Is Cricket 'DEAD' Thread

[Langford4FBOTC]

Heard them talking about this on the ABC yesterday morning. got one on the way so I can keep my sanity this summer.

http://www.panoganaelectronics.com.au/

 

[grizzlym]

Just imagine guys like Hayden 40-50 years ago. Total confidence and disrespecting bowlers, I reckon they would have dominated.

I would love to have seen Warney bowl to Viv.

And yes, to pick up an earlier point you made Langers. I'm a huge fan of Akram. Indeed, I love bowling all rounders like Imran, Hadlee and Akram. Opening the bowling and coming in at 8 but with far more skill than the average number 8. Akram... what a bowler.

 

[Langford4FBOTC]

The mind set of the modern player has certainly changed the game. For me dominance isn't all about belting the ball around. It's about being able to score at will no matter where the bowler puts the ball.

Akram was as dangerous a bowler as has ever played the game. I remember being at the World Cup final at the MCG when he changed the game with two lethal deliveries.

 

[Henry Jr]

Agree, plus the fact that bowlers are shit.

To henrys irrelevant post where he quoted stats. I was surprised by sangakarra stats, well done to him playing the 1st half of career as a wicket keeper batsman.

You can dismiss any stats involving Pakistan.

Henry, didn't u send me a text yesterday saying Clarke is shit, and I thought he was out?

How was it irrelevant when you were quoting the same figures

I never said Clarke was shit, only that he invents ways to get himself (2011 version of Dean Jones). Technology saved him.

 

[Henry Jr]

Lara was cricket pr0n to watch. Being a left hander with the high back lift.

He and Gilchrist you would pay money to watch bat.

 

[Messenger]

Just imagine guys like Hayden 40-50 years ago. Total confidence and disrespecting bowlers, I reckon they would have dominated.

Not so sure. Watching the cricket doco the ABC put out a couple of years ago my most vivid memory is watching Bill Lawry facing up to the West Indian pace battery in a cloth cap with nothing for protection but a thin pair of pads and his wits.

Better quality batsmen friendly pitches, heavy bats, helmets and an assortment of guards makes batsmen imperious; they can get into shots they would never try if serious injury is possible and they get a bigger dividend for the shots that don't come off.

I'd say a good comparison is driving a modern SUV with a high driving position, multiple airbags and a high driving position as compared to getting around in an old Mini Moke.

As for today, Siddle at 8 is ba news, regardless of what the others below him put together. I reckon we just found out why Mitch Johnson kept getting picked.

 

[grizzlym]

I'm just of the general belief that contemporary athletes and sportspeople are generally better than their predecessors, especially when you're talking large gaps of time. Sure bats and protectors have mitigated the physical threat that fast bowling once posed, and blokes like Lawry and co might or might not have worn them if they could, but I think the modern cricketer, in terms of preparation, coaching and all of those things, has a decided competitive advantage.

I for one applaud helmets and the like in the game. Incidents like the McCosker one are just horrible.

Anyone care to speculate how Viv or any of those West Indian batsmen of that era would have gone against the likes of Warne or Murali?

 

[grizzlym]

I never said Clarke was shit, only that he invents ways to get himself (2011 version of Dean Jones). Technology saved him.

I'd take Clarke over Dean Jones in test cricket.

A at one day cricketer, and played one of the great test innings for Australia, but I'd prefer Clarke in my line up.

 

[grizzlym]

The mind set of the modern player has certainly changed the game. For me dominance isn't all about belting the ball around. It's about being able to score at will no matter where the bowler puts the ball.

Akram was as dangerous a bowler as has ever played the game. I remember being at the World Cup final at the MCG when he changed the game with two lethal deliveries.

Mark Taylor's century at the G when Akram was bowling freakin' dangerous deliveries was one of the best innings I've seen. He just destroyed everyone else except Tubby.

 

[Henry Jr]

Anyone care to speculate how Viv or any of those West Indian batsmen of that era would have gone against the likes of Warne or Murali?

Ah, thats the million dollar question I have been asking myself for the past 10 years.

I have no doubt that Viv would go down town a few times but in the end, the spin twins would snaffle him.

Wonder how Abdul Qadar and India's best at the time did against Viv?

I remember the story of Chappelli facing Warne in the nets one day and asking Warne for his field. He couldn't believe that Warne could bowl to him with no deep mid-wicket. After two overs he soon realized why he could!

 

[grizzlym]

Bedi was a dangerous bowler but not of the same style or quality as those two.

Chandresakar would have bowled to Viv.

 

[Henry Jr]

Not so sure. Watching the cricket doco the ABC put out a couple of years ago my most vivid memory is watching Bill Lawry facing up to the West Indian pace battery in a cloth cap with nothing for protection but a thin pair of pads and his wits.

Better quality batsmen friendly pitches, heavy bats, helmets and an assortment of guards makes batsmen imperious; they can get into shots they would never try if serious injury is possible and they get a bigger dividend for the shots that don't come off.

Agree Mess. Take away a helmet from the current day players and replace with the baggy green, then see if Haydos still wants to walk down the pitch at the quicks!

 

[Henry Jr]

Bedi was a dangerous bowler but not of the same style or quality as those two.

Chandresakar would have bowled to Viv.

I'll go back thru Viv's games against India and Paki's tomorrow night and see who the bowlers were that he faced.

 

[Langford4FBOTC]

Mark Taylor's century at the G when Akram was bowling freakin' dangerous deliveries was one of the best innings I've seen. He just destroyed everyone else except Tubby.

I remember that too. Great duel!

