"Blame technology for game’s lost weekend" - Michael Atherton writing in The Times

[sage]

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/blame-technology-for-games-lost-weekend-hfvm380rv

 

Quote

Among a generation of older batsmen, there are some who would encourage you to believe that the past two Tests have finished so quickly partly because of the degradation of the modern batsman’s technique against spin. Don’t count me among their number.

Cricket is a fascinating game that can be confusing. Above all, our readers probably want to try to understand why the third Test finished in such short time — the quickest since 1935 and the first two-day Test for England for more than 20 years. A weekend on the sofa watching Test cricket has gone up in smoke. Was it a bad pitch, bad batting, good bowling, the pink ball, or a combination?

The pitch — “challenging”, “poor”, “tricky”, use whichever term you want — was clearly a key factor. Frankly, though, we’ve heard enough about pitches; I’ve written enough about them, and I’m not going to batter you further. My opinion, contrary to many readers, is that the past two surfaces have been extremely challenging (and prepared to suit) but they were not unplayable nor, according to ICC guidelines which state that danger is the only factor, unfit for purpose.

But the conditions only really explain why the matches have been low-scoring. Two generations ago, these games would have been low-scoring, but would likely have lasted far longer (thereby provoking less anguished comment). To understand why, you have to move away from the narrative that England’s/India’s batsmen are now no good against spin. It was a narrative that was widely expressed after a game in which 20 wickets fell to leg-before and bowled dismissals. They kept missing straight balls was the simple criticism, but it is one that lacks context.

That Joe Root took five quick wickets was another false narrative used to criticise the pitch. Root is a better off spinner than some think — better than Dom Bess, in my view — and he got the last five wickets to fall, three of whom were trying to chance their arm during a collapse. Rohit Sharma and Shubman Gill put it into proper context in the second innings, when they breezed to the victory target with no problems.

 

Instead, we need to focus upon ball-tracking technology, which has had the most profound influence on the way the modern game is played, and has made life doubly tricky for batsmen in these type of conditions. When you add DRS (the decision review system that was introduced in 2008) to a challenging surface, you now get not only low-scoring games, but low-scoring games that finish in double-quick time.

Before ball-tracking technology, if a batsman was unsure which way the ball was spinning, or unsure how it would react off the pitch, he could simply thrust his pad at the line of the ball, with his bat alongside. Batsmen, therefore, had two lines of defence side by side, the bat and the pad; he could obscure the stumps, taking out bowled, and umpires would generally not give leg-befores on the front foot. Crucially, it gave a batsman breathing space at the start of his innings; time to survive for a while and take stock.

The conditions only really explain why the matches have been low-scoring

PANKAJ NANGIA/SPORTZPICS FOR BCCI

Look at the statistics of leg-before decisions given for any spinner of yesteryear. Bishan Bedi, the great Indian left-armer, took six per cent of his dismissals that way — only 16 leg-before out of 266 Test wickets. Ok, you might say he was a left-arm flight bowler, unlikely to get that many lbws. John Emburey, then, who bowled flatter, quicker, off breaks for England? Emburey’s lbw tally was higher, 11 per cent of his Test wickets came this way. Tim May, another fine off spinner of the pre-DRS generation? Only eight per cent of his dismissals were lbw.

It was in around 2001 that ball-tracking technology debuted as a way of adding to the interest for television viewers. Although initially only a televisual and entertainment aide, umpires suddenly had a little more technology to learn from rather than simply relying on their eyes and experience. They began to see and understand that more balls than imagined were hitting the stumps. DRS came into being for the first time in 2008 and has been a fixture in Test matches ever since.

 

 

 

The consequences have been a startling increase in the number of leg-before decisions for spinners. Let’s compare the numbers for some modern-day giants. Rangana Herath? 25 per cent of dismissals given lbw. Ravichandran Ashwin? 21 per cent. Graeme Swann? 27 per cent. Monty Panesar? 25 per cent. Ravindra Jadeja? 20 per cent. I could go on, but you get the drift. Between 1983 and 1995, all spinners received around 12 per cent of wickets leg-before; since DRS that has increased to 21 per cent — a massive change.

That has had a significant impact on the way batsmen play. Instead of being a batsman’s friend, the pad is now his enemy. A batsman cannot get his pad in the way of the ball, nor use it as a second line of defence, as before. That means he must play the line of the ball with his bat not pad, which means, in turn, a spinner need turn it less to take the edge and, crucially, that the stumps are more in play than before. In effect, it has given the modern spinner a broader set of stumps to aim at.

