We have gotten worse. The competition has improved.
Look at India & Sri Lanka, in general very good fielding sides IMHO. South Africa have been good for quite a while.
Plus, we're chasing more leather generally, in the past year or two. Probably for a decade we seldom went a session without taking a few wickets. Batsmen are looking to score, not just survive against Warne & McGrath so the gaps are opening up.
Katich?But it's not just that. We are a genuinely much worse fielding side than before. I would say that there are only four really "very good" fielders in the side - Ponting, Hussey, Clarke, North. Ponting we know about. Hussey is outstanding at gully (although not quite as good as he once was). Clarke is also oustanding at cover/point but not at slips as IMO he's late to pick up the ball off the bat against pace. North is very sharp and a good 3rd slip but IIRC struggled at first. Not to mention that he shouldn't be in the side.
India have a pretty good fielding side in Tests. It's just about holding your catches at Test level really, and India do it pretty well. Don't confuse their lack of athleticism and ground fielding skills in ODIs with poor Test fielding - as you said, they have a good catching side.
Think we're an underrated catching side though, TBF to ourselves.
Pretty big problem though. It's not like you have numerous chances offered up to square leg.Have no problem with our fielding aside from Slips.
Yep, agree we have some good catchers in the side. Laxman rarely drops any, Dravid despite his recent woes has been a reliable pair of hands, Dhoni is a solid keeper and our close-in fielders to the spinners have very sharp reflexes. But athleticism is certainly a facet of fielding to be considered in rating fielding sides IMO, NZ were saving 30 runs per innings on average in the recent series for example. It helps to build pressure, keep new batsmen on strike and good fielding often makes a big difference in successfully executing a disciplined bowling plan when set batsmen are at the crease.India have a pretty good fielding side in Tests. It's just about holding your catches at Test level really, and India do it pretty well. Don't confuse their lack of athleticism and ground fielding skills in ODIs with poor Test fielding - as you said, they have a good catching side.
I think that sort of fielding is vastly over-rated in Tests cricket. You can have a team full of the most athletic ball-stoppers in the world but they'll still only save about 20-40 runs a Test innings through ground fielding at most (and I think even this is quite exaggerated, but I'll give it to you), and if they dropped one catch it could cost them 200 runs. If you have a team whereby everyone is a good catcher in the position they're fielding in, it's a good Test fielding unit, IMO.Yep, agree we have some good catchers in the side. Laxman rarely drops any, Dravid despite his recent woes has been a reliable pair of hands, Dhoni is a solid keeper and our close-in fielders to the spinners have very sharp reflexes. But athleticism is certainly a facet of fielding to be considered in rating fielding sides IMO, NZ were saving 30 runs per innings on average in the recent series for example. It helps to build pressure, keep new batsmen on strike and good fielding often makes a big difference in successfully executing a disciplined bowling plan when set batsmen are at the crease.