Why isn't anyone making Test runs? Dispatches from the frontline of the pace playing pandemic
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 2 ต.ค. 2024
- Jarrod looks at what is happening with the fact no one can bat in Test match cricket anymore.
Buy me a coffee - www.buymeacoff...
Patreon - / jarrodkimber
Manscaped - get 20% off when quoting "RedInker" at checkout with whatever the manscaped link is
Thanks to Bodyline T shirts - www.bodylinets...
Links to all the other places I put things up:
linktr.ee/jarr...
![ลองสั่งของจากแอพ temu ถูกจริงหรอ?? ( part : 1/2 ) [โกงไหมครับ ep.89 ] | DOM](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/RTcZSQTiDZw/mqdefault.jpg)
I know that batting has become difficult but in my twenty years of watching test cricket this period has been by far the most exciting time to watch test match cricket.
yes no boring boring draws now 😃😃
Credit to DRs and the rule changes for umpires call. A lot of umpires have started giving marginal lbw calls in favour of bowler and it's a good sign
Exactly pitches are more bowling friendly since last 3-4years and bowling quality has gone up 🥵 now each lineup has all 4 genuine pacers with different quality.
@SynthMusicFan 501 swingers too not just seamers.means all fast bowlers
No. Batting has not become difficult. You are disillusioned if you think like wise. What has happened is batters have become terrible at batting. If it was the batters of the 2000's playing today they would be raking in runs like anything. Lets take the recent ashes its not that the aussie bowlers were unplayable. Its just that english batters were awful. The standard of cricket has taken a deep dive in the last 5-10 years .
May the pace bowling pandemic continue. May we see batters fighting for every run with multiple misses and edges in between.
One the most entertaining times to watch test cricket.
It would be great to see
Could be one of the reasons why VK is struggling to get his 71st
@@patrick17_6 He could get his 71st in ODI instead.
@@Iam1nsane true
I prefer bowler dominance when it comes to tests.....really brings the batters technique into play....plus keeps the match interesting throughout...
Hard to argue this isn’t a fun era.
Yet how many times did England get 20 Australian wickets in the recent Ashes series (& you are allowed to use the Women's Ashes!!)?
@@michaelodonnell824 it's because the English bowling is made up of swing bowlers except for Wood. You dont win with that
@@anweshpradhan1842 No. Its because the english batters were awfully poor compared to their counterparts.
@@anweshpradhan1842 they could have won with Jofra Archer who has been injured for quite a long time since the world cup victory in 2019
That's what we were crying for since mid 2000s, balance bw bat n ball, and it's great this way
Yaa 2000s spoiled batsmen. Easiest test batting decade ever
@EKLAVYA PRATHABHA VARMA quality of cricket doesn't drop that fast
Nah, now it has become too bowling friendly. There's a batting collapse in every match.
@EKLAVYA PRATHABHA VARMA that's because their batting line-up is nothing special anymore. Look how they lost against India 3-0. It wasn't even a contest.
@@superneenjaa718 And doesn't that mean quality drop in span of just 7-8 years?
Great analysis. Personally, as long as the fifth day doesn’t become redundant, I’m looking forward to watching batsmen trying to adjust while bowlers enjoy some time in the sun.
Just unbelievable. Watching test cricket is just an emotion unexplained especially with ball dominating bat most of the times.
This comparison of eras is why Dale Steyn is so great, his stats are fantastic while playing in the best ever era for batting
That's why I consider him even better than Anderson despite having 200 less wickets. Steyn is GOAT as far as test match bowlers are concerned. 🐐❤️
@@Aman-bc2mv among the post 2000s bowlers, yes. of all time is debatable - amongst the top echelon of bowlers absolutely though
@@11hitmanDagenius except for McGrath I don't think anyone will be in that debate. Who all are you talking about tho?
@@11hitmanDagenius btw I'm talking about test specifically
@@Aman-bc2mv mcgrath had better batting support bowling support fielding support . If this supports are like a avg team he would be in hazlewoods level. Impressive not atg. You need to account for this.
I believe adoption of DRS has also played a massive role in changing the game in favour of the bowlers. Specifically spinners have a way of getting the batsman trapped LBW. Padding the ball away has gone completely. Earlier balls by Shane Warne and Muralitharan were padded incase they were outside the line of wicket and the umpire would never give them out.
@EKLAVYA PRATHABHA VARMA can u blame them?? It's hard to cope with three formats. Specially on full tours. It's very hard to maintain your standard. And the batters who manage to do that are real legends.