Axar Patel found DRS in his favour while bowling India to a swift and dramatic third-Test victory in which he took 11 England wickets

SAIKAT DAS/SPORTZPICS FOR BCCI

It also means any misjudgment in line — which is more likely to come right at the start of an innings — is so much more costly, because even if an umpire says not out, a fielding captain can refer the appeal to the third umpire. The breathing space that batsmen would have at the start of their innings once upon a time is no longer available. It is a better game as a result — the game after all was intended for batsmen to use their bats not pads to hit the ball — but occasionally, a more brutal one for batsmen.

If ball-tracking technology has impacted upon the frequency of leg-before decisions and the way batsmen play as a result, it has also influenced the way spinners bowl. There are now fewer flighty bowlers of the type that Bedi was. Spinners bowl more quickly, generally, and at the stumps. They look less for wickets caught at cover, taken through deception of flight and guile, and instead hunt for the stumps and the pads. On pitches where some balls spin and some don’t, as in the last Test, this is much harder to counter.

So I have a lot more sympathy for the modern batsman than some, and it helps to explain why, when you put a very difficult surface together with DRS, you get matches that finish far more quickly than they would in days gone by.

A wide-ranging post-match piece about batting techniques against spin on the website ESPN Cricinfo was subtitled, “England could do well to listen to voices from the past”. The problem is that ball-tracking technology and its effects have rendered much of the way batsmen played in the past irrelevant.

On pitches such as the one in Ahmedabad, it is a far harder challenge than players of the past either had to cope with, or that some understand.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[sage]

Mike Atherton is a brilliant cricket writer raises a good point.

[Clarke]

Well thought out and reasoned with numbers rather than the banal excuses 

[Jimmy Cliff]

Great write-up. Modern day Test cricket has a strong "revenge of the darter" element to it. Even the most successful wrist spinner currently (Yasir) is someone who is quicker through the air and attacks the stumps looking for bowled-lbws rather than a conventional leggie like Warne.

[Lone Wolf]

He should coach an IPl team I think

[neel roy]

He is the most honest analyst of the game. A manchester grammar school student ( grammar schools in England are toughest to get into and i mean really tough.) and Cambridge educated.. his hold on language, assessment and the subtle humor in his writing is a joy to behold.. the way he examines English captains in sky after a loss is a must watch.. insightful,incisive and to the point..

[goose]

11 minutes ago, neel roy said:

He is the most honest analyst of the game. A manchester grammar school student ( grammar schools in England are toughest to get into and i mean really tough.) and Cambridge educated.. his hold on language, assessment and the subtle humor in his writing is a joy to behold.. the way he examines English captains in sky after a loss is a must watch.. insightful,incisive and to the point..

Downing College, Cambridge...my old college

[neel roy]

33 minutes ago, MultiB48 said:

That education would have worn off by now and there are plenty apps and interns/editors in a big organisation like times to help him out .

No i mean when he does commentory or post match analysis..

[Real McCoy]

Athers is providing a different opinion that most of us have missed. To counter pitches, batsmen need to come down the wicket to hit 6/4 or take an easy single if the deep fielder is there. I think Pant has the better strategy than Rahane or Pujara in this case where he throws off the spinner's length and line by his aggression and sweeping that the spinners bowl more to the off than threatening the stumps. This gives an easy single and if short cut for four.

Also the pink ball effect cannot be denied. I think these guys will be more subdued in their criticism if their own pitches act like this one or the one in adelaide when they host a pink ball test. I have never seen a pink duke ball in England. Has it happened yet. Only when their own hometown batsmen suffer in their own conditions will they think about the pink ball. Otherwise this whining will continue

[neel roy]

Listen to his conversation with Keys Hussain in youtube post the test

[sage]

1 hour ago, neel roy said:

Listen to his conversation with Keys Hussain in youtube post the test

Yes good listen I posted it in the other thread

 

 

[GeeGaw]

On 2/27/2021 at 6:33 AM, goose said:

Downing College, Cambridge...my old college

Not everyone can get into Oxford so it’s nice there are fallback schools like Cambridge for the commoners. 

[Vilander]

On 2/27/2021 at 5:57 AM, MultiB48 said:

goddy

Wtf is a goddy..nwam dont give an answer as no gives a fcuk.. thanks.