-war greats and 70s/80s greats and compare – but those are dumbly exagerrated numbers.

During the times I mentioned, from 1920 to 1950 to 1980, we were in a period of exponential global population growth, which is a real bitch. Add to that the growth of the game of cricket in the minds of the general public (radio, television booms), coincidentally the former of which coincided with Bradman's career. And finally the fact that the number of test nations expanded from 3 to 7 ( 8 with Sri Lanka in the early 80s ), and the numbers aren't that crazy.

Back of a napkin, per Wikipedia world population 2 billion in 1930, 3 billion in 1960, ~4.5 billion in 1980 . That makes for x1.5 for each of the roughly 30 year time periods, multiplied out to x2.25 for the 60 year period. But we also had a more than doubling of the number of Test nations, and an increase of the broadcast and awareness of the game to bigger audiences. My best guess, is something like x5 to x15 could be a reasonable number for the increase in the cricket playing population from 1920 to 1980.

All of which is to say, if we're going by some arbitrary rule of picking 1 out of a uniform number of cricketers from the beginning of cricket history (Test cricket being as good of a starting point as any) to now as being "great", then there's going to be a big skew in the number of cricketers picked towards the tail end of that history.

TL;DR: Old time cricketers get the written text space they deserve when it comes to status as pioneers and curiosities in the history of the game. But that text space vastly over-represents them in discussions of "all time greats" (barring Bradman).

 

[karan_fromthestands]

This is regarding greats in the modern period, basically mid-70s onwards, and how they compare with the pre-modern post War era. Was there an added competitive spirit and professionalism brought by the Aussies and the Packer revolution that took the quality of cricket in this era beyond the skill level of what was before? How should we compare their records and achievements then?

Are modern greats better? Yes. But the number of nations who take test cricket seriously or are good at test cricket will go down. We are kind of in a (very) slow, downward spiral right now. Not sure if it's the "BIG 3" thing or something else, but teams outside top 5 are not looking that competitive any more.

Plus T20s are money, so whether the players accept it or not, more and more youngsters will focus more on how to slog the ball and bowl defensively.

 

[_00_deathscar]

Are modern greats better? Yes. But the number of nations who take test cricket seriously or are good at test cricket will go down. We are kind of in a (very) slow, downward spiral right now. Not sure if it's the "BIG 3" thing or something else, but teams outside top 5 are not looking that competitive any more.

Plus T20s are money, so whether the players accept it or not, more and more youngsters will focus more on how to slog the ball and bowl defensively.

SA beat India at home recently
Windies beat England at home
Bangladesh drew with NZ away

And a few other similar incidents...while I agree on the whole, I'm not sure the results are all that different from previous generations.

 

[karan_fromthestands]

SA beat India at home recently
Windies beat England at home
Bangladesh drew with NZ away

And a few other similar incidents...while I agree on the whole, I'm not sure the results are all that different from previous generations.

Aren't SA in top 5?

Regarding the other teams, I said we are in a (very) slow decline. Not saying teams are completely ****, but we've had a host of T10/T20 leagues with good money coming in recently. It seems natural for more and more players to lean towards white-ball cricket, especially if there is no incentive to focus on tests. This is just a broad generalisation though, other factors like culture, infrastructure, etc. also matter in these cases.

Look at West Indies for example, how often do you see them play their best XI? Forget tests, even in white ball cricket they are not having all their players available.

 

[TheJediBrah]

SA beat India at home recently
Windies beat England at home
Bangladesh drew with NZ away

And a few other similar incidents...while I agree on the whole, I'm not sure the results are all that different from previous generations.

SENA v Asian teams is generally so home-conditions reliant though, don't think this is the best example

Even Bangaldesh can be competitive against SENA teams in Bangladesh, with the right pitch preparation

 

[Migara]

How are 70s bats with their tuk-tuk techniques better in test cricket than modern batters? In a match b/w a decent 70s team & current Eng team, 70s team would tuk-tuk its way to 400 while Eng would hack its way to 400.

We have seen how badly Cummins (70s era accurate line & length pacer) was treated in Ashes. Scoops, ramps & reverse-scoops etc messed up his 4th stump line bowling style. Starc (a modern day pacer) outperformed him.

Instead of saying modern cricketers are better than 70s cricketers, it would be better if we say skillset required is changed. Hitting is being preferred over defence & having bowling variations with accuracy is being preferred over channel bowling.
70s cricketers would struggle in current era & vice versa.

Starc some times don't know where his deliveries pitch or where they are heading. God save batsmen when that reaches them at 90mph. Premeditated batting fails more often against wild bowlers.

 

[Migara]

Yes. Bazball would make Wasim look like a discount Starc.

Some times Wasim himself did not know which way it swung, how much it dipped or when it started ot stopped swinging in the path towards the batsman. At Wasim's peak that thing comes at you 145k+. Now try to adjust to that.