Holysmoke Posted June 17, 2011 Posted June 17, 2011 Yeah' date=' the title of my thread is a bit ToI like, but that brings us to a bigger question whether such extreme protection is really needed. I mean, guys like Kapil, Imran, Hadlee, Marshall had extremely successful test careers without this added protection. If the ball was doing a bit, it wasn't unusual for Kapil, Imran, and Hadlee to bowl 10-15 overs spells. Marshall and Lillee still had good back up, but in those days unless the back up was of a similar class he wasn't just brought into the attack for the sake of it.[/quote'] The amount of cricket played has a big bearing on this. Kapil/Imran/Hadlee did not play for 200 days a year on flat pitches. PS - In before Yammy comes in with "Global warming"
Cricket Tragic Posted June 17, 2011 Posted June 17, 2011 But modern players don't play anywhere as much FC cricket as the players of the past.
The Outsider Posted June 17, 2011 Author Posted June 17, 2011 The amount of cricket played has a big bearing on this. Kapil/Imran/Hadlee did not play for 200 days a year on flat pitches. PS - In before Yammy comes in with "Global warming" We need to differentiate here - are we talking strictly about the number of days on the playing field or are we also considering the associated travel? If it's the former then I don't agree since cricketers in those days played a lot of FC cricket. If it's the latter then yes, travel fatigue plays a part. So, in that case won't it be better to cut down on some tours and give it all on others. For example, Ishant's 10 over spell at Perth was considered an anomaly, but Kapil, Imran, and Hadlee used to bowl 10 over spells very often.
Holysmoke Posted June 17, 2011 Posted June 17, 2011 Maybe it is a by-product of the T20/ODI age. People are more used to bowling 5-6 over spells in ODI's, and just dont practise bowling 8-10 over spells ?
Sir_Afridi Posted June 17, 2011 Posted June 17, 2011 Bowlers in previous years played the game for passion and love of sport so hard work was not a problem for them. Now cricket is a business and players especially fast bowlers want to last longer and afraid of hard work. If Steyn and Asif can average below 25 why cant other bowlers?? :dontknow:
f.b.m Posted June 17, 2011 Posted June 17, 2011 I remember Wasim Akram saying something along the lines that players were spending a lot of energy during warm up/warm down routines and training compared to what he used to do. So essentially, you have bowlers starting the day with their tanks half empty. Which is one more reason why I admire the likes of Dale Steyn and Morne Morkel who can bowl with sustained pace despite doing so much training work off the field.
Cricket Tragic Posted June 17, 2011 Posted June 17, 2011 I remember Wasim Akram saying something along the lines that players were spending a lot of energy during warm up/warm down routines and training compared to what he used to do. So essentially' date=' you have bowlers starting the day with their tanks half empty. Which is one more reason why I admire the likes of Dale Steyn and Morne Morkel who can bowl with sustained pace despite doing so much training work off the field.[/quote'] Steyn recently said that he didn't do much gym work at all. He just runs a lot apparently and that is something that several former great fast bowlers have spoken about as well.
Dayman Posted June 18, 2011 Posted June 18, 2011 i think its just coaches and owners being carefull with their players' date='baseball has had the 162 game season since the 60s.[/quote'] That's part of it, but the games today are much tougher/more intense than they were in the past. The average speed of pitches is much higher than it used to be and batters are much bigger and stronger than they used to be. Thus, pitchers have to go all out for shorter bursts. It's the same in football. Running backs cant last as long as they used to because the defenders are so much bigger and faster.
kabira Posted June 20, 2011 Posted June 20, 2011 actually these days they play 2 to 3 tests back to back. The intensity of bowlers go down. India v/s SA is an example. The third test match, pitch had something for the bowlers. But in 2nd innings, both teams could not finish other off. I thought bowlers got tired and lacked intensity.
Lurker Posted June 20, 2011 Posted June 20, 2011 Kapil's 9/83 bowling 30 overs on the trot is one of my finest cricketing memories, soon to be followed by Hadlee's 9 wicket haul at Brisbane where he took the catch for the other wicket to fall. Imran, Botham, Kapil picking up lots of wickets was a pretty common happening - well, not common like they would do it every other test, but once or twice a year or so some fast bowler would take a bucket load of wickets in an innings. Following are the number of times 7+ wickets were taken in an innings in the 80s (29 occasions): http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/stats/index.html?bowling_pacespin=1;class=1;filter=advanced;orderby=wickets;spanmax1=31+Dec+1989;spanmin1=01+Jan+1980;spanval1=span;template=results;type=bowling;view=innings;wicketsmin1=7;wicketsval1=wickets First things first. Kapil Dev has 3 8 wickets plus haul in top 10 (80s). Says so much about his stature amongst the best bowlers of his and the workload he carried on his broad shoulders. That he took the wickets in 3 countries in less than 3 years shows how good he was. Have the modern day fast bowlers become pansies? Of course. You really think even the best of current Indian lot Zaheer Khan, and I rate him very highly, would take scalps like that? So what are the reasons: a) Fans. Period. Short on cricketing knowledge and plenty on nonsensical cricket. b) Administrators. No bouncer rules has effectively killed fast bowlers. Dennis Lillee bowled 4 consecutive bouncers to Viv Richards in a one dayer and got him off 5th ball, try doing that today and umpire will give a "free-hit". c) Dilution of abilities. Bowlers are now less potent (me thinks) bowling wise but have become more effective batsmen. Thus folks like Harbhajan Singh being touted as all-rounders (really?). No more running through a team with 8 wickets haul. d) Less 5 test series. Effectively means bowlers dont set in a rythm. Exceptions abound of course - Steyn for example. But of course bowlers have become pansies. Heck havent we all??? xxx
f.b.m Posted June 20, 2011 Posted June 20, 2011 Of course. Back in the day when men were men, bowlers used to grunt through 40 overs at breakneck pace and still had the energy to grind rocks into dust with their bare hands as a past time. They did all of this because they were virtuous heroes and because they were moral supermen who didnt care one bit about the money that they were never going to get. Compare that to these days when the so called fast bowlers run half way up their run ups before complaining about fatigue, workloads and player contracts. After having done this, they choose a pitiful sum of a million dollars for six weeks work instead of the pride and honor of sitting in the sidelines due to injury. I say this of course as someone who gave up and sacrificed my billion dollar yacht building business to take care of disabled puppies. Gone are the days when brave helmetless warriors faced up to menacing gladiators producing a spine tingling spectacle for all to see. What we are left with thanks to television, play stations and immigration is a bunch of vegetarian overpaid prima-donnas who'se best skill is their ability to complain about pansy little things like stress fractures or hamstring injuries. Regards A daily mail reader.
