Has the number of follow-on enforcements decreased in the last decade?

[Brainfade]

Back when I was growing up, there was a sense of false prestige associated with enforcing the follow-on.  It was an act of egotism.  But, recently it seems like teams like to bat again and give their opponent virtually un-achievable 4th innings targets (like 500+).  My guess is that the VVSL and RD epic in 2001 was the game that changed the course of follow-on enforcements forever.  I am, of course, just going by gut feeling and don't have the skills to tease out the stats.  It would be cool if one of you smart people can help.

 

[gattaca]

It was egotism and pride but bowlers were never considered when enforcing follow on. Now bowlers are rare resources in world cricket a break of 60-80 overs will help them relax and focus better.

[speedster]

8 minutes ago, Moth2Flame said:

Back when I was growing up, there was a sense of false prestige associated with enforcing the follow-on.  It was an act of egotism.  But, recently it seems like teams like to bat again and give their opponent virtually un-achievable 4th innings targets (like 500+).  My guess is that the VVSL and RD epic in 2001 was the game that changed the course of follow-on enforcements forever.  I am, of course, just going by gut feeling and don't have the skills to tease out the stats.  It would be cool if one of you smart people can help.

 

Yes it seems teams are unwilling to take a chance, they prefer to bat teams out, probably also has to flat surfaces one encounters these days so makes it difficult for bowlers who would be tired anyway as someone mentioned

[sourab10forever]

It's all about giving rest to the bowlers who aren't used to playing 2 full test days continues in the field thanks to LOIs.

[sourab10forever]

This "unachievable 4th innings target" thing would have backfired big time for Aus had Pak chased down the total in the 1st test.

[BeautifulGame]

It's all about giving rest to the bowlers who aren't used to playing 2 full test days continues in the field thanks to LOIs.

Yes it seems teams are unwilling to take a chance, they prefer to bat teams out, probably also has to flat surfaces one encounters these days so makes it difficult for bowlers who would be tired anyway as someone mentioned

It isn't because bowlers aren't used to 2 full days of test cricket but because of the shortened gaps between tests nowadays.

In the past there used to be 5-6 days minimum,even rest days, but nowadays just 2-3 days at best .

[Brainfade]

So, y'all are saying that the 2001 VVSL epic has not put a shit-scare in prospective follow-on enforcers?  I would love to see a before and after analysis, and wish I knew how to mess around with these data without going down a list of 100s of tests manually.

[fineleg]

When Test cricket had a Rest day in between day3 and day 4, versus now, stats will be interesting.

When was Rest day removed from Test cricket?

Edited January 4, 2017 by fineleg

[gattaca]

35 minutes ago, Moth2Flame said:

So, y'all are saying that the 2001 VVSL epic has not put a shit-scare in prospective follow-on enforcers?  I would love to see a before and after analysis, and wish I knew how to mess around with these data without going down a list of 100s of tests manually.

Steve Waugh enforced follow on 7 times after Kolkata. Kolkata was the first time as captain he enforced follow on. So I doubt this is the case.  Also Australian captains are defensive after Waugh. Pointing and Clarke are defensive compared to Waugh. Steve smith even more defensive compared to pointing and Clarke.

Edited January 4, 2017 by gattaca

[sandeep]

Back in the days tails were quite long and easy to wrap up, so you effectively needed to take 6 or 7 good wickets to finish an innings.  These days, that's not the case, so bowlers need to work harder and consequently need more rest as well.  

[coffee_rules]

Basic Test Cricket 101...Bat first, why do you want to take a chance and bat last... just to achieve glory/fame? 

 

This rule, Nightwatchman, etc. where old-school rules are being questioned and are fading away with modern cricket.

[sourab10forever]

21 minutes ago, sandeep said:

Back in the days tails were quite long and easy to wrap up, so you effectively needed to take 6 or 7 good wickets to finish an innings.  These days, that's not the case, so bowlers need to work harder and consequently need more rest as well.  

Good point...

