• Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.

    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, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!

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

**Official** Ireland in England 2019

jimmy101

Cricketer Of The Year
Yeah, their dominance was clearly built around their sledging ;-)

But I'd say the pitches in Australia had a bit less character to them once most of the grounds in the country started employing drop-in pitches. Plus the playing surfaces used to be absolutely huge before roped boundaries came into effect circa 1996.
 

cnerd123

likes this
Also the nature of ODI cricket now and back when Australia dominated was so different. I think it was easier for a good batsman to adapt between the two back then than it is now. This WC aside, if you wish to excel in ODIs for the past four year, it requires adopting a certain style of batting that hasn't been a good fit with increasingly spicier test pitches.

Also I probably should have said that these English batsmen aren't as good as the ones the Aussies had at their disposal too tbf
 

TheJediBrah

Request Your Custom Title Now!
But I'd say the pitches in Australia had a bit less character to them once most of the grounds in the country started employing drop-in pitches.
That all really started after Aus were already on the decline

Also (a bit tangentially) I wouldn't say the pitches in Aus around the late 90s-mid 2000s were particularly batting friendly. Stats tend to support that it was about standard. In fact IIRC the averages runs/wkt in Australia during that time period was actually the second lowest, after South Africa.

Also the nature of ODI cricket now and back when Australia dominated was so different. I think it was easier for a good batsman to adapt between the two back then than it is now.
Yeah, no, not at all IMO. "when Australia dominated" was during the period where scores started sky-rocketing, eg. the 434 vs 438 game.

I think you're sort of on the right track though. It's more the wickets for ODIs have been especially flat the last 5 or so years, especially in England, which will accentuate the difference between ODI batting (eg. a lot of slogging) and Test batting (proper technique). This leads to England struggling batting in Tests because the ideal "techniques" for their ODI wickets have been focused on slogging.

So yeah actually I think you're sort of right regarding adapting. Not that it was easier back then in general, but more that it is hard for England especially atm due to a few factors.
 
Last edited:

jimmy101

Cricketer Of The Year
Oh for sure. In fact the MCG & SCG dished up some diabolical pitches back in the day. Moreover, the GABBA & WACA were often difficult venues for touring teams.
 

trundler

Request Your Custom Title Now!
I wouldn't say it's an excuse along the lines of 'it's just the way he plays'. It's just what will happen if their techniques are centred around biffing on road. Of course they're going to have their middle stumps uprooted.
 

TheJediBrah

Request Your Custom Title Now!
I wouldn't say it's an excuse along the lines of 'it's just the way he plays'. It's just what will happen if their techniques are centred around biffing on road. Of course they're going to have their middle stumps uprooted.
That's exactly correct. It's more of a current England team-specific issue than a "adapting is harder nowadays" thing
 

trundler

Request Your Custom Title Now!
Tbf I only said it is at its hardest and looking at Rohit, Roy, Bairstow, Dhawan, Guptill etc that does seem to be the case. The best players still find a way but they're all accumulators aren't they? Babar, Williamson, Smith, Ross. Kohli is a freak, of course.
 

cnerd123

likes this
As of now, only the fab 4 along with Taylor and Warner qualify for it I think. Amla is done.
Faf has been decent across formats too. And Shakib obv.

Babar's been decent in Tests but hasn't really set the world alight. Shai Hope another name that springs to mind.

Worth digging into the stats if anyone's got the time to see how much overlap we have between the best Test batsmen of the last 4 years and the best ODI batsmen.
 

Burgey

Request Your Custom Title Now!
As of now, only the fab 4 along with Taylor and Warner qualify for it I think. Amla is done.
There’s a lot of money to be made concentrating on shorter format cricket these days. 10 or more years ago the dough was in playing multiple formats, now you can be a T20 specialist and making millions without troubling the test selectors
 

mr_mister

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Faf has been decent across formats too. And Shakib obv.

Babar's been decent in Tests but hasn't really set the world alight. Shai Hope another name that springs to mind.

Worth digging into the stats if anyone's got the time to see how much overlap we have between the best Test batsmen of the last 4 years and the best ODI batsmen.
Outside of 1 test, epic though it was, Hopes test career has been abysmal
 

OverratedSanity

Request Your Custom Title Now!
Haven't checked the record but he too hasn't done that great in tests, right? I don't remember any great knock in tests from him.
He played 2-3 amazing little knocks in SA. He hasn't quite figured out how to get big scores yet but I think he'll do a kohli eventually and translate his great odi form into great test numbers.

He's the best of the next generation after the fab 4 imo
 

Top