Better Batsmen?

[Tom Halsey]

extreme spin.

It is spinning, but I wouldn't call it extreme.

 

[Bazza]

I think Rich has got it right - a combination of 3 or 4 factors maybe. But we don't regularly see bowlers destroying sides anymore do we? Lets check out some equivalent stats:

This year there have been five 7-fers and thirteen 6-fers (including two today - Kumble and Butler). 3 of those 18 performances were against Zimbabwe and Bangladesh.

Last year Murali got 9-51, there were five 7-fers and nine 6-fers. 5 of those 15 performances were against Bangladesh and Zimbabwe.

In 2001 there were two 8-fers, nine 7-fers and fifteen 6-fers, a much better year for bowlers. Only 4 of those 26 perfromances were against Bangladesh or Zimbabwe.

In 2000 there were 15 6-fers or better, none were against those two teams, and 4 were by Muralitharan.

These stats only go back to 1999, and there were 18 6-fers or better.

So I guess the fact that 6 wickets in an innings or better has become no more frequent than 4 years ago, yet there are many more double tons suggests batters are getting the best of it, but maybe it is just because more positive batting gives players more chance to get 150 and 200 instead of just 100-120.

 

[Mister Wright]

But we don't regularly see bowlers destroying sides anymore do we?

Have a look at Sami & Ahktar (sp) in New Zealand.

 

[Richard]

Ie you dont see anyone of ranatunga's size playing now.

Yes you do - Craig Evans.
I thought, upon seeing him for the first time in Australia - "oh, dear, I thought the days of Test-cricketers looking like that had gone".

 

[Richard]

i dont think the pitches are getting flatter at all. just have a look at the mcg strip which australia and india are playing on. uneven bounce. extreme spin. I think the batsman are just playing better and the quality of bowlers is as high class anymore

You're never going to get every pitch conforming exactly. Look at the pieces of rubbish at Trent Bridge and Headingley last season.
The fact is there's a general trend that most pitches are far flatter now than they ever have been. Inevitably there are anomalies in every trend, but they don't mean much.

 

[Richard]

Have a look at Sami & Ahktar (sp) in New Zealand.

Sami.
I think you've mistaken him for Shabbir.
The time Mohammad Sami destroys a Test line-up I'll eat my computer.
(I'll probably regret that whenever Pakistan play Zimbabwe)
Maybe I should say destroys a Test line-up full of decent batsmen.

 

[Neil Pickup]

Sami.
I think you've mistaken him for Shabbir.
The time Mohammad Sami destroys a Test line-up I'll eat my computer.
(I'll probably regret that whenever Pakistan play Zimbabwe)
Maybe I should say destroys a Test line-up full of decent batsmen.

I'll be looking for photographic evidence.

 

[Tom Halsey]

He took 5/1 in an ODI recently, but that is not a test match.

 

[Bazza]

OK you got me but Akhtar always destroys NZ - they can't cope with pace.

Sami has made a great start in ODIs and again likes NZ - both his test 5-fers to date have come against them.

 

[Mister Wright]

Sami.
I think you've mistaken him for Shabbir.
The time Mohammad Sami destroys a Test line-up I'll eat my computer.
(I'll probably regret that whenever Pakistan play Zimbabwe)
Maybe I should say destroys a Test line-up full of decent batsmen.

Sami takes 5/44 v New Zealand

 

[Linda]

Sweet

 

[marc71178]

Do you want fries with that Computer?

A bit of ketchup maybe?

 

[Richard]

I prefer salad-cream to tomato-ketchup anyday.:duh:
Quite how I forgot that I don't know. He actually did the same on his Test debut in the same country.
Still, maybe I should say the day his Test average falls below 30 (bowling average, obviously).
Anyone will take wickets if they play long enough.

 

[Bazza]

Just backtracking, lets check out the end of year PwC ratings:

1 Ricky Ponting AUS 907
2 Brian Lara WI 897
3 Matthew Hayden AUS 893
4 Rahul Dravid IND 881
5 Inzamam-ul-Haq PAK 811
6 Jacques Kallis SA 790
7 Herschelle Gibbs SA 781
8 Mark Richardson NZ 775
9 Gary Kirsten SA 763
10 Mahela Jayawardene SL 754

They are ordered based on form, but one thing is clear - the top 4 are clearly in front of everyone else right now. Ponting and Dravid are at their best ever ratings, Hayden and Lara have been over 900. But there is a wealth of batting - Inzamam just led Pakistan to victory despite the efforts of Richardson and three SAs just got tons. No Sachin, Vaughan or Youhana in this list. Indeed you can look down the list to players outside the top 30 who are still class - Hussain, Sehwag, Jayasuriya, Tillekeratne, Ganguly, Atapattu...

