Cricket 24/7  

Welcome to the Cricket 24/7.

You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. There are also more forums available to members, such as the Lounge - where members chat about just about anything under the sun except cricket!

Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!

If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact contact us.


Go Back   Cricket 24/7 > Cricket Discussion Forums > International Cricket
Register FAQDonate Members List Calendar Casino Articles Terms of Use Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 7th May 2016, 14:10   #161
thedon
County Pro
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 844
Quote:
Originally Posted by slop View Post
You've taken the post in isolation and ignored that it refers to T20 being blamed for the decline

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Context

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post_hoc_ergo_propter_hoc
Not at all, I directly mentioned it (t20) and ignored nothing.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man

Quote:
Originally Posted by thedon View Post
I think not only batting, but the standard of cricket in every aspect has declined in recent times. This seems commensurate with the rise in popularity of t20, but who knows.
Modern professional t20 at the level we have in recent times is unprecedented, hence wondering why observations from the 1800's on when it wasn't, would necessarily be relevant.
__________________
carpe diem quam minimum credula postero

Last edited by thedon : 7th May 2016 at 18:36.
thedon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 7th May 2016, 18:27   #162
Fatslogger
Self Confessed Mentalist
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Hitchin
Team(s): England and Liverpool
Age: 41
Posts: 43,274
Quote:
Originally Posted by thedon View Post
Thanks for such peerless insight fatslogger. lol. Are you inferring from this that the apparent drop towards club standard in test cricket at the highest levels doesn't exist at all? Or it's all good, because it might have happened before? Something else?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ignoratio_elenchi

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Association_fallacy

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Affirming_the_consequent
That's an awful lot of Wiki links that don't really refer usefully to my post, although I suppose you might have linked the missing the point one because you did. Anyway, my post was brief but the point I was making is that test cricket's decline has been much commented on before and traditionalists (and supporters of test cricket pretty often are traditionalists) are often bewailing the way things have declined in modern times, all the way back to times we would now think of as pretty ancient.

I don't remotely accept that test cricket is dropping towards club standard but I've got too much gambling to do to hunt down a Wiki page with a Latin term for wild exaggeration. I don't think the standard of the game is at a particularly low ebb. Certainly the Aussies are weaker than they've mostly been from the 90s on but I still think they have a pretty decent team with some exceptional players. SA has had an excellent test side for the last few years, likely fading a bit now but that hardly coincides with T20 and is just a cyclical thing. England, Pakistan and to a lesser extent NZ have sides that have probably recently been above their means for the last couple of decades. Murali retiring isn't the fault of T20 but SL doesn't have a particularly bad side by historical standards either. India lacks fast bowling firepower, has good batting and spin bowling but it was ever thus. Bangladesh have shown the odd good sign. Obviously there aren't any terribly positive things to say about Zim or WI for very different reasons but even then I'm not sure it's that much to do with T20. Obviously WI players don't necessarily focus on tests but the decline was well established before T20 existed and even if you returned the T20 franchise crowd to the test team, it would still be bad.

Most of the better teams are currently good at home and comparatively weak away but that's mostly because they're relatively evenly matched.

So In summary, don't buy the decline argument and don't buy the T20 basis for it even if I did.
__________________
Work is the curse of the drinking classes - Wilde

Last edited by Fatslogger : 7th May 2016 at 19:24.
Fatslogger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 7th May 2016, 18:54   #163
thedon
County Pro
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 844
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fatslogger View Post
That's an awful lot of Wiki links that don't really refer usefully to my post, although I suppose you might have linked the missing the point one because you did.

The point I was making is that test cricket's decline has been much commented on before and traditionalists (and supporters of test cricket pretty often are traditionalists) are often bewailing the way things have declined in modern times.

I don't remotely accept that test cricket is dropping towards club standard (I've got too much gambling to do to hunt down a Wiki page with a Latin term for wild exaggeration). I don't think the standard of the game is at a particularly low ebb. Certainly the Aussies are weaker than they've mostly been from the 90s on but I still think they have a pretty decent team with some exceptional players. SA has had an excellent test side for the last few years, likely fading a bit now but that hardly coincides with T20 and is just a cyclical thing. England, Pakistan and to a lesser extent NZ have sides that have probably recently been above their means for the last couple of decades. Murali retiring isn't the fault of T20 but SL doesn't have a particularly bad side by historical standards either. India lacks fast bowling firepower, has good batting and spin bowling but it was ever thus. Bangladesh have shown the odd good sign. Obviously there aren't any terribly positive things to say about Zim or WI for very different reasons but even then I'm not sure it's that much to do with T20.

