• 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.

Last two years - Spinners' downturn in ODIs?

Arjun

Cricketer Of The Year
Taking a look at the figures of spinners in ODIs over the last two years from this date, the results don't appear very positive. Here's the table, if you want to modify figures. I've included only those who have taken at least 20 wickets, to filter out part-timers.

Amongst spinners who have played enough to take at least 20 wickets, only six bowlers have got averages under 30. Of the whole set, only Saeed Ajmal and Jim Tredwell have strike rates under or a little over 30. While economy rate is a useless statistic for a specialist strike bowler, Sunil Narine has a seriously effective economy of 4.19, which can make a difference, but there are few who score well even on this front- and one of them is Mohammed Hafeez, who's primarily a batsman. Only two, as against at least three different rosters you can make when you look for similar results in pace/seam/swing bowlers. The scene was much more encouraging, a year before, but that's mostly because of bowlers like Mishra, Bishoo and Tahir, who haven't played much. even then, the list bursts when you ask for pace bowler figures.

Long-running spinners with plenty of ODI caps, with the exception of Ajmal, are struggling. Are we seeing a long-running trend of struggling spinners in the past few years? With strike rates swelling, are spinners now primarily restrictive bowlers? Or is this a reflection of team selections that plump for four seamers and a spinner? Or as has ODI cricket, as Bishan Bedi said, weakened the spinner? Test figures look a lot better, but I am not surprised to see plenty from the subcontinent and West Indies there.
 
Last edited:

smalishah84

The Tiger King
Taking a look at the figures of spinners in ODIs over the last two years from this date, the results don't appear very positive. Here's the table, if you want to modify figures. I've included only those who have taken at least 20 wickets, to filter out part-timers.

Amongst spinners who have played enough to take at least 20 wickets, only six bowlers have got averages under 30. Of the whole set, only Saeed Ajmal and Jim Tredwell have strike rates under or a little over 30. While economy rate is a useless statistic for a specialist strike bowler, Sunil Narine has a seriously effective economy of 4.19, which can make a difference, but there are few who score well even on this front- and one of them is Mohammed Hafeez, who's primarily a batsman. Only two, as against at least three different rosters you can make when you look for similar results in pace/seam/swing bowlers. The scene was much more encouraging, a year before, but that's mostly because of bowlers like Mishra, Bishoo and Tahir, who haven't played much. even then, the list bursts when you ask for pace bowler figures.

Long-running spinners with plenty of ODI caps, with the exception of Ajmal, are struggling. Are we seeing a long-running trend of struggling spinners in the past few years? With strike rates swelling, are spinners now primarily restrictive bowlers? Or is this a reflection of team selections that plump for four seamers and a spinner? Or as has ODI cricket, as Bishan Bedi said, weakened the spinner? Test figures look a lot better, but I am not surprised to see plenty from the subcontinent and West Indies there.
wow.....Hafeez's ER is under 4
 

theegyptian

International Vice-Captain
Only 4 fielders allowed outside the circle instead of 5. Less need to go over the outfielders as there is one less part of the boundary covered. Just makes it a lot harder for spin bowlers imo.

+ the 2 new balls
 

Furball

Evil Scotsman
The most likely explanation is that most of the "spinners" playing their trade currently are just crap.

A change in the fielding restrictions and the 2 new balls rule possibly won't help (although if the 2 new balls was that big a problem, spinners would be of absolutely no use in T20), but it's worth noting that Ajmal has taken his wickets at 20 in the last 2 years.
 

YorksLanka

International Debutant
i have to agree with most here, think the two new balls rule has severely restricted those teams where spin bowling/reverse swing is their strength..stupid rule...
 

hendrix

Hall of Fame Member
I honestly don't think the two new balls thing should be too much of an issue for spinners.

Tend to agree that there just aren't that many good spinners at the moment. Yes, the field restrictions make it a little more difficult to restrict, but they also cut off singles more and force the batsmen to take risks during the middle overs. Good spinners should still be able to take wickets and/or restrict.
 

benchmark00

Request Your Custom Title Now!
Nothing at all to do with two new balls. An argument could be made that the two new balls curtails reverse at the end of an innings but it really has no real noticeable different to spinners. The two new ball rule is great, it just doesn't work perfectly for the sub continent because the ball is easier to play against when it's new due to the slow pitches, which is reversed everywhere else in the world.

The hardest thing going against all bowlers is the one less fielder allowed outside the circle. You've gone from being able to protect pretty much 85% of the boundary to now only being about to protect around 50% of it.
 

Top