Averaging 35 will be accepted again

[CricAddict]

From the fourth paragraph:

Simultaneously, there is also an argument that, despite the presence of a few top-class batters, defensive techniques have generally declined due to an excess of 20-over cricket.

Nice to at least see it acknowledged, albeit 'an argument'.

And look at the graph on bowling averages in four year periods - starts its trend down sharply from around 2008, which is when the IPL started and T20 took off with a bang.

If you look at the guys who bowled from 2007-10 (Steyn is a freak with 200 wickets at 21), the likes of Swann, Zaheer Khan, Murali, Johnson, Morkel and Anderson who averaged from 27-29 in that period, would no doubt be in the mid to low 20s from 2018 onwards. The 2007-10 played in an era with guys who honed their games on long form cricket, the guys now are bowling to guys fed on T20 dreams and Test specialists who weren't quite as good as their peers, so specialised.

It is definitely a fact and not just an argument. Many defensive batsmen are changing their game to suit to T20 and playing with a more open stance since that is where the buck is. And once they change their style, it will be very difficult for them to go back to their defensive techniques even if they get selected for tests.

The big 200s and 300s also requires strong temperament which will be difficult for the impatient T20 boomers.

 

[Starfighter]

With respect to batting temperament, batsmen don't know how to construct an innings anymore. The lack of patience is very palpable when you watch a lot of them. And it shows in their stats before they even make the test team. Why would we expect batsmen who average only 35 domestically to do better in tests, especially when conditions have gotten more bowling friendly?

 

[SteveNZ]

It is definitely a fact and not just an argument. Many defensive batsmen are changing their game to suit to T20 and playing with a more open stance since that is where the buck is. And once they change their style, it will be very difficult for them to go back to their defensive techniques even if they get selected for tests.

The big 200s and 300s also requires strong temperament which will be difficult for the impatient T20 boomers.

With respect to batting temperament, batsmen don't know how to construct an innings anymore. The lack of patience is very palpable when you watch a lot of them. And it shows in their stats before they even make the test team. Why would we expect batsmen who average only 35 domestically to do better in tests, especially when conditions have gotten more bowling friendly?

100% agreed with all of these points. Analysts and people like Jarrod Kimber probably don't like the 'T20 is one of the key factors in the regression of Test batting' because it's harder to quantify than simply saying it must be the bowling, because here's the averages and they're way down. It requires looking past that to where the downward trends in batting and bowling averages are coming (post 2008) and the fact that the guys who are averaging the most (Karunaratne, Williamson, Smith, Sharma, Kohli) all started in FC cricket before 2008.

 

[SteveNZ]

Onboard with blaming IPL

I'm not blaming the IPL. Not one percent. It's not 'blame', because I don't dislike that competition or believe it's evil. I'm just pointing out that you can track these trends in Test cricket back to 2008, and there's an obvious turning point in international cricket and the focus of earning potential in that year. I don't begrudge anyone coming up now or any international player who wants to be paid as well as they can be. So it's not blame, more so pointing out that if franchise cricket (with the IPL being the forerunner and still the big cheese of those leagues) didn't exist, Test batting would be much different.

 

[OverratedSanity]

Every time someone plays an absurd counterattacking match winning innings which have been on the rise in recent years (Stokes/Perera/Pant), everyone rightly points out that T20s have contributed to making those kind of innings possible these days. It's definitely true. But the other side is obviously that the defensive side of the game has so clearly taken a nosedive and it's frustrating to see muppets like Kimber not acknowledging it and pretend batsmen are as good as ever at every aspect of batting. When in reality on the longer format they're better in certain situations but much worse in other scenarios that call for a conservative approach.

Really not sure how people can watch top order batsmen play the moving ball these days and say with a straight face that batsmen are as good as they were before at handling it. It's nonsense imo.

 

[ankitj]

It's what has made test cricket so exciting in last few years

Onboard with blaming IPL

Wait, I'm actually crediting IPL ?

 

[SteveNZ]

Preach, Overrated, my man. I know this is me giving praise to someone because they share my views, but that is spot on. You can stare at all the statsguru columns you want, but if you park up in front of a TV screen for long enough and know a bit about the history of the game and the way it operates at certain levels, it's very clear and obvious that T20 is the greatest influence on Test batting - above any supposed revolution in bowling, the quality of Test pitches or the amount of words per minute Jarrod Kimber can bust out on a typewriter.

 

[Starfighter]

@OverratedSanity such innings have existed throughout cricket history, and largely have been played by known hitters. But you can't build a team of them. Compounding this, they don't get the chance to find a game which works in the long form, like Ken Barrington did. The whole foundations from juniors up have been affected by T20. FC averages fall as older batsmen retire so you need less to get in the national setup. Then you're on the international and franchise wheel and never develop your FC game further.

Stokes is actually an okay example, though he was of course picked as an allrounder. His non-test FC average is just 33.57. I don't know how many county games he's played since 2013, but it can't be many. Talk about his couple of brilliant innings but he just isn't dependable enough. Fill a team full of Stokeses and you'll get the situation we are in.

 

[morgieb]

The reality is batsman's ability to construct innings has been extremely dubious since before 2018. In 2015 I made this thread which was pinpointing that there seemed to be a ****load more collapses on wickets which did something. It's just that there were still a number of roads back then and a few bats from the previous generation where knowing how to build Test innings was important.