f.b.m Posted June 20, 2011 Posted June 20, 2011 Steyn recently said that he didn't do much gym work at all. He just runs a lot apparently and that is something that several former great fast bowlers have spoken about as well. Gymming is only on the non-match days. But the warm up and warm down drills on the match days can be very draining since they aren't put in with 40 over a day workloads in mind. So they focus on getting rid of any looseners in the beginning of a spell and preventing injuries.
The Outsider Posted July 25, 2012 Author Posted July 25, 2012 I decided to update these stats since I still don't see fast bowlers bowling longer spells and picking up bigger hauls. Number of 7+ wicket hauls in the 80s (29 times): http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/stats/index.html?bowling_pacespin=1;class=1;filter=advanced;orderby=wickets;spanmax1=31+Dec+1989;spanmin1=01+Jan+1980;spanval1=span;template=results;type=bowling;view=innings;wicketsmin1=7;wicketsval1=wickets 90s (32 times): http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/stats/index.html?bowling_pacespin=1;class=1;filter=advanced;orderby=wickets;spanmax1=31+Dec+1999;spanmin1=01+Jan+1990;spanval1=span;template=results;type=bowling;view=innings;wicketsmin1=7;wicketsval1=wickets 00 - Till Date (25 times): http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/stats/index.html?bowling_pacespin=1;class=1;filter=advanced;orderby=wickets;spanmin2=1+Jan+2000;spanval2=span;template=results;type=bowling;view=innings;wicketsmin1=7;wicketsval1=wickets 8+ wicket hauls: 80s (13 times): http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/stats/index.html?bowling_pacespin=1;class=1;filter=advanced;orderby=wickets;spanmax1=31+Dec+1989;spanmin1=01+Jan+1980;spanval1=span;template=results;type=bowling;view=innings;wicketsmin1=8;wicketsval1=wickets 90s (9 times): http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/stats/index.html?bowling_pacespin=1;class=1;filter=advanced;orderby=wickets;spanmax1=31+Dec+1999;spanmin1=01+Jan+1990;spanval1=span;template=results;type=bowling;view=innings;wicketsmin1=8;wicketsval1=wickets 00 - Till Date (2 times): http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/stats/index.html?bowling_pacespin=1;class=1;filter=advanced;orderby=wickets;spanmin2=01+Jan+2000;spanval2=span;template=results;type=bowling;view=innings;wicketsmin1=8;wicketsval1=wickets After normalizing with number of tests: 7+ wickets/ test : 1. 1980s : 29/266 = 10.9% 2. 1990s : 32/347 = 9.2% 3. 2000+ : 25/570 = 4.4% 8+ wickets/test : 1. 1980s : 13/282 = 4.6% 2. 1990s : 9/347 = 2.6% 3. 2000+ : 2/570 = 0.3% All I can say with the updated numbers is that the pansiness is increasing in modern day fast bowlers and it is reflected in the fact that over the last many years the only all time great bowler is Steyn. This also speaks volumes about batsmen who cannot score at 55-60+ even against the sort of depleted pace bowling attacks across the world.
The Outsider Posted July 25, 2012 Author Posted July 25, 2012 ^ where this leading into :hmmm: :winky: It did not get into the Bradman versus Tendulkar debate when it was first posted and hopefully it will not this time either because it's a completely different subject inherently.
Trichromatic Posted July 25, 2012 Posted July 25, 2012 But then how % of drawn matches is reducing? :dontknow:
The Outsider Posted July 25, 2012 Author Posted July 25, 2012 But then how % of drawn matches is reducing? :dontknow: Lack of batting quality who give wickets to support bowlers and faster scoring rates? Just a guess?
rkt.india Posted July 25, 2012 Posted July 25, 2012 Lack of batting quality who give wickets to support bowlers and faster scoring rates? Just a guess? What batting was lacking in those days was after top order, it used to be easy to get the rest, but not anymore that is why lot of 7-8 wicket hauls. Pitches have turned flat. Even tailenders can handle the bat nowadays, most teams bat deep. #11 is not really #11 in some teams like it used to be before.
CG Posted July 25, 2012 Posted July 25, 2012 Fact is the pitches are flat.Its the main reason,If you give even a sporting track we know what happens to batting lineups.In sa even srilanka made won a test with likes of welegedara.
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now