Pacers having a bit more versatility doesn't mean that you can't doctor wickets to suit them or that they can't be made useless. Just that for the India example our pacers are better that's all.
-
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.
Debate thread for 2024 ranking of bowlers poll
- Thread starter CricAddict
- Start date
Like we know now exactly how much influence conditions can have on player performances, and to somehow act like this is a modern concept that has never existed before is weird IMO. Shouldn't be used as a way to mark them down unless you can legitimately prove that players in the past always had to play in the most difficult conditions for their styles of play every match.
TheJediBrah
Request Your Custom Title Now!
It's clearly both. Bowlers are getting more helpful conditions and the mean ability for Test batsmen to handle those conditions is worse than pre-00s. You don't have to pick a side lol
Again, nothing more than I said so isn't convincing. And ignoring the general level of the bowlers in such discussions doesn't help when you want to say this take is accurate.
TheJediBrah
Request Your Custom Title Now!
I don't think anything would convince you regardless, you seem to have made up your mind for some reason. Suffice it to say that it's observable and apparent to a lot of people and has been for years. It's also common sense when you think logically about the changing landscape of top level batsmanship.
Lower batting averages and performance being observed doesn't mean the conclusion you have is correct though. And there's no common sense involved when it comes to T20 being a cause of this issue. It still involves ignoring half of the game and players to pretend that this makes sense, so clearly it's crazy.
TheJediBrah
Request Your Custom Title Now!
That's not why it's accepted lol. People. Watch. Cricket. and can observe changes
Again, if the conclusion being drawn involves ignoring other strong factors it isn't a good conclusion.
TheJediBrah
Request Your Custom Title Now!
It doesn't ignore anything what are you talking about
CricAddict
Cricketer Of The Year
That T20s have tampered with both technique and temperament of current batsmen can surely not be denied. It is quite obvious on watching them play tests compared to watching pre-T20 batsmen.
shortpitched713
International Captain
I don't think it's underrating other roles. It's just the nature of CW's conversations that we spend almost all our time talking about the "pinnacle players, very best, disproportionate value", etc. It's no secret that the crown jewelpiece of the majority of great Test sides, have been an ATG seamer ( or even 2 or more).
Not to say a spinner can't be more important. I have Murali as more valuable than almost any seamer ever ( excepting McGrath, most probably ). It's just, it hasn't happened as often for spinners, as it has for seamers to be that great team centerpiece.
It assumes bowlers haven't gotten better at all though. Which is very weird for a sport in general to not have players generally get better generation to generation.
I mean most of the players playing now did just fine in FC cricket and weren't spamming T20s all the time. And this also like above just ignores that maybe the other part of the game developing could have affected the batting performances as well.
I really don't see how ignoring a big part of Test cricket is "common sense" to be honest. We've seen batters struggle in the past when they've faced a lot of good bowling in difficult conditions, what makes this mini-era any different? T20 shots being played? Really?
TheJediBrah
Request Your Custom Title Now!
Wut? No it doesn't
No it doesn't. I literally just said there are multiple factors. You're the one trying to deny one of the most observable changes in modern cricket. More than one thing can be true.
shortpitched713
International Captain
I don't think we need to give any shrift to this idea that shorter form makes it harder for batsmen to occupy the crease.
Actually, bowling is just too good to make attempting that viable. There's literally no point trying to take time, but ultimately losing on day 5 with <500 runs or whatever, when you can just at least give your team a shot at winning the match on the 4th day by batting with a more assertive approach. You get more WTC points too for the win, as it's worth more than twice a draw.
When you combine that with the fact modern bowlers are always capable of producing a ball with your name on it, and the whole playing for a draw/time thing has almost completely become obsolete (occasionally you can steal a draw when dominated, on a batting friendly pitch, or weather effected match, but this is different from the old school approach, more opportunistic draw seeking).
shortpitched713
International Captain
This factor is way overrated, and more importantly, unprovable.
Line and Length
Cricketer Of The Year
By and large the changes from the 2020 polls and this combined poll have been just one or two spots in their respective pacer/spinner listings.
However, there have been 5 cases of more significant moves - all upwards and mostly involving current day players.
These major moves are: Bumrah - up 11 spots; Jadeja - up 9 spots; Rabada - up 8 spots; Ashwin - up 5 spots and Adcock - up 4 spots.
One can't deny that current players are more likely to improve on their ratings from 2 years ago and, in the case of the Indian trio, their success as a team has been a positive influence on the voting. As I have expressed in the past, I am somewhat reticent to vote for players who have yet to complete their Test careers, but I can't deny these players, especially the Indian trio, their rise up the rankings.
If I have a reservation it would be the Rabada's climb up 8 places but I may be judging him, to an extent, on a recent tour of Australia. In the 22/23 tour he averaged over 30 with the ball and was unimpressive but, since then, he's had two solid home series.
As for Adcock, when rankings were done in 2022 and upon looking at his stats, I felt he was under-rated.
We are down to the final dozen or so spots and, hopefully, we can maintain interest and variety in the voting.
However, there have been 5 cases of more significant moves - all upwards and mostly involving current day players.
These major moves are: Bumrah - up 11 spots; Jadeja - up 9 spots; Rabada - up 8 spots; Ashwin - up 5 spots and Adcock - up 4 spots.
One can't deny that current players are more likely to improve on their ratings from 2 years ago and, in the case of the Indian trio, their success as a team has been a positive influence on the voting. As I have expressed in the past, I am somewhat reticent to vote for players who have yet to complete their Test careers, but I can't deny these players, especially the Indian trio, their rise up the rankings.
If I have a reservation it would be the Rabada's climb up 8 places but I may be judging him, to an extent, on a recent tour of Australia. In the 22/23 tour he averaged over 30 with the ball and was unimpressive but, since then, he's had two solid home series.
As for Adcock, when rankings were done in 2022 and upon looking at his stats, I felt he was under-rated.
We are down to the final dozen or so spots and, hopefully, we can maintain interest and variety in the voting.
Last edited:
CricAddict
Cricketer Of The Year
@Fuller Pilch are you serious with the Jamieson voting? He hasn't even got 100 wickets yet and been perennially injured. Do you think he deserves to be in the atg top 50 bowlers?
Line and Length
Cricketer Of The Year
I'd rate Jamieson well above Aaqib Javed but at least the latter's nomination has !? after it.