Most of the better teams are currently good at home and comparatively weak away but that's mostly because they're relatively evenly matched.

So In summary, don't buy the decline argument and don't buy the T20 basis for it even if I did.
Well, that's a much better explanation of your position. Thanks fatslogger, wasn't so hard was it?

Apart from that, I'm far less sure. I think cricketers seem to have the concentration powers of molluscs in the field, batting is going down the gurgler, the bowling seems to be a bit ordinary too. A lot of matches where teams seem to fold at the first hint of pressure lately. Like they no longer have the ability to fight. Not necessarily win or salvage a draw, just a respectable effort. The twists and turns of a test match aren't there very often any more. Possibly too much odi (which is just an extended version of t20/hit and hope nowadays) as well as t20.

Though I don't really know if it is from t20. The standard might be all good as you say, or possibly a natural cycle and I'm being unrealistic. I'm far less certain at this stage and am having doubts that the appeal (and focus) is necessarily in test cricket for the players, like it once might have been.

ps. This might simply be an Aussie thing. The last 10 Ashes matches were atrocious and one sided, nearly all of them a forgone conclusion from day one (which means England have a similar problem to an extent at least). Our trips to the subcontinent were even worse. We have had some rubbish teams before and don't travel well in those parts, but at least managed to lose a bit more respectably at times lol.
__________________
carpe diem quam minimum credula postero

Last edited by thedon : 7th May 2016 at 19:18.
thedon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 7th May 2016, 20:00   #164
Fatslogger
Self Confessed Mentalist
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Hitchin
Team(s): England and Liverpool
Age: 41
Posts: 43,274
Quote:
Originally Posted by thedon View Post
Well, that's a much better explanation of your position. Thanks fatslogger, wasn't so hard was it?
I've got lazier in my middle age so found it unacceptably much effort and now I've got engaged in an interesting conversation and am going to have to post more in depth posts, which is clearly an enormous imposition.

Quote:
Apart from that, I'm far less sure. I think cricketers seem to have the concentration powers of molluscs in the field, batting is going down the gurgler, the bowling seems to be a bit ordinary too. A lot of matches where teams seem to fold at the first hint of pressure lately. Like they no longer have the ability to fight. Not necessarily win or salvage a draw, just a respectable effort. The twists and turns of a test match aren't there very often any more. Possibly too much odi (which is just an extended version of t20/hit and hope nowadays) as well as t20.
Still think you're exaggerating, although I'm not sure you're totally wrong either. Did you see the earlier link to the analysis that showed how tests often end up as one sided wins, even between evenly matched sides? See below too. I think you'd actually need to put a lot of effort in to analyse the game's history to see whether teams really were folding more easily, as there are a lot of confounders, to say the least. Even if they are, that doesn't prove a drop in quality as such.

I would admit that we're looking at a world game relatively short of really high quality fast bowling, by comparison with the glory days of the 1990s and early 2000s but that was an exceptionally golden era, I think. It would help if the young Aussies weren't all made of gossamer though.

Quote:
Though I don't really know if it is from t20. The standard might be all good as you say, or possibly a natural cycle and I'm being unrealistic. I'm far less certain at this stage and am having doubts that the appeal (and focus) is necessarily in test cricket for the players, like it once might have been.

ps. This might simply be an Aussie thing. The last 10 Ashes matches were atrocious and one sided, nearly all of them a forgone conclusion from day one (which means England have a similar problem to an extent at least). Our trips to the subcontinent were even worse. We have had some rubbish teams before and don't travel well in those parts, but at least managed to lose a bit more respectably at times lol.
As above, I don't really think the game is in widespread great health but I don't think it ever has been. It's easy to look back at times in the past and reckon that the standard was generally high but the period of Aussie dominance that lasted over a decade coincided with some other sides being pretty indifferent, England certainly, up to 2005 and the stunning clashes of the 2005 Ashes weren't exactly replicated in the Ashes contests before or since, were they? Again as I've posted before, even evenly matched teams don't often produce close games. The 2005 series was bizarre in its production of three almost all time nail biters. I think it's going a bit far to say that almost every one of the recent Ashes tests has been programmed in from day 1 although there were several that were. So accepted that the current Aussie team isn't as good as its recent predecessors and travels badly but it still knocks spots off most of those from the 1980s, say.
__________________
Work is the curse of the drinking classes - Wilde