Excellent video. There's a really good essay by the biologist Stephen J Gould on why nobody hits 0.400 in baseball any more. The answer is that the game overall has improved, and the batters no longer face an unprepared opponent. The pitchers know a lot more about each batter and the fielding is adjusted according to the statistical spread of past hits - just as you point out about all the stats that modern bowlers have. The overall fielding has improved too, with more double plays. I wonder if cricket stats would show that - fewer dropped catches, more runouts etc?
The fielders are the key.Even the bowlers are now brilliant. There a dozens of Colin Blands and Neil Harveys in the covers.Bobby Simpson and Alan Davidson are alive and well at slip and well -leg slip is out of fashion but Davidson was "The Claw".Today The Big Bash resounds with incredible fielding by unsung heroes,this makes it brilliant to watch.
"And that Nagpur pitch wasn't even the worst pitch I've seen at Nagpur" has me in stitches.
For the longest time test pitches were all roads, now they are much more bowler friendly and the bats have restrictions on their size. Plus there are great fast bowlers all of the world now.
Thank u for making a video like this, I wish alot of people see this,and stop saying older generation was the worst for batters
My take is that teams are using data better, and this favors bowlers FAR more than batters.
Cricket is a game you can break down like baseball, and the statisticians deal in facts, over a coaches or captains feelings.
Every batter walking to the crease has AMPLE coverage on his strong areas, averages vs pace, spin, left or right arm, round or over wicket ect. Every batsman in the world is (or should be) walking to the crease and immediately being faced with a field that closes down his favorite areas, and a bowler bowling his least desirable line, length and angle.
People will say "Oh but this information has existed for a couple of decades!" And they're right, but old habits die hard, and coaches of yesteryear would have laughed if you tried to dictate their tactics with data. Things evolve slowly. I believe that cricket has entered the true information era.
So I wonder, how DO batters take advantage of the data to bat better? Or is it that the only way to do that is to be NZ and create batting-friendly wickets?
On the flipside the batsmen can then improve vs the go to tactic against them. Perhaps this is era where persistence is rewarded.
@@johnnywilson3071 I disagree mate. I think a good ball is a good ball. In cricket, the batsmen is definitely the target, and the bowler the predator.
Telling a batsman
"x bowler likes to set y field"
"x spinner spins the ball y amount on average"
"x quick bowls 5 good length away swingers and a bouncer on average in his first spell"
Is just not even close to being as powerful information as the dirt bowlers get on batsmen with stats.
@@johnnywilson3071 No, analysis always favour bowlers more than batters because the batsman has to adjust to whatever they are bowling. Bowlers just have to follow the plan given by the analysts and coaches
How you all can miss or not include the effect T20 has on batsmen. There is a complete shift in the batsmen's attitude and temperament towards game. It's more T20 centric than the tests.
The bowlers are just fitter and more talented these days, and overall the game is better for it. I do think there is a lot england could do to improve our batting though, the scales are tipped so far the other way and bowling is absolutely dominant in the county championship. As some England batsman have said, you just look to get to 30 as quick as you can because you know on 90% of pitches there is just a ball with your name on it.
Bowling attacks nowadays are incredibly strong (see india australia nz england etc.) and batsmen are getting blown away. add bowler friendly pitches on top of that and youll find its very hard yo bat in todays era
And don't forget the DRS.
@@Sen9393 drs does partially help batsmen though, but yeah cause umpires of the past gave batsmen the benefit of the doubt (unless you are sachin)
SA too have two world class Pacers in rabada and nortje and pak now have shaheen too. So these two teams also cannot be counted out.
Personally this period is like renaissance of test viewership as have seen personally I will love to watch 20 wicket in a day falling then seeing whole day of batting.
Have not seen pure record but have seen many matches where viewership are just of the charts like india vs England test one of the most watched test match in decades etc.
As a viewer T20 is more glamorous when it is high scoring and test is most wonderful when bowlers just dominate
When I was a kid in 2000-2010s, I used to hate watching test cricket because it was always a batters paradise. Just top 4 toying with the batsmen scoring 400. Boring.
Idc if the current batters end up with low averages, this makes test cricket SO MUCH more exciting. 1st innings 330 and then 280-290 runs in the later innings getting their ass handed to them by pacers makes for fun and exciting test matches.
Test cricket is most exciting when bowlers are on top and batsmen have to fight for each run. Nothing more boring when each team scores 500+ and game ends in a draw. Give the tests to bowlers. ODIs, T20s are there anyway to treat bowlers like cannon fodder.
Same bowlers ball in odi and t20s btw.
So it's not the bowlers for sure.
Couldn't agree more.
@@parthsavyasachi9348 rules and balls are different mate
@@AAAAAA-gj2di yes.
