Bowlers these days are lazy : Akram

[Lurker]

And instead of talking without context like the forummer patriot, shouldn't you agree that a five test series more packed these days than they used to be in 1990? Perhaps then the entire series was spread in three and a half to four months. These days, the 5 tests have to be finished within 2 months. So there is a difference in bowling that many deliveries in just 60 days compared to bowling them in 120+ days. The body would get more time to recover.

Actually there are no more 5 Test series these days(apart from Ashes). One of the records that Sachin Tendulkar doesnt have after close to 2 decades of cricket, is he has not scored 500 runs plus in a Test series. And the key argument given for that of course is Test series these days are 3 or 4 Tests. I think you are largely ascertaining to jam packed cricket calendar. My assertion regarding that is the jam packed schedule is ONLY about International cricket these days. Most of cricketers of Akram's era, and before, played lot more domestic cricket and first class during their "holidays". When was the last time Indian International players showed up at Ranji trophy? So you can not make a case of too much cricket. Too much International cricket? Yes. Too much cricket? No.

I suppose the thread was about how bowlers today don't work hard enough on their basic skills and Akram compared himself with them saying how he and Waqar used to practise for long period in the nets.

Its a natural flow of discussion. An argument was made that Akram doesnt realize the extent of cricket played these days and I would like to think I have proved by two comparisons that it is not neccessarily the case. I would be interested if you could prove me wrong of course. xxx

[Mr. Wicket]

Lurks is right on most points. The international calendar is too packed and the domestic games suffer in return. In those days Botham would play a test match at home, head back to Somerset to play a county game or two, then head back for another test. Here central contracts and a packed int'l schedule prevent that. Not less cricket.

[Chandan]

I think you are largely ascertaining to jam packed cricket calendar. My assertion regarding that is the jam packed schedule is ONLY about International cricket these days. Most of cricketers of Akram's era, and before, played lot more domestic cricket and first class during their "holidays". When was the last time Indian International players showed up at Ranji trophy? So you can not make a case of too much cricket. Too much International cricket? Yes. Too much cricket? No.

Actually I'm ascertaining about too much cricket without ant reasonable gap in between. One test finishes and next starts after a two day gap during which you have to travel as well. Akram didn't face such rush 20 years back. Second point, which you too agree with is too much international international cricket and not finding enough time for FC cricket where a player really hones his skill. We saw what difference just one year of county cricket brought to Zaheer. Poor bowlers today don't get that opportunity. I asked you to tell me when could Ishant have played a single FC match, forget about "playing an entire season during his holiday", since 2008 Jan? He just got an opportunity to play 2 FC matches in India where he played the season opener against Pak domestic champs, and Irani trophy. When can he go and play county cricket to hone his skill, like Akram did? When can he play in his own domestic cricket to learn more tricks to bowl on flat tracks like Akram did?

[Mr. Wicket]

Actually I'm ascertaining about too much cricket without ant reasonable gap in between. One test finishes and next starts after a two day gap during which you have to travel as well. Akram didn't face such rush 20 years back.

You're forgetting the other stuff. Here's an example, the 1981 Ashes series. 1st test: 18-21 Jun '81 at Nottingham 2nd test: 2-7 Jul at Lord's 3rd test: 16-21 Jul at Leeds Nice gaps between, right? Lurks brings up the fact that cricket was just as hectic, except with fewer int'l games and far more domestic games. This is the full touring schedule for the start of that summer: 1st ODI: 4th June 2nd ODI: 6th June 3rd ODI: 8th June Warmup v. Derbyshire: 10-12 June Warmup v. Middlesex: 13-15 June (yes, the next day) 1st Test: 18-21 June (and there's your 2 day break again) Warmup v. Lancashire: 24 June Warmup v. Kent: 27-29 June 2nd Test: 2-7 Jul Warmup v. Warwickshire: 9 Jul Warmup v. Northants: 11-13 Jul 3rd Test: 16-21 Jul etc, etc. Players at the top level also faced intensive packed schedules, but with far more first class cricket instead of the tests and ODIs.

[chanakya]

don't leave room for you experiments or 'hone your skills', are three times more than what Akram faced those years.

