• 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.

Are tons really that impressive in this era?

Status
Not open for further replies.

Dan

Hall of Fame Member
Oh look another two tons by india!..ZZZZZZZZZZZ like i said they are a dime a dozen now!!.

Crap pitches and crap attacks are making these batsmen look like world beaters 8-) .
Nah look I agree with you that there are a lot of 'easy' tons being made and the amount of runs being scored by the tail (in particular) is starting to take the piss a bit, but actually watch the tons before writing them off.

I don't care how many tons are being scored, how flat the deck was, or how crap (even though it isn't) the attack is -- Kohli and Rahul batted extremely well and deserved those tons. Watching them live, that Kohli one was something special -- one of those innings where I looked up at the scorecard multiple times and went "****, he's on that many already, we're not getting this bloke out today". And Australia wasn't bowling badly (for the most part).

Rahul's, while far more chance-y and far less fluent, was an incredibly valuable knock. The guy's in his second Test, playing Australia in Australia, after having basically the worst debut in Test history, in the midst of a shambles of a side. You can't roll your eyes and use them as proof of your concept, though I admit there are plenty other innings that fit the bill.


Could we devalue taking a 5 for in the 80/90's just as easily. We counter the bigger bat argument with the pitch condition and the batsmen were obviously weaker.
I get that you're being facetious, but considering with 5-fers you're basically competing against your teammates (i.e. only 10 wickets can fall, while a batsman making a ton doesn't preclude 2 more batsmen from making tons), I doubt 5-fers would be devalued unless we changed team sizes.






Also, the desire to ensure Tests last 5 days for the TV rights is probably another factor leading to less spicy decks.
 

Noah

School Boy/Girl Captain
Well you're entitled to your opinion but i'll still stick with mine thanks.
Yeah of course I'm entitled to an opinion; what a banal statement. If you have no interest in engaging on any level why bother making a thread that appear to ask for opinions and gives the illusion that you're interested in a debate or discussion. That's 5 minutes of my life that I'll never get back.
 
Last edited:

WindieWeathers

International Regular
Yeah of course I'm entitled to an opinion; what a banal statement. If you have no interest in engaging on any level why bother making a thread that appear to ask for opinions and gives the illusion that you're interested in a debate or discussion. That's 5 minutes of my life that I'll never get back.
Well you're telling me "oh actually this and that is not true" when you don't have any evidence to BACK UP if my claims are "true" or not. So if you're so one eyed from the outset then all i can say is i'll stick with my view and you're welcome to stick with yours :unsure: .
 

WindieWeathers

International Regular
Nah look I agree with you that there are a lot of 'easy' tons being made and the amount of runs being scored by the tail (in particular) is starting to take the piss a bit, but actually watch the tons before writing them off.

I don't care how many tons are being scored, how flat the deck was, or how crap (even though it isn't) the attack is -- Kohli and Rahul batted extremely well and deserved those tons. Watching them live, that Kohli one was something special -- one of those innings where I looked up at the scorecard multiple times and went "****, he's on that many already, we're not getting this bloke out today". And Australia wasn't bowling badly (for the most part).

Rahul's, while far more chance-y and far less fluent, was an incredibly valuable knock. The guy's in his second Test, playing Australia in Australia, after having basically the worst debut in Test history, in the midst of a shambles of a side. You can't roll your eyes and use them as proof of your concept, though I admit there are plenty other innings that fit the bill.



I get that you're being facetious, but considering with 5-fers you're basically competing against your teammates (i.e. only 10 wickets can fall, while a batsman making a ton doesn't preclude 2 more batsmen from making tons), I doubt 5-fers would be devalued unless we changed team sizes.






Also, the desire to ensure Tests last 5 days for the TV rights is probably another factor leading to less spicy decks.
Like i said Dan it wasn't a knock on the Indian batsmen it was a knock on the amount of tons being scored in the current climate. I like to see quality batting myself but it's getting scandalous how many just above average players are being allowed to hit tons like it's going out of fashion...we all saw Kohli in England and you're telling me drastic changes have been made between now and then? i don't think so.
 

harsh.ag

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Yeah of course I'm entitled to an opinion; what a banal statement. If you have no interest in engaging on any level why bother making a thread that appear to ask for opinions and gives the illusion that you're interested in a debate or discussion. That's 5 minutes of my life that I'll never get back.
The glorious things first world citizens take for granted :happy:
 

harsh.ag

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Like i said Dan it wasn't a knock on the Indian batsmen it was a knock on the amount of tons being scored in the current climate. I like to see quality batting myself but it's getting scandalous how many just above average players are being allowed to hit tons like it's going out of fashion...we all saw Kohli in England and you're telling me drastic changes have been made between now and then? i don't think so.
Kohli in South Africa was pretty decent, dude.
 

