Has the retirement ages of International cricketers gone up ?

[Ram]

Off late, It seems to me as though the shelf-life of international cricketers have actually gone up. Just take a look at the list of guys who have retired recently - Warne, Langer, McGrath, Gilchrist, Fleming. All of these guys are either or over 35. And even in the Indian test team, we have three players who are 35+. And this obviously brings us on to the actual question. Are the retirement ages of international cricketers going up ? During the 80s, 90s and even during the early 2000s, I seem to remember that most guys hung up their boots at around 33,34. Now, its consistently going towards 35+. It does reveal a bit of a paradox coz, in the recent past, we all seem to be complaining about too much cricket, but the players themselves seem to be playing more than ever, longer than ever.

[Bumper]

No paradox. Playing when you are in your mid 30s is painful. Only those who have some 'extra' motivation will pull in their mid 30s. The Aussies dont have any endorsements to lose, nor do they have any records in sight. Plus they've won everything, anyways. Now with IPL, retirement is a no brainer. Gilly is gonna make $800K (roughly his wages from 3 international years of cricket) for 6 weeks of slam, bang, dim, doosh tamasha.

[CricketMeriJaan]

Only for batsmen

[siddhu]

Actually, there were a lot of people who retired very late in 30s or even in early 40s. for eg Gavaskar retired at 37, Imran retired (i think) in his early 40s. Keppler Wessels retired well into his 40s. Graham Gooch, Gatting etc also retired very late in their 30s and these are just the high profile ones. Anyway, if anything the retirement age has actually gone down. Mostly, IMO most peope have 125-150 test matches in them and people nowadays get through these pretty quickly. But its upto the individual and their fitness and their motivation levels.

[f.b.m]

Yeh, look at Brian Close. He was 45 when he played his last test. And Colin Cowdrey was about 103 years old when he retired.

[Guest Hiten.]

If i recall correctly Pat Symox retired at the age of 42.

[Vignesh]

Retirement age has a lot to depend on fitness,Motivation determination etc....... And Not to forget Alec Stewart Former england WK he was 40 or something when i last saw him play for england http://content-ind.cricinfo.com/england/content/player/20372.html

[Guest HariSampath]

Ganguly would have been retired by now even if he were employed in the Railways

[Desi Cartman]

Ganguly would have been retired by now even if he were employed in the Railways

:haha::haha: I dont think many cricketers are retiring late , its just that we have 3 very good batsmen retiring late as SG , RD, AK and VVS are not even playing ODIS. So its not that tough ..

[mhr123]

Ganguly would have been retired by now even if he were employed in the Railways

Hari bhai u wud have been killed by now if u were in kolkata.... :haha:

[Desi Cartman]

Hari bhai u wud have been killed by now if u were in kolkata.... :haha:

:cantstop:

[King Tendulkar]

Yes I think it has. I also think generally in sport this is now the case. Better health advice, medicall help and concentration on fitness has meant players can now last longer. I think all these things mean that even people in their 60/70s are much fitter and healthier then they were say 20 years ago. This is why I confidently say sachin will play at the next world cup!

[cochise]

The Don was 40 when he retired...don't really know if retirement age has increased. Someone should do a comprehensive study on it.

[Vignesh]

Why dont we hold a poll n decide who's gonna Make that study????????

[cochise]

Count me out. I got cricket to watch.

[Desi Cartman]

I am watching IPL game for the first time and I am sure that the Pakistani players are fit enough to play for pakistan and they are way better than the ones in the international side ..but to join IPL some of them have retired . What a shame PCB f@cked up big time

[f.b.m]

You mean ICL? The player only have to be around for 20 overs, so not much of a test, really.

[Predator_05]

Unless you are a fast bowler, it shouldn't be too hard to play 'til you are 40.

[Vignesh]

@ Predator I Agree................. Hope Sourav Doesnt see this :haha:.............(jus a joke)

[CC1981]

It is an interesting question. From what I can tell, the retirement age has gone up for bowlers but down for batsmen. Till the early 90s, it was very common for batsmen to play till they were 37-40 while bowlers, especially fast bowlers, rarely crossed 35. I think a look at the retirement ages for most great/good players in that time frame is indicative of this. However, due to modern physiotherapy, fitness schedules and nutrition, bowlers have a longer shelf-life, where we regularly see bowlers crossing 35 and still being very effective ( the best examples of the last 10 yrs would be McGrath,Warne,Ambrose, Walsh & Wasim) But a far more hectic schedule and far higher demands placed on the body due to higher standards of fielding( if you notice, its the batsmen who are usually hurling themselves/diving for the ball on field, not so much as bowlers,who usually run around the boundary) means that batsmen have seen their shelf-life decrease and nowadays its almost impossible to find a batsman playing international cricket at the age of 40.