All the same, given that excluding Bangladesh would take, what, zero effort? Would it not be worth doing?
I don't think it would give better data.
Makes sense.
exactly, you'd have to be really good or accurate to be playing when you are in your mid thirties, but because there is so much rubbish bowlers in their twenties the good bowlers economy rates are brought down by those who are especially bad. However, when in the thirties it is proboble that the bowler would have to be extremely accurate or get decent swing to get in the side as he is hardly going to get picked on pace.
Why not? Test cricket would be most accurately reflected in no Bangladesh game had Test status, so therefore I think any data will be better without their inclusion.
Bangladeshi bowlers are not immune from relative decline as they age. This deals with relative decline in performance. If I were measuring absolute averages to judge something, I'd keep them out. As it is, the higher the sample size, the better.
Yea, ideally, I'd like to include FC cricket too (all professional FC leagues at least, so lack of money is not a major factor in retirement).Hmm, well in that case, you should do it for all bowlers at all levels.
(Yeah, I know - there's no tool that lets you do that at levels other than I$C$C-recognised Tests)
Indian FC players are now paid very well, and can lead comfortable lives while playing cricket. It was not the case until recently though.
Yea, while I'd love to get data for those countries too, I'm would wary of trusting it to provide accurate information about this topic, as the prospect of enduring pain for more years when you have no chance of making it to the national level and not making enough to live comfortably is not a great one. Most people's career begins at 30, when they start making very good money, and that's when cricketers are tapering off, so it's very hard to keep going as much as you normally would. And completely understandably too.
Just thought I'd dig this up now we're a test and two-fifths into the South African tour. Brett doesn't seem to have backed up his encouraging New Zealand form, so are we now seeing a player whose career is starting to circle the drain? As Dizzy showed in 2005 when the end does come it can be swift and brutal.
I'm sure Lee would take the way Dizzy went out, regardless.
Would not suprise me tbh, Lee is already two years older than Gillespie was when his sudden decline kicked in during 2005. And Lee is and always has been far more reliant on pace than most, I know he has an excellent wrist position and is well capable of swinging the ball, however he has never done it that consistently and with conditions as they are in most countries around the world nowdays you arent always going to be swinging the ball. If he looses just a little bit more zip and we see him averaging in the 135-142kph bracket, then I fear it may be curtains, because he has never had outstanding control, nor does he have the trajectory to be a threat on flat wickets at that pace, he's just too skiddy and flat and he'll be cannon-fodder.
Yeah, it's certainly now possible to contemplate the possibility that the last of Lee of any note or use (as well as the first...) was seen in 2007/08. So far in 2008/09 he's averaged just under 50, almost all of which owes to that one game at Adelaide Oval. In the other 7 he's averaged just under 70.
), given his injury history, he can't have that much left. Hard to imagine him declining as a bowler, never ever want to see that happen.