Which aspects of test cricket have regressed in the current era?

[Athlai]

People cheat a lot less. A lot less frauds being called express bowlers that aren't actually that quick. People don't misfield as much. People don't get runners for being lazy anymore. Weaknesses in batting are exploited by all professional teams.

So yeah teams these days are so much worse at being ****.

 

[Starfighter]

People don't misfield as much.

This one does actually bug me. Nothing like a few misfields to entertain. Pakistan certainly made a good effort on their last Australia tour.

 

[Athlai]

India had some truly shocking fielders as late as the 2000s.

 

[Athlai]

Umpiring is a lot less ****. No longer does a team with a big crowd roaring earn a wicket by influencing the umpire to think it's clipping 5th stump.

Also the sheer improvement in tools available mean things we think are bad calls these days wouldn't have been been questioned 20-30 years ago.

 

[Brook's side]

Umpiring is a lot less ****. No longer does a team with a big crowd roaring earn a wicket by influencing the umpire to think it's clipping 5th stump.

Also the sheer improvement in tools available mean things we think are bad calls these days wouldn't have been been questioned 20-30 years ago.

Whilst accepting your points about the howlers, I'd say that a lot MORE lbws are given on field now than they used to be.

Dickie Bird wouldn't give anything unless it pitched on middle and was hitting half way up middle.

 

[Flem274*]

It's interesting seeing the 00s finally being viewed through nostalgia lenses in the past 12 months.

When I first joined here the consensus was the 00s batsmen were frauds (except for the big 3 and a few select others based on aesthetic bias) and that the bowlers were all terrible. If you were an 80s or 90s player you were basically a God.

 

[Starfighter]

Umpiring is a lot less ****. No longer does a team with a big crowd roaring earn a wicket by influencing the umpire to think it's clipping 5th stump.

Also the sheer improvement in tools available mean things we think are bad calls these days wouldn't have been been questioned 20-30 years ago.

I think you're missing the point of the thread.

 

[ashley bach]

Authorities not as good picking up on the fixing. TBF the players no doubt much smarter these days.

 

[Athlai]

I think you're missing the point of the thread.

I reject the premise. All nostalgia to think skills were better in yesteryear. Unless its scratching the ball with a bottlecap

 

[Kenneth Viljoen]

My instinct was that this would be statistically false. My instinct was that the faster pace of scoring, so less mental and physical fatigue, would offset the technical looseness.

But it appears to be true. Using the same space 10 years apart.
10 to 15 years ago the conversion rate was 50%, currently (last 6 and bit years) the conversion rate is 43%.

Mostly due to:
- on percentage: South Africa and Sri Lanka huge batting decline.
- on quantity: England's slightly less dramatic decline, but sheer volume, will affect the overall stats a fair amount.

(Only NZ and Bangladesh dramatic improvers)

View attachment 34993

Markram didn't make that conversion rate any better today .

 

[Ali TT]

Authorities not as good picking up on the fixing. TBF the players no doubt much smarter these days.

Not just the players though. If it is endemic then the criminal gangs have to have infiltrated all levels of playing, coaching and administration.

 

[subshakerz]

It's interesting seeing the 00s finally being viewed through nostalgia lenses in the past 12 months.

When I first joined here the consensus was the 00s batsmen were frauds (except for the big 3 and a few select others based on aesthetic bias) and that the bowlers were all terrible. If you were an 80s or 90s player you were basically a God.

Yeah it's a sad development. In other words, when you joined closer to that era, posters already were recognizing that most of the bats were having it much easier. Now that time has passed, they forget that or are younger and never say that era.

 

[Molehill]

As I cast a passing eye over the empty stands in Joburg, I can't help thinking that attendances to Test Matches outside of England have regressed over the last 20 years. Whilst English fans now travel more than ever, they often seem to outnumber the locals.

Having said that, it was great to see some packed grassy mounds in NZ for those recent Tests.