I think 2018 was the tipping point because of that MCG clash. In the 2015-17 period the batting standards weren't great but you at least had pitches that batsman could dine out on a lot of the time. Now? It's pretty rare to find a road, and by the time you do batsmen's confidence has copped a massive blow from all the spicy decks.

It'll probably correct itself somewhat eventually, but I think the age of batters at Test level is a thing of the past. And given that Test wickets tend to be far more entertaining when there's plenty in it for the bowler, is that such a bad thing?

 

[Justo]

In my opinion there's many factors but I think the lack of quality and far fewer warm up matches is definitely hurting batting averages for touring bats. England barely had any warm up games in the lead up to the recent ashes. It wouldn't have changed the outcome of the series but definitely could have helped a bit.

On top of that I suspect day night Test matches are hurting averages a notch as well. Adelaide alone will be skewing averages for Australian bats since it's gone from a 1500+ run test to probably around 1000 runs per test.

Combine that with better pitches for bowling, DRS (and generally better use of DRS these days) along with deeper bowling attacks all around and batting averages are going to suffer.

 

[Flem274*]

Those dashers who don't defend, the English cricket team.

I remember in the 00s the online idea that there were less great bowlers because the bowlers were bad, not that it was a strong batting era.

Now we're seeing the reverse argument.

Cricket is environmentally controlled to a far greater extent than any of us want to believe for a number of reasons.

If the pitches are flat, the good batsman is more likely to look great and the good bowler, bad. In an era of spicy decks, you see the opposite.

Conditions have the final say on how the game goes more often than not. Combine this with a lack of warm up games, and batsmen have it tough.

Some players transcend the environment of their time because they are true greats.

T20 is lame but people have been writing the narrative that it ruins tests since day 1 and seizing any evidence to fit the narrative. Notable T20 players suck at tests so they don't play them.

What we see now is pretty similar to the 80s and 90s but without the lack of internet and decades of nostalgia to buff its reputation.

You could argue t20 has damaged one side (WI), but they began circling the drain in 2001. T20 isn't the reason Hameed is a terrible batsman.

 

[CricAddict]

It'll probably correct itself somewhat eventually, but I think the age of batters at Test level is a thing of the past. And given that Test wickets tend to be far more entertaining when there's plenty in it for the bowler, is that such a bad thing?

Test cricket is more entertaining when there is a balance. I don`t find a test wicket more entertaining if there is plenty in it either for bowlers or for batsmen.

 

[Starfighter]

@morgieb not sure that MCG test was really the tipping point - there's cricket outside of Australia, but the embrittlement of batting was certainly becoming noticeable before then. But things have gotten a lot worse since then.

Look at Trent Bridge 2015. A classic brittle collapse. One notable thing is that when teams make a low score these days, they do so quickly rather than gritting it out. But if you look at the batting lineups - there's hardly anyone with the FC accomplishments of, say, Bell, Voges or Rogers.

Furthermore, as @Justo alludes to, warmup schedules have declined in quality and quality since even then. That's without accounting for the pitches as FC level. Anyone surprised Ollie Pope can't play spin when his home board penalises any team that makes a turning pitch?

 

[Fuller Pilch]

It requires looking past that to where the downward trends in batting and bowling averages are coming (post 2008) and the fact that the guys who are averaging the most (Karunaratne, Williamson, Smith, Sharma, Kohli) all started in FC cricket before 2008.

Marnus L started in 1st class in 2014.

 

[CricAddict]

Marnus L started in 1st class in 2014.

Yes, but he doesn`t play IPL or T20s. I can bet his average will go down once he gets selected for those. Thinking of it, BCCI should have made some IPL team select him just for that

 

[Xix2565]

The T20 argument is the same kind of argument that can be made for ODIs yet no one really suggests anymore that ODIs are affecting Test cricket batting.

 

[Justo]

IMO the biggest impact T20 has on Test batting averages are the players that have retired early or avoided long form cricket for various reasons (ABDV and Chris Lynn come to mind). TBH though I can't name too many other players who have followed this path.

 

[Starfighter]

Those dashers who don't defend, the English cricket team.

Pope, Buttler, Bairstow, Stokes, Moeen, Crawley and what have you are all on the attacking side.

With respect to Hameed, look at the English FC system. Hardly any games when the pitches are good for playing innings, generally depleted of quick bowlers, international players rarely feature. T20 has been the major part of this sidelining. And without the system, you get hunch picks. Hameed got back into the test team on the basis of form that would have passed completely unnoticed fifteen years ago and because he looked good a few years back. Is it a surprise when things turn out how they do?

 

[CricAddict]

The T20 argument is the same kind of argument that can be made for ODIs yet no one really suggests anymore that ODIs are affecting Test cricket batting.

They are totally different ball games. Till recently, in ODIs, no one went after the ball from ball one. A lot of test logic of settling in and then going after tired bowlers happened in ODIs too. Now, the advent of T20s impacts ODIs too which is a dying format right now caught in the middle.

 

[Fuller Pilch]

Yes, but he doesn`t play IPL or T20s. I can bet his average will go down once he gets selected for those. Thinking of it, BCCI should have made some IPL team select him just for that

He plays in the Big Bash though.