Reading CW recently, I have noticed one thing - if threads even have a little bit of juice in them then the posts are generally quite low-standard.
Now I didn't watch that game, but I have had the misfortune of having to read a 30 page debate on the pitch condition of the India/South Africa game. What is clear is that a return to turning-based wickets in India have seen the number of **** posts be 215....which is pretty bad for threads which aren't the England V India at Trent Bridge 2011 thread. And you can survive and make good posts like spikey does with some patience.
Let's also look at Adelaide. It is quite a bit more bowler-friendly than your average Adelaide wicket, yes. But green/bouncy enough to see 12 Jono posts on one day for about 250 likes? That I'm not sure about. It still looked a pretty **** thread.
And let's not forget the Ashes. The threads had spikey but they were far from pasag. Yet you saw **** like 60 all out, and spark only reaching 400 posts in a thread (on a very low word count) once despite some often very average posting from Sledger. Plus also once a side got on top, they stayed there and the opposition's posting would inevitably collapse.
What is clear to me that unless you have a massive thread (like what we saw at BOTM, and also the wrestling thread) posts in the last year or so have been quite low at cricket web. This can only mean in my eyes that posting standards are pretty poor these days. Bring back Richard. Do you agree?