Sport could the game of cricket as we know it be dying before our very eyes?

[Howard Moon]

How far back are you arguing for the death of cricket as we know it though Howie?

I mean you say 1 bowler in the top 30 averages and it sounds horrible.

But in context only 10 of those bowlers have played post 1960 with 3 of those playing the vast bulk before 1960.

Reality is looking at bowling averages tells us very little as only McGrath (#30), Philander (#28), Ambrose (#21), Garner (#20), Marshall (#19) and Abbas (#7) have played any significant amount of cricket in the past 40 years.

i'm not even sure bowling average is that relevant anyway, I mean its the amount of runs scored per wicket isn't it? that can be affected by field placements, batsman's intent, overall team tactics and form ect ect.

Maybe bowling strike rates are of more interest? amount of balls per wicket?

GA Lohmann (ENG) 1886-1896 18 3830 1205 112 9/28 15/45 10.75 1.88 34.1 9 5
JJ Ferris (AUS/ENG) 1887-1892 9 2302 775 61 7/37 13/91 12.70 2.01 37.7 6 1
SE Bond (NZ) 2001-2009 18 3372 1922 87 6/51 10/99 22.09 3.41 38.7 5 1
K Rabada (SA) 2015-2018 32 5937 3279 151 7/112 13/144 21.71 3.31 39.3 9 4
SF Barnes (ENG) 1901-1914 27 7873 3106 189 9/103 17/159 16.43 2.36 41.6 24 7
DW Steyn (SA) 2004-2018 88 17707 9533 421 7/51 11/60 22.64 3.23 42.0 26 5
Mohammad Abbas (PAK) 2017-2018 12 2592 1014 61 5/33 10/95 16.62 2.34 42.4 4 1
AEE Vogler (SA) 1906-1911 15 2764 1455 64 7/94 12/181 22.73 3.15 43.1 5 1
Waqar Younis (PAK) 1989-2003 87 16224 8788 373 7/76 13/135 23.56 3.25 43.4 22 5
FR Spofforth (AUS) 1877-1887 18 4185 1731 94 7/44 14/90 18.41 2.48 44.5 7 4
W Barnes (ENG) 1880-1890 21 2289 793 51 6/28 9/81 15.54 2.07 44.8 3 0
J Cowie (NZ) 1937-1949 9 2028 969 45 6/40 10/140 21.53 2.86 45.0 4 1
JV Saunders (AUS) 1902-1908 14 3565 1796 79 7/34 9/66 22.73 3.02 45.1 6 0
J Briggs (ENG) 1884-1899 33 5332 2095 118 8/11 15/28 17.75 2.35 45.1 9 4
FH Tyson (ENG) 1954-1959 17 3452 1411 76 7/27 10/130 18.56 2.45 45.4 4 1
C Blythe (ENG) 1901-1910 19 4546 1863 100 8/59 15/99 18.63 2.45 45.4 9 4
Shoaib Akhtar (PAK) 1997-2007 46 8143 4574 178 6/11 11/78 25.69 3.37 45.7 12 2
JJC Lawson (WI) 2002-2005 13 2364 1512 51 7/78 8/102 29.64 3.83 46.3 2 0
HV Hordern (AUS) 1911-1912 7 2148 1075 46 7/90 12/175 23.36 3.00 46.6 5 2
MD Marshall (WI) 1978-1991 81 17584 7876 376 7/22 11/89 20.94 2.68 46.7 22 4
JL Pattinson (AUS) 2011-2016 17 3279 1831 70 5/27 8/105 26.15 3.35 46.8 4 0
AA Donald (SA) 1992-2002 72 15519 7344 330 8/71 12/139 22.25 2.83 47.0 20 3
W Bates (ENG) 1881-1887 15 2364 821 50 7/28 14/102 16.42 2.08 47.2 4 1
CB Llewellyn (SA) 1896-1912 15 2292 1421 48 6/92 10/116 29.60 3.71 47.7 4 1
SP Jones (ENG) 2002-2005 18 2821 1666 59 6/53 7/110 28.23 3.54 47.8 3 0
RO Schwarz (SA) 1906-1912 20 2639 1417 55 6/47 7/89 25.76 3.22 47.9 2 0
DE Bollinger (AUS) 2009-2010 12 2401 1296 50 5/28 8/141 25.92 3.23 48.0 2 0
VD Philander (SA) 2011-2018 55 9970 4416 205 6/21 10/102 21.54 2.65 48.6 13 2
Mohammad Asif (PAK) 2005-2010 23 5171 2583 106 6/41 11/71 24.36 2.99 48.7 7 1
PJ Cummins (AUS) 2011-2018 14 3221 1572 66 6/79 9/141 23.81 2.92 48.8 2 0
GJ Gilmour (AUS) 1973-1977 15 2661 1406 54 6/85 9/157 26.03 3.17 49.2 3 0
CEH Croft (WI) 1977-1982 27 6165 2913 125 8/29 9/95 23.30 2.83 49.3 3 0
FS Trueman (ENG) 1952-1965 67 15178 6625 307 8/31 12/119 21.57 2.61 49.4 17 3
KM Jarvis (ZIM) 2011-2018 12 2289 1270 46 5/54 7/98 27.60 3.32 49.7 3 0
MA Starc (AUS) 2011-2018 45 9354 5305 186 6/50 11/94 28.52 3.40 50.2 9 1


few more relevant names there, current day or close to , but as you point out quite a few up top that didn't play enough meaningful matches to form a decent stat base.

But to the point of when did it start dying... hmm on pure feel, it feels like cricket might have reached its peak or pomp in the late 70s thru to the mid 90s maybe? When the heavyweights were all at play, but, as Doss pointed out earlier, there's grounds to suggest that's just my childlike brain at the time building the game up at that time to be better than it is now - and me just wanting it back again..im sure people that lived in the 40s probably say their era was better, no? ...but I cant help but feel the stats back up the fact that those eras did actually stack up and we were just lucky enough to be brought up watching cricket in the 80s and 90s more than people like me just glorifying it and wanting it back.

 

[Towno78]

The bowling averages have stagnated also, in fact of the top 30 bowling averages one plays now, (Mohammas Abbas, ave 16.2 from 12 matches) and of the top 30 all time bowling averages only 3 have played in the 2000s, McGrath, Philander and Abbas.

Understand stats don't always tell the true story but it also flies in the face of the claim that batting averages have not gotten better with time because of better bowling perse.

The original argument was that while most other sports and pursuits the world participates in, participants/teams/scores/averages/records have steadily gotten better with time, but cricket has bucked that trend. Players are better offensively and defensively at basketball, yet scoring records continue to be smashed ect

The great SK Warne himself said that 20/20 cricket has fundamentally changed how bowlers bowl, pre short form, bowlers were taught to bowl in the same spot over and over and over again, find rhythm, consistency and you'll grind the batsman out - these days they are taught to never bowl the same ball twice - how do you actually find rhythm when by default you are trying not to find rhythm?

So short form has changed bowling and changed batting, for the worse? well, if you want entertainment for 2 hours - I guess not , if you want classical test cricket to survive and prosper - definitely.

You argue cricket isn't dying, but is infract quite the opposite - because more people are involved in watching 20/20 - and that might be right - I probably should have rephrased my argument to say the game as we/I knew it is dying in lieu of this new version.

but I did enjoy your post - most don't argue with any facts other than to say BS you are wrong, just because..

least a bit of dialog helps the cause.

As you say, test cricket is dying is certainly a different argument to cricket is dying.