Print

[uknsaunders]

Just going to put this out there for debate. I was thinking back to the late 70's and early 80's, with batsman struggling to cope with some fine quick bowling. Back then I don't remember much in the way of video analysis/bowling machines/batting coaches etc. I'm not saying the batsman then lacked talent, imho they were probably more talented than the crop of today - but I did wonder whether batting practise has moved on and players are more comfortable at 80 mph+ than they use to be?

It's a first class cricket I'm on about but it could equally apply to club cricket I suppose.

[tim2000s]

When did covered pitches become the norm?

[uknsaunders]

late 70's I think. If I remember rightly the Gooch's first test was on an uncovered wicket in 76 and it rained, turning the wicket into a wet flyer. Hence why Gooch bagged a pair.

[petehosk]

Which makes it even more impressive how the likes of Bradman, Hobbs, Hammond, etc used to score so well!!! 

[Buzz]

as covered pitches became the norm in higher level cricket more than 20 years ago, I think that is an aside.

the use of statistics thanks to money ball has made a big difference, the computer software advances have made a big difference as has the amount of cricket on tv which has meant with the likes of Simon Hughes and sky's 12th man the armchair cricketer has far more idea of good techniques.

I really like the way different approaches are encouraged, even if it can be to the detriment of the player.

and we have information sharing on the internet.

I could waffle on on this subject, but I'm going to cook dinner instead...

at all levels coaching has improved.

[Manormanic]

Coaching has certainly improved, both in terms of the level of knowledge specific to the coaching of the game (as opposed to the playing of it) which exists, and in terms of the tools available to assist coaches in doing the best job possible.

But...

...I'm far from convinced that that phenomenon is responsible for the perceived difference in how well batsman play "pace" bowling.  If we benchmark 1986 and 2011, so 25 years apart, there are a number of factors which have made it much easier for batsmen to prosper against the fastest bowling:

1. The standard of pitches - even accepting that they were covered by 1986, pitches worldwide were considerably more helpful to quick bowlers than they are now.  Think about it - Perth aside, where in the world does one now regularly see fast, bouncy wickets for Test cricket?  Part of this is based on the needs of administrators for the game to last as near as possible five days, but drop in pitches (NZ), a lack of investment in infrastructure (the West Indies) and changes to individual grounds (Old Trafford, Headingley, The Oval) have made pitches bland.

2. The amount of cricket played - allied to the modern obsession with non specific fitness, as opposed to match fitness, this means that the fastest bowlers spend an inordinate amount of time benched.

3. Bigger bats lighter pressed equals easier runs for batsman against all bowling, fast or slow.

Of course, the biggest difference really is the lesser standard of fast bowling  in the game - in the easrlier timeframe, the West Indies alone could field Marshall, Garner, Ambrose, Walsh, the Benjamins, Syl Clarke, Wayne Daniel etc, whilst Pakistan had Imran, Wasim etc and the Kiwis Hadlee. There isn;t that much around of a comparable class today!

[uknsaunders]

some good points there and I'd agree the pitches are certainly less helpful. However, when you look at the training put in and the coaching available to the present England batsman compared to the amount of training the class of 86 had (for example) - it must make a difference.

I very much doubt Athey, Broad, Lamb, Gatting, Gower, Botham hit the bowling machine very often and who's to say they wouldn't of won more matches with todays training.

[Buzz]

On the fast bowling point - my view is that if you allow for the flatter pitches the bowlers these days are underrated.
If we look at all other aspects of athletic persuits - the players are fitter, stronger faster with better diets and better recovery. The have better equipment and training facilities.
With all this it is inconceivable that they are not better than in the past - I think the difference is the rose tinted glasses people remember some of these players by.
Anyone fancy facing Broad, Anderson, Finn, Bresnan, Durnbach, Meaker, Tremett... on an uncovered wicket... thought not.

Back on batting - the improvements in coaching, facilities and protective equipment have had a massive impact and we must not forget the shrinking of boundaries - this has an effect on bowling and batting...

[Manormanic]

If we look at all other aspects of athletic persuits - the players are fitter, stronger faster with better diets and better recovery. The have better equipment and training facilities.
With all this it is inconceivable that they are not better than in the past - I think the difference is the rose tinted glasses people remember some of these players by.

In some ways, yes - but I do wonder how much their pursuit of athletic excellent affects their actual match fitness - remember that Tremlett only really came back to prominence when he stopped trying to build that daft bodybuilders physique, and apply the same thoughts to Simon Jones, Brett Lee, Shaun Tait, Irfan Pathan et al whose careers tailed off because they were never fit for more than ten minutes straight.


And lets be fair in our "rose tinted" recollections - yes, the guys you mention are good.  But are they really the second coming of Holding, Roberts, Marshal, Garner and Croft?  I'd wager you wouldn't fancy trying to make that argument...

[Buzz]

nope... they mainly were frightening

[Mortimer]

late 70's I think. If I remember rightly the Gooch's first test was on an uncovered wicket in 76 and it rained, turning the wicket into a wet flyer. Hence why Gooch bagged a pair.

sorry to be a pedant, but Gooch's first test was in 75, at Edgbaston, against the convicts. It was Mike Denness's last test, both as captain and player. He won the tosss and asked Australia to bat, and England lost by an innings.

[tim2000s]

nope... they mainly were frightening

I think that's the main point. In recent years, the only guys that I can think of that were truly frightening were Shoaib and Brett Lee, and even Shoaib would have days when he simply wasn't frightening enough because the ball came nowhere near you.

The rules have also changed, which doesn't seem to have been picked up on. Days were, when it was acceptable to bowl 6 really nasty, short pitched balls at the batsman. These days are gone, with the 1 bouncer/batsman/over rule. The bowlers aren't allowed to be as scary, so they have had to come up with different weapons. What's the point of bowling at 95mph if you can't bowl 5 at the head and one yorker?

[Buzz]

Sorry, but in terms of being afraind for my well being, I don't fancy facing (in no particular order):
Tremlett
Meaker
Finn
Broard
the much maligned Mitchell Johnson
Stein
Morkle
and quite a few others...
and Jimmy Anderson as he has the ability to make you look really silly

and that is including the changes to the bouncer rules and improved protection....
We shouldn't underestimate the quality in some of the quicks around at the moment, just because the pitches are dead.

or maybe I am just a big girl.

[Simmy]

i wouldnt mind facing any of them. just to see how good they where but i would be pooing my self

[tim2000s]

Sorry, but in terms of being afraind for my well being, I don't fancy facing (in no particular order):
Tremlett
Meaker
Finn
Broard
the much maligned Mitchell Johnson
Stein
Morkle
and quite a few others...
and Jimmy Anderson as he has the ability to make you look really silly

and that is including the changes to the bouncer rules and improved protection....
We shouldn't underestimate the quality in some of the quicks around at the moment, just because the pitches are dead.

or maybe I am just a big girl.

When I say frightening, I mean "Frightening to an international batsman"! I don't really fancy facing someone who can put the ball on my toes at >90mph as Finn, Tremlett and Broad all can.