 

[Ali TT]

My instinct was that this would be statistically false. My instinct was that the faster pace of scoring, so less mental and physical fatigue, would offset the technical looseness.

But it appears to be true. Using the same space 10 years apart.
10 to 15 years ago the conversion rate was 50%, currently (last 6 and bit years) the conversion rate is 43%.

Mostly due to:
- on percentage: South Africa and Sri Lanka huge batting decline.
- on quantity: England's slightly less dramatic decline, but sheer volume, will affect the overall stats a fair amount.

(Only NZ and Bangladesh dramatic improvers)

View attachment 34993

But how does this compare to the 80s and early 90s? For example, the best batter of that era, Sir Viv, only converted about a third of his fifties, yet by the 00s there were quite a few less impressive players who converted half.

 

[subshakerz]

As I cast a passing eye over the empty stands in Joburg, I can't help thinking that attendances to Test Matches outside of England have regressed over the last 20 years. Whilst English fans now travel more than ever, they often seem to outnumber the locals.

Having said that, it was great to see some packed grassy mounds in NZ for those recent Tests.

Big yes, test match attendance has dramatically dropped. This is one of the more disappointing aspects today.

 

[Slifer]

Many countries have current batsmen (eg Root, Smith, Kohli, Williamson) that would figure in ATG team conversations. Similarly we have bowlers (eg Cummins, Bumrah, Rabada, Anderson, Jadeja, Ashwin) who would be considered. I see this as a positive sign that standards aren't declining as severely as some would suggest.

But the majority of countries donot. And in the case of Williamson and Bumrah, that's only because quality pace bowlers and batsmen for their respective teams were unusually thin. Compare that with the 90s for example, where several teams had players who wouldn't look out of place in an ATG Xi: Ambrose, Lara, Sachin, Donald, McGrath, Warne, Murali, Wasim. In the 80s, you know who they are.

Of the current players only really Cummins and Smith would feature in the very short list of candidates for an ATG XI. Batting now is poor, no two ways about it.

 

[Molehill]

But the majority of countries donot. And in the case of Williamson and Bumrah, that's only because quality pace bowlers and batsmen for their respective teams were unusually thin. Compare that with the 90s for example, where several teams had players who wouldn't look out of place in an ATG Xi: Ambrose, Lara, Sachin, Donald, McGrath, Warne, Murali, Wasim. In the 80s, you know who they are.

Of the current players only really Cummins and Smith would feature in the very short list of candidates for an ATG XI. Batting now is poor, no two ways about it.

Lara averaged 52 and Tendulkar 53, they're not as far removed from the current players as you think. By the end of his career Root could seriously challenge Sachin's numbers. Not sure Donald would feature long in any ATG discussions.

And in 20 years time I have no doubt we'll look back and think "how the **** did Anderson and Broad take so many wickets"? Their records are going to last a long time.

 

[Slifer]

Lara averaged 52 and Tendulkar 53, they're not as far removed from the current players as you think. By the end of his career Root could seriously challenge Sachin's numbers. Not sure Donald would feature long in any ATG discussions.

And in 20 years time I have no doubt we'll look back and think "how the **** did Anderson and Broad take so many wickets"? Their records are going to last a long time.

Yeah but neither Broad or Anderson would be considered for an world ATG XI. And averages or not, only Smith would be considered in the Lara/Sachin level atm. As for Donald, he has a better case to be in an ATG Xi than any current bowler, except for maybe Cummins. That's it.

 

[trundler]

By the end of his career Root could seriously challenge Sachin's numbers.

 

[trundler]

I reject the premise. All nostalgia to think skills were better in yesteryear. Unless its scratching the ball with a bottlecap

"Everything is better today" is just as naive and cringe as suggesting that everything was better in the good ol' days. The OP acknowledges that a lot of things have indeed gotten better recently so it's pretty silly to go on a crusade against nostalgia bias in this thread.

Guess Kohli is a better slipper than Dravid because he debuted more recently.