GotSpin

Hall of Fame Member
It does all seem a bit easy doesnt it right now.

Im guessing its just because so many batsmen are in great form
 

ImpatientLime

International Regular
Like i said Dan it wasn't a knock on the Indian batsmen it was a knock on the amount of tons being scored in the current climate. I like to see quality batting myself but it's getting scandalous how many just above average players are being allowed to hit tons like it's going out of fashion...we all saw Kohli in England and you're telling me drastic changes have been made between now and then? i don't think so.
facing anderson and broad in england and harris and johnson in australia are two very very different challenges.
 

Dan

Hall of Fame Member
we all saw Kohli in England and you're telling me drastic changes have been made between now and then? i don't think so.
"Nothing changed, he still sucks as much as he did in England, therefore his runs here don't count" is the wrong way of looking at it. Look at the trends through Kohli's career and he consistently makes runs. England was the outlier to the norm that is Kohli making valuable Test contributions. That doesn't mean that it doesn't exist, that it should be glossed over, or that it wasn't a **** display of Test match batting. But failing in one series shouldn't devalue the actual runs scored in another series.

Not to mention that Australia and England, y'know, are different countries that test different elements of a player's technique.

Marlon Samuels, for example, is a batsman who has a weird ability to perform utterly **** one series yet bounce back to perform brilliantly in the next, with no drastic changes in his style of batting or game plan. Averaging 14.75 across the 4 Tests he played vs NZ (3 away, 1 home) doesn't devalue the 263 runs @ ~53 that he scored against South Africa. He played poorly against New Zealand and played well against South Africa. Maybe it was a technical flaw most obviously exploited by the NZers. Maybe he was having trouble sleeping. Whatever the source of his failures, that failure doesn't mean that his future performances "don't count" because someone has now decided that the failure is the norm.
 

Dan

Hall of Fame Member
Basically, I think you've found the weakest possible way to argue this point, WW.
 

Justo

U19 Debutant
Like i said Dan it wasn't a knock on the Indian batsmen it was a knock on the amount of tons being scored in the current climate. I like to see quality batting myself but it's getting scandalous how many just above average players are being allowed to hit tons like it's going out of fashion...we all saw Kohli in England and you're telling me drastic changes have been made between now and then? i don't think so.
Most of the guys piling on the runs are more than above average though. Smith, Kohli, Root, Williamson etc were all regarded as major talents before they entered the Test arena and their recent output is getting them in line with their First Class Records. This shows as much as anything that they've all matured and are now comfortable at this level.

Outside of the top bats in the world though there aren't really that many centuries being scored (or at least any more than you might expect). In the Australian-Indian series only Warner, Smith and Clarke (all high quality bats) have hit centuries for Australia while India have Kohli, Vijay, Rahane and Rahul (again all high quality bats with Rahul having to prove himself more) in the centurion list. Most of the other series that occurred recently are similar with the top shelf or top form bats making hay with most others falling around them.

Ultimately it comes down to a number of high quality batsmen hitting form at the same time on pitches that reward good batting. For bowling attacks IMO they're at least comparable to bowling quality in the 00s. While there's certainly no spinner in the Murali-Warne class at the moment there's more quality pacers about.

Another thing that could be considered is the amount of cricket being played allows batsmen to make better use of their form than potentially in the past. At the same time it doesn't particularly help bowlers since they're more likely to get fatigued/injured and have a reduced output (Anderson in the last Ashes in England comes to mind where he just seemed stuffed after that first Test). Steven Smith for example has played 21 Tests (including the current Test) since getting the call up 20 or so months ago and with a tour to the WI, another Ashes, Bangladesh and then a full home season ahead things aren't going to slow down for him anytime soon.
 
Last edited:

social

Hall of Fame Member
It does all seem a bit easy doesnt it right now.

Im guessing its just because so many batsmen are in great form
And pitches are flat

And fielding is ****

And boundaries are short

And bats are weapons

Stats in Oz this year are embarrassing and a farce
 
Last edited:

vic_orthdox

Global Moderator
I think the fact that very few teams are taking the follow-on also has lead to some, lets call them "less pressurised", centuries being made.
 

Noah

School Boy/Girl Captain
Like i said Dan it wasn't a knock on the Indian batsmen it was a knock on the amount of tons being scored in the current climate. I like to see quality batting myself but it's getting scandalous how many just above average players are being allowed to hit tons like it's going out of fashion...we all saw Kohli in England and you're telling me drastic changes have been made between now and then? i don't think so.
Kohli issue with nicking in England doesn't require a drastic change. Kohli's problem was a simple one that was apparent right from his days as a junior: his footwork had a tendency to move him legside and when he came forward he didn't get his front foot far enough. This meant that he was likely to struggle with swing or back-of-a-length bowling with a bit of seam movement. Its a problem that others players have struggled with and fixed without too much drama, including Ricky Ponting. It isn't a drastic change. It is quite a basic adjustment, which Kohli was always capable of.