1 Muttiah Muralitharan SL 908
2 Shaun Pollock SA 877
3 Shoaib Akhtar PAK 861
4 Glenn McGrath AUS 806
5 Jason Gillespie AUS 748
6 Makhaya Ntini SA 745
7 Daryl Tuffey NZ 721
8 Anil Kumble IND 686
9 Harbhajan Singh IND 662
10 Jacques Kallis SA 642

If you look at the bowling, Murali is out in front of Pollock and Shoaib, and McGrath has dropped of the pace due to injury. But after that there is a big gap. Ntini is rising but most of these bowlers haven't done much for a while and are declining. I'm not sure Tuffey is a world class bowler. McGrath and Pollock have both been over 900 but nobody else has the consistency. Stuart MacGill is 11th and the top 20 still contains Saqlain, Waqar and Cairns. There are alot of bowlers who have played in the last year or so but maybe only one or two games. Perhaps it is the constant changing of players (due to injury or poor performance) which means bowlers don't get as high ratings.

But Ponting is the 15th batsman to be rated over 900 and there have also been 15 bowlers, so that suggests it is possible to achieve. A quick look at the names shows we have recently lost Waqar and Ambrose and maybe Warne and McGrath, though there is still Murali and Pollock. In the batting, Hayden, Lara and Ponting are still very much at large.

So I guess the question is whether cricket is heading in the same direction as baseball - runs is what the fans like to see, so runs is what we'll give them? I mean if you look at test averages, 6 of the top 18 batsmen are current players. That's 1/3rd from over 100 years are playing today. Yet Pollock is the highest bowler, and he is 18th in that list. Next comes McGrath in 29th and then Murali is 45th (Hall is 33rd but I wouldn't say he's played enough yet - just 7 tests). As pointed out, recent years has seen the loss of Ambrose and Donald, and there aren't enough bowlers with an average in the low 20s, compared with batsmen who average 50+. Shoaib is 50th, so if you count Hall there are 5 in the top 50 for bowling, yet there are 14 batsmen (including Lehmann and Waugh).

 

[Tom Halsey]

Some interesting stuff there, Bazza. :P

 

[Richard]

Just backtracking, lets check out the end of year PwC ratings:

1 Ricky Ponting AUS 907
2 Brian Lara WI 897
3 Matthew Hayden AUS 893
4 Rahul Dravid IND 881
5 Inzamam-ul-Haq PAK 811
6 Jacques Kallis SA 790
7 Herschelle Gibbs SA 781
8 Mark Richardson NZ 775
9 Gary Kirsten SA 763
10 Mahela Jayawardene SL 754

They are ordered based on form, but one thing is clear - the top 4 are clearly in front of everyone else right now. Ponting and Dravid are at their best ever ratings, Hayden and Lara have been over 900. But there is a wealth of batting - Inzamam just led Pakistan to victory despite the efforts of Richardson and three SAs just got tons. No Sachin, Vaughan or Youhana in this list. Indeed you can look down the list to players outside the top 30 who are still class - Hussain, Sehwag, Jayasuriya, Tillekeratne, Ganguly, Atapattu...

1 Muttiah Muralitharan SL 908
2 Shaun Pollock SA 877
3 Shoaib Akhtar PAK 861
4 Glenn McGrath AUS 806
5 Jason Gillespie AUS 748
6 Makhaya Ntini SA 745
7 Daryl Tuffey NZ 721
8 Anil Kumble IND 686
9 Harbhajan Singh IND 662
10 Jacques Kallis SA 642

If you look at the bowling, Murali is out in front of Pollock and Shoaib, and McGrath has dropped of the pace due to injury. But after that there is a big gap. Ntini is rising but most of these bowlers haven't done much for a while and are declining. I'm not sure Tuffey is a world class bowler. McGrath and Pollock have both been over 900 but nobody else has the consistency. Stuart MacGill is 11th and the top 20 still contains Saqlain, Waqar and Cairns. There are alot of bowlers who have played in the last year or so but maybe only one or two games. Perhaps it is the constant changing of players (due to injury or poor performance) which means bowlers don't get as high ratings.

But Ponting is the 15th batsman to be rated over 900 and there have also been 15 bowlers, so that suggests it is possible to achieve. A quick look at the names shows we have recently lost Waqar and Ambrose and maybe Warne and McGrath, though there is still Murali and Pollock. In the batting, Hayden, Lara and Ponting are still very much at large.

So I guess the question is whether cricket is heading in the same direction as baseball - runs is what the fans like to see, so runs is what we'll give them? I mean if you look at test averages, 6 of the top 18 batsmen are current players. That's 1/3rd from over 100 years are playing today. Yet Pollock is the highest bowler, and he is 18th in that list. Next comes McGrath in 29th and then Murali is 45th (Hall is 33rd but I wouldn't say he's played enough yet - just 7 tests). As pointed out, recent years has seen the loss of Ambrose and Donald, and there aren't enough bowlers with an average in the low 20s, compared with batsmen who average 50+. Shoaib is 50th, so if you count Hall there are 5 in the top 50 for bowling, yet there are 14 batsmen (including Lehmann and Waugh).

I've been reading the all-time averages for some time and it really is concerning that comparative rubbish like Richardson, Hayden and Gilchrist are averaging more than all-time greats due to 2 or 3 years of purple runs in an era of flat wickets and trash bowling.