Thats is the important bit that Lurks has missed out addressing. Its not just the number of matches but the opposition. An easy way to look at it when you were playing against another school for your school you would not try to rxperiment but while playing in the gully it was mostly experiments :P

[Don Sharma]

Lurks brings up the fact that cricket was just as hectic, except with fewer int'l games and far more domestic games. This is the full touring schedule for the start of that summer: 1st ODI: 4th June 2nd ODI: 6th June 3rd ODI: 8th June Warmup v. Derbyshire: 10-12 June Warmup v. Middlesex: 13-15 June (yes, the next day) 1st Test: 18-21 June (and there's your 2 day break again) Warmup v. Lancashire: 24 June Warmup v. Kent: 27-29 June 2nd Test: 2-7 Jul Warmup v. Warwickshire: 9 Jul Warmup v. Northants: 11-13 Jul 3rd Test: 16-21 Jul etc, etc. Players at the top level also faced intensive packed schedules, but with far more first class cricket instead of the tests and ODIs.

Don't you think the top players would have stayed out of those Warmup matches and let the second string XI play just like what is happening nowadays.

[Mr. Wicket]

No. The touring team's top players generally played in most of those games. And looking at random scorecards of that tour, the top players went back to play county cricket or took part in those games between tests. You didn't have the issue of nationally contracted players being above county or other domestic cricket back then. See some of those scorecards: Paul Allott and David Lloyd (along with one Clive Lloyd) played in the Lancs game, Dennis Amiss, Alan Knott, Graham Gooch and a lot of other int'l players all took part in those other warmups. http://static.cricinfo.com/db/ARCHIVE/1980S/1981/ENG_LOCAL/CC/GLAM_SOMERSET_CC_27-30JUN1981.html And note this scorecard, right in between the first test and second of that series. Note the England captain (at the time; Botham resigned after the Lord's test) going back to Somerset during those few days and playing county cricket.

[Don Sharma]

^^Respect!!!

[Mr. Wicket]

Also do note the sort of lineups in that day and age. The idea that county lineups were lesser sides that you could take it easy against and have a nice day out to 'experiment' is rubbish. If you played a Somerset side in those days consisted, you'd be facing Joel Garner and Ian Botham, or bowling to Viv Richards. A Sussex side would have the nasty Garth le Roux and Imran Khan in the attack, Kent had the WI quick Eldon Baptiste, Derek Underwood, Asif Iqbal, Chris Tavare, Alan Knott, etc... In those days a lot of the extra WI quicks like Sylvester Clarke, Baptiste, Wayne Daniel and Franklyn Stephenson who couldn't get into the national team (given the excess of competition) were regulars on the county circuit. Lots of the South African players blocked by anti-apartheid bans like Mike Procter, Garth le Roux and co. played county cricket too, and then with internationals like Imran and Clive Lloyd coming in and players REGULARLY playing for their sides, it meant the county circuit was a full throttle, intense schedule with some great teams, great players who never would let anyone else take it easy and have a fun day out/experiment (as some mistakenly think) and a very intensive pace of games - given that in a single week people would have a 3 day game and usually 2 one day games. This isn't just county cricket btw... the likes of Lillee, Hughes, Border and the Chappells regularly turned out for their squads in the Sheffield Shield, and in India a Bombay side usually had Gavaskar, Vengsarkar and the other big int'l heavyweights more often than not. Considering that, think of what a Botham, Kapil Dev, Hadlee or Imran would have gone through physically with that kind of schedule regularly and that quality of opposition. Cricket was a different game those days - players put in a lot more, and had a lot more to deal with on the field. The kind of opposition Dravid faces in a Ranji game for Karnataka or Ian Bell faces in county cricket is NOTHING compared to what Bhaskar Pillay would face on the Ranji circuit or what anyone else would see in a county game 2 decades ago...

[Don Sharma]

Agree with you. There are not enough Intl players in the county cricket ATM and the intl calendar is one the reasons.I guess during those days England would have been the only country playing its home series when the county season is on, that would allow players from ROW represent the counties. But nowadays you could see atleast four teams playing at this time of the year. A player like Sarwan would have been a far improved player if he had three decent county stints. Then we got the T20 leagues. Gone are those days when a player wanted to feature in county cricket to "hone his skills", barring a few the rest all play for money. With the T20 leagues they need not sweat out for that as well. I read an article in CC in which the author explained how Clive Lloyd and Holding are entitled to criticise the present team even though the former greats signed up for WSC during their time. He went on to say once "...money attracted the players to WSC but once the cricket started, money plunged to the bottom of their list of priorities." Not sure how many of the current generation of Intl. cricketers would think alike. There were lot more characters in the 80s-mid 90s than what we got now.

