Is it time

[Bomber Bears]

To re-evaluate what a good bowling average is?

It tends to be thought that averaging 50 in the modern day game is not as significant as it was 20+ years ago, simply because it was far less common then. Improved bats, flatter pitches and roped off boundaries, as well as helmets and the othe rmultitude of safety gear, seem to have seen many more players averaging what was the accepted marker for an excellent test batsmen.

So by the same token, bowling on pitches that are often lifeless, to batsmen wielding bats thicker than your arm can make it difficult to take wickets. The very best bowlers have averaged around 20-24 (The west indian quicks, McGrath, Lillee, Akram Donald etc). Whilst the quality has generally been around 25-26 (Gillespie, Walsh etc). Is it now time to consider a 'quality' bowler more likely to have a career average around 28, with the rare cases more in the 24-26 range, simply because the game seems to have become somewhat skewed in favour of batsmen?

 

[Doodlesweaver]

To re-evaluate what a good bowling average is?

It tends to be thought that averaging 50 in the modern day game is not as significant as it was 20+ years ago, simply because it was far less common then. Improved bats, flatter pitches and roped off boundaries, as well as helmets and the othe rmultitude of safety gear, seem to have seen many more players averaging what was the accepted marker for an excellent test batsmen.

So by the same token, bowling on pitches that are often lifeless, to batsmen wielding bats thicker than your arm can make it difficult to take wickets. The very best bowlers have averaged around 20-24 (The west indian quicks, McGrath, Lillee, Akram Donald etc). Whilst the quality has generally been around 25-26 (Gillespie, Walsh etc). Is it now time to consider a 'quality' bowler more likely to have a career average around 28, with the rare cases more in the 24-26 range, simply because the game seems to have become somewhat skewed in favour of batsmen?

Good point, except that 2 really fine bowlers in Asif and Steyn have low averages. They are the only real quality around that I can think of. Alan Donald has said that modern bowlers don't have any patience and can't stick at good line and length, which is true I think.

 

[Zeke]

Alan Donald has said that modern bowlers don't have any patience and can't stick at good line and length, which is true I think.

He's spot on.

Some of the bowling plans and field placements are so convoluted these days. I reckon they over think things.

Top of off stump (with variation) to a regulation field from both ends is not an easy proposition for any batsman, I don't care who you are.

 

[Doodlesweaver]

He's spot on.

Some of the bowling plans and field placements are so convoluted these days. I reckon they over think things.

Top of off stump (with variation) to a regulation field from both ends is not an easy proposition for any batsman, I don't care who you are.

Fields seem to be set for shit bowling from the off these days. Really.

 

[Bomber Bears]

Good point, except that 2 really fine bowlers in Asif and Steyn have low averages. They are the only real quality around that I can think of. Alan Donald has said that modern bowlers don't have any patience and can't stick at good line and length, which is true I think.

I suppose thats another discussion again. Whilst conditions certainly are skewed in favour of batsmen, there seems to be a dearth in fast bowling talent.

They were talking today, Tubby saying it's a over-complicated at present, and Mark Waughs philosophy was aim for top of Off with the occasional bouncer, pretty effective.

If anything I think it boosts Mcgraths standing, to average 21.5 in an era dominated by good batsmen on largely flat tracks with smaller outfields is a pretty fine achievement.

 

[Damon_3388]

IMO, a good bowler should possess a combination of sub-30 average, sub 3 RPO economy rate and sub-60 strike rate.

That being said, the only current Test bowlers (who've played at least one Test in 2010) who fit that criteria over their career are Muttiah Muralitharan, Graeme Swann, Mohammed Asif and Ryan Harris, so maybe I'm being too harsh, particularly with the RPO part - Dale Steyn, Doug Bollinger, Mohammed Amir, Kemar Roach, Shane Watson and Steven Finn are ruled out on economy rate, although they fit the other criteria.

Notably, Stuart Clark easily fits the criteria (better average and economy rate than Dennis Lillee, and just a 2.7 ball difference in strike rate), yet remains outside of the national team, likely never to return.

 

[BarneyBent]

Notably, Stuart Clark easily fits the criteria (better average and economy rate than Dennis Lillee, and just a 2.7 ball difference in strike rate), yet remains outside of the national team, likely never to return.

And he shouldn't. He's pedestrian now. Ever since that niggling elbow injury that just wouldn't go away, he has been a shadow of his former self. It's a terrible shame, but he's just lost that extra bounce, that surprising nippiness, which would get batsmen off guard.