I think he has made that change in Australia even though it isn't really required (as Dan alludes to). Looking at his stance, I think he is covering more of the stumps than he traditionally has and he has been getting a big stride in when he plays forward. His footwork has even been picked up by the CH9 commentary team and when that happens, you know it is blindingly obvious.
 

morgieb

Request Your Custom Title Now!
What I found interesting was that the 2011-2013 period was actually quite a bit better for bowlers than the 10 years before that (well at least 2011 and 2013, 2012 had a **** load of ATG innings), but the last 12 months have been more of a return to the mid 2000's. This is despite a lot more quality bowlers appearing now than what they were.

Is it just form? Or are wickets a lot flatter now than what they were?
 

WindieWeathers

International Regular
"Nothing changed, he still sucks as much as he did in England, therefore his runs here don't count" is the wrong way of looking at it. Look at the trends through Kohli's career and he consistently makes runs. England was the outlier to the norm that is Kohli making valuable Test contributions. That doesn't mean that it doesn't exist, that it should be glossed over, or that it wasn't a **** display of Test match batting. But failing in one series shouldn't devalue the actual runs scored in another series.

Not to mention that Australia and England, y'know, are different countries that test different elements of a player's technique.

Marlon Samuels, for example, is a batsman who has a weird ability to perform utterly **** one series yet bounce back to perform brilliantly in the next, with no drastic changes in his style of batting or game plan. Averaging 14.75 across the 4 Tests he played vs NZ (3 away, 1 home) doesn't devalue the 263 runs @ ~53 that he scored against South Africa. He played poorly against New Zealand and played well against South Africa. Maybe it was a technical flaw most obviously exploited by the NZers. Maybe he was having trouble sleeping. Whatever the source of his failures, that failure doesn't mean that his future performances "don't count" because someone has now decided that the failure is the norm.
Well tbh your Samuels argument doesn't really hold weight when he scored a ton against the same attack a year earlier and it was confirmed that he had a major wrist injury during that series which he had operated on straight after the NZ tour.

All i'm saying is there are far too many tons being scored and it's making the game look a little ridiculous...Whether it's the pitches, weak bowling attacks or something else it's getting too much now. How can Australia's attack be as "great" as some suggest when they can barely get a man who's technical flaws were there for all to see against England? bad form is one thing but Jimmy had him on toast time and time again.

The smith and Warner stuff i put down to India crap attack but imo this ton fest needs to end and there need to be more balance with the bowlers making hay otherwise this game will go downhill.
 

WindieWeathers

International Regular
Kohli issue with nicking in England doesn't require a drastic change. Kohli's problem was a simple one that was apparent right from his days as a junior: his footwork had a tendency to move him legside and when he came forward he didn't get his front foot far enough. This meant that he was likely to struggle with swing or back-of-a-length bowling with a bit of seam movement. Its a problem that others players have struggled with and fixed without too much drama, including Ricky Ponting. It isn't a drastic change. It is quite a basic adjustment, which Kohli was always capable of.

I think he has made that change in Australia even though it isn't really required (as Dan alludes to). Looking at his stance, I think he is covering more of the stumps than he traditionally has and he has been getting a big stride in when he plays forward. His footwork has even been picked up by the CH9 commentary team and when that happens, you know it is blindingly obvious.
The aussies have barely stuck to bowling a nagging line on off-stump though!!..they've been all over the place to Kohli ad that's why he's filling his boots imo. That and the fact that the tracks are basically tailor made for the indian batsmen.
 

vic_orthdox

Global Moderator
Think there's a few factors to this series:

- some wickets were going to be slightly overprepared due to delays in the scheduling
- CA losing money on rescheduling, want the full five days to ensure not too much lost on ticketing
- looking after the Indians, both as a relationship between boards and also trying not to get the "wait till you play at our joint" vibes from them, after their 4-0 whitewash.
 

weldone

Hall of Fame Member
I don't think that is really true. From what I've seen of Kohli in England and Kohli now, he has moved across his stumps more to protect them, which is one the most important corrections a batsmen has to make if he is nicking the ball too much. Obviously you can't judge its effectiveness until he has to face similar bowling but he has certainly adjusted his game in response to his struggles in England.
Absolutely spot on. In England, he was taking off-stump guard. He takes a 4th stump (imaginary one outside off) guard now.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top