[MUMBAISKIPPER]

Well you can't just blame bowlers.Look at the state of the wickets across the world...there is hardly anything for seamers...90% of wickets are dead..uninspiring wickets are one of the reasons for bowlers being lazy. cricket has become one-sided...even in tests...the art of fast bowling has been almost killed by cash-crazy cricket administrators...ICC must take this matter seriously.

[Lurker]

Couple of points that I read this morning which made me think of this thread: a) Marcus Trescothick is the 1st person to cross 1000 runs this year in county. This is almost August and generally by this time you would have players crossing 2000 runs in county cricket. County cricket is basically redundant these days and as Salil has already pointed out it is a far cry from the days of Garners, Imrans and Procters. And the situation is the same with Ranji trophies, Shell shields etc. Thanks to nonsensical events like IPL domestic cricket is royally screwed up while meaningless International games are played ad nauseum. In other words it is NOT more cricket, just more meaningless International cricket. b) Muralitharan has just mentioned he may retire from test cricket but would continue to play LOI and T20. His reason? Simple, Test cricket is the hardest form of cricket. This from the leading wicket taker from all-times. So what do you call players who run away from hardwork?? Isnt lazy one of those terms. xxxx

[Mr. Wicket]

Couple of points that I read this morning which made me think of this thread: a) Marcus Trescothick is the 1st person to cross 1000 runs this year in county. This is almost August and generally by this time you would have players crossing 2000 runs in county cricket. County cricket is basically redundant these days and as Salil has already pointed out it is a far cry from the days of Garners, Imrans and Procters. And the situation is the same with Ranji trophies, Shell shields etc. Thanks to nonsensical events like IPL domestic cricket is royally screwed up while meaningless International games are played ad nauseum. In other words it is NOT more cricket, just more meaningless International cricket.

I would not blame the IPL - this has been the case for the past decade, pretty much since boards started scheduling random ODI 3 and 4 team series (particularly in places like Sharjah, Singapore, Nairobi, etc) from the mid 90s onwards to stick meaningless crap like a Singer Cup and a Hero Honda Trophy and a Pepsi Challenge in the calendar.

[rainy day]

b) Muralitharan has just mentioned he may retire from test cricket but would continue to play LOI and T20. His reason? Simple, Test cricket is the hardest form of cricket. This from the leading wicket taker from all-times. So what do you call players who run away from hardwork?? Isnt lazy one of those terms.

Previously players used to retire earlier from LOI cricket to extend their Test careers, now its the complete opposite.

[Lurker]

I would not blame the IPL - this has been the case for the past decade' date=' pretty much since boards started scheduling random ODI 3 and 4 team series (particularly in places like Sharjah, Singapore, Nairobi, etc) from the mid 90s onwards to stick meaningless crap like a Singer Cup and a Hero Honda Trophy and a Pepsi Challenge in the calendar.[/quote'] Thats fair Salil. It would be incorrect to say cricket was good in 1983(say) and suddenly went down the poopers after 25 years (in 2008 when IPL came alive). There were intermediate stage/championship that expedited this. However this has come to complete crux at/around IPL. It would be incorrect to say a Singer trophy has had the same impact as IPL. I mean you see players openly suggesting they would retire from Test cricket to play IPL, not too many said that about the meaningless LOI trophies.

[Chandan]