Just youtubed some Wasim footage. The guy was seriously unplayable.

 

[grizzlym]

I remember that too. Great duel!

Just youtubed some Wasim footage. The guy was seriously unplayable.

Awesome bowler. And when, during Toolman Tim's reign, he offered to coach Mutch and was declined, I wept.

The Indian fanboi Youtube compilations of Akram are amazing.

I saw him demolish us with the bat in Adelaide (I think). Incredible.

 

[Langford4FBOTC]

Awesome bowler. And when, during Toolman Tim's reign, he offered to coach Mutch and was declined, I wept.

The Indian fanboi Youtube compilations of Akram are amazing.

I saw him demolish us with the bat in Adelaide (I think). Incredible.

Mitch deserves to be the couldabeen he is for that effort. To be so insular to think he couldn't offer anything is beyond ridiculous.

Definitely underachieved with the bat. Shows what bowling takes out of you.

 

[moginie]

When everyone talks about Viv Richards, his dominant season in 1976 has to be remembered. 7 centuries, 3 against England, 3 against India (boasting Venkat, Bedi & Chandrasekhar) the other against Australia (plus a 98, those against us were made as an opener) & 2 of the centuries were double hundreds, highest score 291.

He dominated that year in a way that nobody else had since Bradman.

In that year he made runs against all sorts of attacks. The openers weren't as consistant as the glory days of Greenidge & Haynes. While the word is overused today, the only way to describe his performance that year is phenomenal.

 

[Langford4FBOTC]

Ah, thats the million dollar question I have been asking myself for the past 10 years.

I have no doubt that Viv would go down town a few times but in the end, the spin twins would snaffle him.

Wonder how Abdul Qadar and India's best at the time did against Viv?

I remember the story of Chappelli facing Warne in the nets one day and asking Warne for his field. He couldn't believe that Warne could bowl to him with no deep mid-wicket. After two overs he soon realized why he could!

I think they would have been fantastic duels. The whole West Indians are poor players of spin is a fallacy perpetrated to a degree I think by the fact they didn't need one during their fast bowler dominated era. Lara was Warne's arch nemesis. Richards had a great eye, super sharp reflexes and wasn't a lead footed slogger by any stretch of the imagination.

 

[moginie]

I think they would have been fantastic duels. The whole West Indians are poor players of spins is a fallacy perpetrated to a degree I think by the fact they didn't need one during their fast bowler dominated era. Lara was Warne's arch nemesis. Richards had a great eye, super sharp reflexes and wasn't a lead footed slogger by any stretch of the imagination.

Larry Gomes & Clive Lloyd were both excellent players of spin.

 

[grizzlym]

How about that West Indian side though, get through the top six and Jeff Dujon trudges out. And a handy Malcom Marshall to follow.

I loved watching Greenidge bat.

 

[Langford4FBOTC]

How about that West Indian side though, get through the top six and Jeff Dujon trudges out. And a handy Malcom Marshall to follow.

I loved watching Greenidge bat.

Batting depth plays a big role in determining the greatness of a team doesn't it.
Caught some footage on World Series classics of a young Jeff Dujon. Batting at 3 or 4 and I think scored a ton or very close. Seriously talanted batsman.

Then Marshall. Well, in my book the greatest bowler of all time and no ones bunny with the bat.

 

[grizzlym]

Imagine having like Gilchrist, Akram, Marshall... oh my.

 

[Messenger]

I'm just of the general belief that contemporary athletes and sportspeople are generally better than their predecessors, especially when you're talking large gaps of time. Sure bats and protectors have mitigated the physical threat that fast bowling once posed, and blokes like Lawry and co might or might not have worn them if they could, but I think the modern cricketer, in terms of preparation, coaching and all of those things, has a decided competitive advantage.

I for one applaud helmets and the like in the game. Incidents like the McCosker one are just horrible.

I'd certainly agree that cricketers are better trained, fitter and better supported than in past years. I'm not sure that translates into them being better players per se, just more likely to meet their potential. Conditions and equipment of years past mean that the game is inherently different. No one is being asked to face Derek Underwood on a sticky wicket in Manchester in May or face 70 overs of spin from Bedi, Chandasekar et al. in Mumbai anymore. Even Australian wickets are homogenising. And when they homogenise, certain skillsets atrophy. Witness Australian batsmen confronted with honest to goodness swing bowling in England every four years.

Anyone care to speculate how Viv or any of those West Indian batsmen of that era would have gone against the likes of Warne or Murali?

Poorly, but I tend to think other teams may have faired somewhat better.

 

[grizzlym]

To digress, I actually think that the last couple of tours have been blighted by some extraordinarily bad planning, coaching, playing and lack of an overall strategy. Hilditch and co were a disaster. As was Nielsen.

Fundamentally, we've never accepted that we're not the number one dominant side in the world anymore and we still played as if we were. Our batting, including flaying at everything, has been reckless on many occasions. We've churned through far too many players, and handled many of them badly, in the last few years we've never looked like we've been trying to rebuild our batting line-up or plan for the future.

And so it goes.

 

[Messenger]

To digress, I actually think that the last couple of tours have been blighted by some extraordinarily bad planning, coaching, playing and lack of an overall strategy. Hilditch and co were a disaster. As was Nielsen.

Fundamentally, we've never accepted that we're not the number one dominant side in the world anymore and we still played as if we were. Our batting, including flaying at everything, has been reckless on many occasions. We've churned through far too many players, and handled many of them badly, in the last few years we've never looked like we've been trying to rebuild our batting line-up or plan for the future.

And so it goes.

Couldn't agree more.