Last edited by Fatslogger : 7th May 2016 at 22:44.
Fatslogger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 7th May 2016, 20:08   #165
Ali TT
Posting God
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 16,619
Can't agree with don's assessment of fielding, which has improved immensely with the advent of t20, especially ground fielding. England have shelled plenty recently but then they did in the 90s too
__________________
WARNING
Reading the above post may cause bouts of nausea.
Ali TT is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 7th May 2016, 21:34   #166
CDogg16
Established International
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Posts: 4,000
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ali TT View Post
Can't agree with don's assessment of fielding, which has improved immensely with the advent of t20, especially ground fielding. England have shelled plenty recently but then they did in the 90s too
Fielding on the boundary has improved ten fold, I think slip catching has worsened a tad.
CDogg16 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 8th May 2016, 03:45   #167
Mickmac
County 2nd Team
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: Chiang Mai, Thailand
Team(s): The Game
Posts: 215
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ali TT View Post
So AB is not a classic test player in the same way that Steve Smith has been found out, I presume?

Humouring you and your mythical Tavaresque test batsman, there are others around currently, some quite young -
Murali Vijay
Kane Williamson
Tom Latham
Kraigg Brathwaite
Dean Elgar
Asad Shafiq

Lots of teams in transition currently, so we don't know how some sides will develop or bounce back.
..............."in the same way that Steve Smith has been found out"..............

If he was "found out" it would only be about his computer hacking skills, the wily fox got into the ICC database and made himself #1 test batsman !
Or did you find out something else about him ?
Mickmac is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 8th May 2016, 05:26   #168
thedon
County Pro
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 844
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ali TT View Post
Can't agree with don's assessment of fielding, which has improved immensely with the advent of t20, especially ground fielding. England have shelled plenty recently but then they did in the 90s too
More specifically, slips feilding which seems to be a low standard recently. Not just the occasional put down which has always happened, but overall. Are there any standout slips units?Though I don't think outfielding has improved overall in test matches at all either. Quite a few donkeys around. In odi and t20 which is based on negative field settings there has been improvement and we see some occasional brilliance, it hasn't transferred to test matches.
__________________
carpe diem quam minimum credula postero
thedon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 8th May 2016, 06:02   #169
thedon
County Pro
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 844
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fatslogger View Post
Still think you're exaggerating, although I'm not sure you're totally wrong either. Did you see the earlier link to the analysis that showed how tests often end up as one sided wins, even between evenly matched sides? See below too. I think you'd actually need to put a lot of effort in to analyse the game's history to see whether teams really were folding more easily, as there are a lot of confounders, to say the least. Even if they are, that doesn't prove a drop in quality as such.
I think analysis could be misleading this way (depending how they are done of course). For instance the 2006 and 2013 whitewashes. In 2006-7 that score was in no way indicative of the series itself. England played some good cricket at times and just ran into a great team that also had to play at their best in home conditions to achieve that result. In the last one...6 nil (out of 5 matches lol) would have been a better indication of how the series played out. Same result on paper though.

I can remember us going to India with an ordinary team towards the end of Pontings reign and having good competitive series, though we never won a match. From memory it was heroics from Laxman and the tail that was the main difference. We used to be at least competitive, even with mediocrity but failure just seems assured now from the beginning. The last couple of series in Aus have been similarly one sided. The extent to which series and matches are one sided might not show out in analysis.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fatslogger View Post
I would admit that we're looking at a world game relatively short of really high quality fast bowling, by comparison with the glory days of the 1990s and early 2000s but that was an exceptionally golden era, I think. It would help if the young Aussies weren't all made of gossamer though.
I might be looking back through rose coloured specs, but since around the end of the Lawry era, I can't remember such a dearth of good fast bowlers around the world. England and the Saffers still have reasonable attacks with Broad and Steyn standouts, but it remains to be seen whether Steyn continues to punish himself much longer.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fatslogger View Post
As above, I don't really think the game is in widespread great health but I don't think it ever has been. It's easy to look back at times in the past and reckon that the standard was generally high but the period of Aussie dominance that lasted over a decade coincided with some other sides being pretty indifferent, England certainly, up to 2005 and the stunning clashes of the 2005 Ashes weren't exactly replicated in the Ashes contests before or since, were they? Again as I've posted before, even evenly matched teams don't often produce close games. The 2005 series was bizarre in its production of three almost all time nail biters. I think it's going a bit far to say that almost every one of the recent Ashes tests has been programmed in from day 1 although there were several that were. So accepted that the current Aussie team isn't as good as its recent predecessors and travels badly but it still knocks spots off most of those from the 1980s, say.
I'm not expecting repeats of 2005. Though I think 2009 was a very enjoyable series and would be happy enough with that. I actually do think the current Aussie team is reminiscent of the mid '80's. That they have somehow managed to be anywhere near the top of the rankings puts things into perspective IMO. The way the domestic competition seems to be regarded as an obstacle to t20 from administrators has long been a worrying sign here also.
__________________
carpe diem quam minimum credula postero