A good article from Harsha Bhogle supporting Akram's view: The Pampered Few Sunday 2nd August 2009 Wasim Akram, always deliciously outspoken, thinks "bowlers nowadays are pure lazy and are happy with whatever they are being given on a platter". It is a telling remark, not just because it comes from a great bowler but because Akram spent his formative years before the era of mushrooming specialist coaches. I read this comment just a day before I read of how the return to effectiveness of Mitchell Johnson would be a test for Troy Cooley, the Australian fast bowling coach; or indeed that Cooley's reputation would depend on it. The two comments are related. If bowlers are handed everything on a platter, as Akram says, they will stop being able to think for themselves and to solve their own problems. They would use coaches as crutches and in doing so retard their own development. A similar, equally valid, argument has been put forward about pampered young men and women and their inability to face the real, and often cruel, world. There is only that much Cooley can do for Johnson for the bowler has to fire the gun himself. Damien Fleming, another whose company I have enjoyed greatly in a commentary box, is spot on when he says, "The problem is you can't perform for the players on the field, you can only prepare them, and my big worry with Mitch is that when it's going badly he doesn't seem to be able to coach himself on the field to get himself back into the battle.''. The more players are spoon fed the more they will find themselves unable to coach themselves. In fact, later in that interview, Akram says, "The use of technology is good but it shouldn't stop the bowler from using his own mind". That is what great cricketers, or for that matter, great managers or great actors, will always tell you. You use a coach as a map, for directions, but you drive the car yourself. You cannot keep going back to the coach after every ball and that is my grouse with some of the academies these days; that they are producing over-coached over-reliant cricketers. With coaches congregating on maidans and grounds, they are available like a meal is in a food court. If one is absent there is always another around on whom to thrust your problem. Good cricketers become great when they hone their instinct, when they study the opposition they have to compete against rather than wait for notes or video clips to be handed to them. And that is why this is not Cooley's test but Johnson's test. Akram also talks about the season of county cricket that Zaheer Khan played. It has been much spoken about, much documented. When you play county cricket you are part of a team but you are also on your own; you learn to bowl with a new ball and an old one, in the morning, in the afternoon and after six straight days, in the last hour of a game when you are picking your body up and coaxing it to the top of your mark. You play in front of five people and alongside teammates, some of whom are playing as a chore and for a salary. There is much in the daily grind to drive you away from the game but it is when the exit option is a step away in life that we really discover ourselves. It is when you are putting in the hard yards without any reward in sight that you grow as a performer. If the resource and the reward is always at hand, how will you grow? It is a question that RP Singh, Irfan Pathan and Ishant Sharma (who has had a string of worrying performances in recent times) will have to ask themselves. How do they steer clear of reward and fame nudging them all the time and put in the hard yards? It is a question to which another fine cricketer, Sreesanth, hasn't found an answer to but he now has the opportunity ahead of him. He gets seven county games for Warwickshire where there will be no cameras to speak to, no journalists to make statements for and the luxury of working in anonymity. He can do what Zaheer did; toil away, bowl the first ball and the last and eventually, understand himself. He has been offered much on a platter; fame, notoriety and its attendant ills. He now has the opportunity to spurn the platter and become the cricketer he can be.

[Lurker]

It is a question that RP Singh, Irfan Pathan and Ishant Sharma (who has had a string of worrying performances in recent times) will have to ask themselves. How do they steer clear of reward and fame nudging them all the time and put in the hard yards?

The answer is rather simple really, hard work. And the responsibility for that is not only for the bowlers and coaches but also fans, sponsors and everyone else. I hate to sound like a broken record on this one but good to see the angle of bowlers-these-days-are-lazy is catching momentum, if only a tad. The other day I was reading Kapil's autobiography and he mentions how on overseas trips they would save money by doing laundry themselves. We are not talking of Shivlal Yadavs here (nothing against him), we are talking of Kapils, Sunnys, Vishys and Amarnaths. Are you seriously gonna tell me Dhoni is doing his laundry these days? For goodness sakes these prima donnas start howling if they are not given accomodation in anything less than 4 stars these days(one good reason why Bihar/Jharkhand/Orissa does not get to see many International games). That all said, is it just International cricketers fault? When was the last time YOU did your laundry by bare hands? I can assure you your parents would do that routinely. Give that a thought. xxx

[The Outsider]

The amount of travel involved for today's cricketers is a lot. As someone who has done a bit of work related travel I can assure you it's a terrible thing. Taxis, airports, hotels, jet lags - it's a complete mess. Just comparing the number of deliveries bowled by X to the number of deliveries bowled by Y is naive in the extreme. Cricketers of the past never had to travel so much - the tours were usually long interspersed with more relaxed FC matches, not the constant travel from one country to another we see today with primarily high intensity international cricket.

[kabira]

^When was the last time YOU did your laundry by bare hands? why would anyone do that when there is washing machines. And being believer in capitalism, I don't want to do it myself, that will ruin some poor household as they depend on that income :)

[Guest gaurav_indian]

The amount of travel involved for today's cricketers is a lot. As someone who has done a bit of work related travel I can assure you it's a terrible thing. Taxis, airports, hotels, jet lags - it's a complete mess. Just comparing the number of deliveries bowled by X to the number of deliveries bowled by Y is naive in the extreme. Cricketers of the past never had to travel so much - the tours were usually long interspersed with more relaxed FC matches, not the constant travel from one country to another we see today with primarily high intensity international cricket.

+1