 

[Trichromatic]

On 1/4/2017 at 6:36 PM, Moth2Flame said:

Back when I was growing up, there was a sense of false prestige associated with enforcing the follow-on.  It was an act of egotism.  But, recently it seems like teams like to bat again and give their opponent virtually un-achievable 4th innings targets (like 500+).  My guess is that the VVSL and RD epic in 2001 was the game that changed the course of follow-on enforcements forever.  I am, of course, just going by gut feeling and don't have the skills to tease out the stats.  It would be cool if one of you smart people can help.

 

No, Kolkata test isn't the reason. As mentioned below:

 

On 1/4/2017 at 9:04 PM, gattaca said:

Steve Waugh enforced follow on 7 times after Kolkata. Kolkata was the first time as captain he enforced follow on. So I doubt this is the case.  Also Australian captains are defensive after Waugh. Pointing and Clarke are defensive compared to Waugh. Steve smith even more defensive compared to pointing and Clarke.

Cricket has changed a lot after the war. Pre-war era had approx 50-60 overs per day or less. 40s to 60s was the time when started bowling 100-120 overs day in an day. Cricket was played in England and Australia where could play in longer days and bowl more overs.

 

Later cricket became popular in other parts of the world. From late 70s when great pacers were on rise all over the world, number of overs bowled in a day started decreasing again. WI used to bowl 70-75 overs in a day with pacers taking lot of time to relax before bowling next delivery.

 

So it was easier for the captains to enforce the follow on.

 

Once the mandatory 90 overs rule was implemented and captains were penalized for slow over rates, break time for pacers has reduced and now they are finding it difficult to bowl 100 overs again after bowling 100 in first inning. Moreover with flat pitches there are lot of chances that teams just bat for longer in 2nd inning even if they are bowled out cheaply in first. You don't want to risk an injury to your bowlers. They don't have luxury of bowling slow over rates anymore.

 

On a side note, this is one reason I don't believe that the bowlers of 30s-50s were comparable to modern pacers in terms of speed. It's not easy to bowl fast and bowl 120 overs in a day.

[Cricketics]

Even though I know Australian batted brilliantly, but there was no way Pakistan could put pressure on Australia, and hence I though Smith should have tried to put follow even today. Pak might have been rolled out by 200 runs with Aus having enough time to win. Pakistan would have surely played more shots than what they will do now, had the trail would have been of just 200. Now they will be conservative a bit and go for the shots on the bad ball. And it is a still pretty good pitch to bat, so will be lot of hard work for Aussie bowlers.

[bowl_out]

Giving bowlers rest and not wanting for bat 4th, particularly in subcontinent conditions.. 

And ensuring you can't lose.

[King Tendulkar]

What was fuss about not enforcing follow on 

 

perfect tactic . As will be seen by india win tommorow 

Edited February 12, 2017 by King Tendulkar

[King Tendulkar]

Perfect tactic now not enforcing follow on unless bowl a team out real cheap and quick 

 

bowlers get a rest . Invaluable even if get only 3 hours to put feet up , have a massage , refuel properly and prepare to do busssienss .  They are human beings not machines , need to best to get best from them .

 

plus best to just bowl day 5 and not bat alll.

 

also can control game . As if have to bat a bit to reach totoal ,opposition can bowl very slow over rates and Weird defensive field on maybe day 5 horror track 

 

plus having a bat and throwing willow before declaring mentally and physically wrecks team and effects it's batting 

[kosingh]

plus on deteriorating pitches you want your spinners bowling on 5th day. Follow on is especially tricky on those pitches.

[King Tendulkar]

Perfect decision 

 

Indian win 

[coffee_rules]

I3 batting is different than I4. In I4, they push for a win or draw. I3, they would still enforce a win by setting a target for I4. Unless the innings break is early in the morning or if the team is a rank bad team and the lead and pitch are so good for folding the opposition, nobody goes for a follow-on these days, Esp wtih no rest days, it doesn't make sense at all. The break came about 15 min before lunch after bowling 100 + overs, bowlers were tired. It made perfect  sense to not enforce the fon.