Last edited by thedon : 8th May 2016 at 06:44.
thedon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 8th May 2016, 08:54   #170
Ali TT
Posting God
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 16,619
Question

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mickmac View Post
..............."in the same way that Steve Smith has been found out"..............

If he was "found out" it would only be about his computer hacking skills, the wily fox got into the ICC database and made himself #1 test batsman !
Or did you find out something else about him ?
Don't worry, in joke on this board.

Quote:
Originally Posted by thedon View Post
More specifically, slips feilding which seems to be a low standard recently. Not just the occasional put down which has always happened, but overall. Are there any standout slips units?Though I don't think outfielding has improved overall in test matches at all either. Quite a few donkeys around. In odi and t20 which is based on negative field settings there has been improvement and we see some occasional brilliance, it hasn't transferred to test matches.
We'll have to disagree about this. Yes, there are still donkeys lumbering around but they are more athletic donkeys than even ten years ago.

Can't speak for others about the slip fielding, but England have struggled a bit over recent years. However, the worst slipper we have had over that time was a certain Ian Bell, who even his most ardent supporters were soon forced to admit was not a t20 player.
__________________
WARNING
Reading the above post may cause bouts of nausea.
Ali TT is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 8th May 2016, 13:01   #171
thedon
County Pro
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 844
The point taken, but it doesn't preclude that people can be poor in the slips regardless of playing t20 or not.

At any rate we seem in an unprecedented time at the moment. When odi's first became popular it didn't seem to have this impact. Will be interesting to see what happens, t20 is immensely popular at the moment. It's the "evolution" of the game anyway and the effort will go into supplying people with what they like (and what makes the most money), which is fair enough.
__________________
carpe diem quam minimum credula postero
thedon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 8th May 2016, 13:24   #172
D/L
World Class
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Leeds
Team(s): Yorkshire CCC & England, Wakefield Trinity RLFC, Leeds Carnegie RUFC
Posts: 6,524
Quote:
Originally Posted by thedon View Post
... The last 10 Ashes matches were atrocious and one sided, nearly all of them a forgone conclusion from day one (which means England have a similar problem to an extent at least). ...
Indeed, much disappointment at the standard of cricket was expressed at the time, particularly during the most recent Ashes series.

Is the lack of application and determination and the "gung-ho" approach we see in much test cricket now coincidental with the glut of T20 cricket or cause and effect? I'd say it is more likely to be the latter.
D/L is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 8th May 2016, 22:56   #173
geoff_boycotts_grandmother
Posting God
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 27,075
Quote:
Originally Posted by D/L View Post
Indeed, much disappointment at the standard of cricket was expressed at the time, particularly during the most recent Ashes series.

Is the lack of application and determination and the "gung-ho" approach we see in much test cricket now coincidental with the glut of T20 cricket or cause and effect? I'd say it is more likely to be the latter.
The hugely successful Australian team of the 90s and early 00s were playing that sort of cricket with players like Hayden and Gilchrist before T20 cricket had been invented.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Michelle Fivefer
It was a poor innings by Bell with the bat.
geoff_boycotts_grandmother is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 9th May 2016, 10:55   #174
D/L
World Class
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Leeds
Team(s): Yorkshire CCC & England, Wakefield Trinity RLFC, Leeds Carnegie RUFC
Posts: 6,524
That's only saying that Australia had a couple of very attacking batsmen in those days and who could disagree? Many sides, going back many years, have had similar. Colin Milburn is probably the earliest example I can remember seeing play.

The point being made is, that since the advent of T20, we have seen far fewer players who, realising that victory is most unlikely, will pull out all the stops in going for a draw. It's all to do with deficiencies in skill and attitude and the glut of T20 must be a significant factor.
D/L is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 9th May 2016, 11:06   #175
Ali TT
Posting God
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 16,619
I think we need some Gabe type analysis here to prove D/L's hypothesis. Not sure what questions we'd need to ask, perhaps length of fourth innings in overs year on year? That would only give the headline trend, would require further deciphering to determine if t20 was a casual factor.
__________________
WARNING
Reading the above post may cause bouts of nausea.
Ali TT is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 9th May 2016, 11:27   #176
D/L
World Class
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Leeds
Team(s): Yorkshire CCC & England, Wakefield Trinity RLFC, Leeds Carnegie RUFC
Posts: 6,524
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ali TT View Post
I think we need some Gabe type analysis here to prove D/L's hypothesis. Not sure what questions we'd need to ask, perhaps length of fourth innings in overs year on year? That would only give the headline trend, would require further deciphering to determine if t20 was a casual factor.
Or even a causal one.

Good idea, though.
D/L is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 9th May 2016, 12:24   #177
geoff_boycotts_grandmother
Posting God
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 27,075
Quote:
Originally Posted by D/L View Post
That's only saying that Australia had a couple of very attacking batsmen in those days and who could disagree? Many sides, going back many years, have had similar. Colin Milburn is probably the earliest example I can remember seeing play.

The point being made is, that since the advent of T20, we have seen far fewer players who, realising that victory is most unlikely, will pull out all the stops in going for a draw. It's all to do with deficiencies in skill and attitude and the glut of T20 must be a significant factor.
I suspect that it's more that with faster scoring rates teams have to bat for longer to save tests, but I'd be interested to hear how many examples you have of teams batting a long time to save test matches in the pre-T20 era.

Obviously Atherton-Russell at Jo'burg is an example but that was rightly fêted at the time as it was the exception rather than the rule and that innings has since been surpassed in length in tests for England by a T20 centurion in saving a test match anyway.

The number of tests drawn with 9 wickets down also seems to have increased since T20's introduction. Pulling out all the stops would seem to involve no.11 batting.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Michelle Fivefer
It was a poor innings by Bell with the bat.
geoff_boycotts_grandmother is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 9th May 2016, 17:06   #178
D/L
World Class
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Leeds
Team(s): Yorkshire CCC & England, Wakefield Trinity RLFC, Leeds Carnegie RUFC
Posts: 6,524
I think the fêting of that was not that it was an exception but rather that it was an outstanding example of something that was more the rule at the time - that and the ferocity of Donald's bowling.

The only significance of scoring rates (along with bowlers' strike rates, of course) are where they are markedly different between the two teams. 'twas ever thus and has no real bearing upon the matter.
D/L is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 9th May 2016, 17:28   #179
geoff_boycotts_grandmother
Posting God
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 27,075
Quote:
Originally Posted by D/L View Post
I think the fêting of that was not that it was an exception but rather that it was an outstanding example of something that was more the rule at the time - that and the ferocity of Donald's bowling.

The only significance of scoring rates (along with bowlers' strike rates, of course) are where they are markedly different between the two teams. 'twas ever thus and has no real bearing upon the matter.
Number of times a team batting 4th in a drawn test faced 90 or more overs:

Last ten years: 18
90s: 18
80s: 8
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Michelle Fivefer
It was a poor innings by Bell with the bat.
geoff_boycotts_grandmother is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 9th May 2016, 17:42   #180
Ali TT
Posting God
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 16,619
Quote:
Originally Posted by D/L View Post
Or even a causal one.

Good idea, though.
Bloody predictive text.

Another factor to consider, which might explain the number of last wicket saves in recent years is that there are fewer utter rabbits kicking around. Tens and elevens still like to give it the long handle when they can, but seem to be more able to block it out than once upon a time.

Jimmy would've probably been a no9 thirty years ago, even a batting all-rounder for england in the late 90s.
__________________
WARNING
Reading the above post may cause bouts of nausea.
Ali TT is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 14:46.



Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
© Cricket247.org