This has huge impact on test cricket.
@@parthsavyasachi9348 rules in odis and t20s have become very cruel for the bowlers.
Love the use of stats in ways that actually make sense. And i love that you can correctly identify why the outliers may be outliers.
Great stuff, was glued for 22 min.
Would have liked a mention of the depth of all the lineups.
The fast bowlers aren't just better, there are a lot of them.
The first and second change bowlers are no longer the chumps that the batsmen could score off.
There is literally no breathing room, for any team in the top 7.
I’m not sure they are better.
I'll agree. India's definitely are, NZ's definitely are, I think Australia's definitely are and SA line up that took on India I think you could make a case for too (though the 2000s they had pretty amazing top 3-4 pace group). The Windies latest line up I think yuo could argue are (unless you're going to go back to Ambrose and co.). Pakisitan maybe much of a muchness but I feel the Bangladeshis have more pace depth now. Maybe England are similar and SL worse. Definitely more teams have better change pace change bowlers than teams have worse.
@@dcbbot can you explain how Australia and South Africa have better change bowlers now than earlier and also how England is similar to earlier
@@rudrankpatel379 sure. During the period where Australia were most dominant they had the likes of Andy Bichel as a change bowler. Even with a settled line-up at their peak McGrath and Gillespie would be followed by Lee at best. Lee is absically a slightly faster Starc who gets less movement and bounce and has an average north of 30.
The great Australian attacks were typically built aroudn pairs, think Lillee and Thompson. Can you name the change bwolers used then? There's a reason. Cummins will go down as McGrath with extra pace, Hazlewood is an able second with Starc at three. During this period Aussie have been able to turn to Pattinson in 4th who average's at least 4 better than Brett Lee. There's a reason the Aussie media were massively hyped by the diea of all 4 of them playing. We've recently seen what Green, Boland and Richardson are cpable of too. While they may ahve a had a mroe balanced overall attack (one with Warne in it for example) they've enevr had so many good pacers at one time.
Over this period England have had two of their greatest pace bowlers, and an all-rounder who is dangerous as hell in swinging conditions as well as one of their best ever all-roudners period. They have more gas to choose from than traditonally (unless you go way, way back) with Wood and Archer who have played at various stages. Robinson seems a great find. Only the 2005 ashes line-up wich lasted about oen season together woudl be better unless you're going to go back to the 50s or earleir. Just go look at the English pace units from the 80s and 90s.
SA recent trio of Stayn, Philander and Morkel were pretty tasty, but the 4th seemer often underwhelmed. Donald, Pollock, Kallis and any other pretty decent all-rounder they used during this time were also pretty good too. However, those SA sides often had very formidible battign unit's and scoreboard pressure helped with the earleir bunch mentioend a lot. I think the current SA team's pace potential could rival them as an all-round unit (even if no one matches Steyn) of coruse this will depend on how they develop but Rabada, Ngidi, Olivier, Nortje, and Jansen already have impressive figures. Given their battign unit, they couldn't have beaten India without a pretty strong pace battery.
The majority of sides have pace attacks that are stronger than their histroical average. They bowl faster, more accurately for longer periods, often with more variation too. The cumulative knowledge of past generations is there to be utilised along with video analysis. Pace bowling is better generally now, even if there were the odd period with a few more great bowlers. The drop off from great to test standard was high.
If bowlers are better now how come they give 330 plus in pretty much every odis now a days.
Amazing to watch this in-depth analysis. Great work.
One effect of this pace-pandemic era or the too-much cricket era, is that batter's aren't getting the time to fix their issues as it used to happen in the 80s, 90s and early 2000s. Thanks to T20 cricket and around-the-world leagues for this format, countries like Eng, WI, Pak, SA and SL are just not able to produce better batters anymore. Aus and NZ are hanging by the thread and Ind may be next in this line up too. Test cricket batting has taken a dip thanks to change in the ball, the way pitches are being rigged and DRS playing an active role, but the truth of the matter is batter's are not that good anymore. Video analysis has made it easy to help bowlers, pace and spin.
Only when a pitch is flat, the batters have any chance these days. Otherwise, you gotto be really lucky to be dropped multiple times to score a match-winning 100 or 200. Does this mean 300s are out of the picture altogether? Oh no.
Truly impressive insights though.
David Warner scored 335, zak Crawley got 267, karun nair has 303,virat has 7 double hundreds. And most of the batters get dropped on tough pitches . What is your point really?
@@baidicsarkar8329 - just that batting these days are not great in Tests, just like the analysis shows.
smith's 2019 ashes might actually be best since bradman .
That’s interesting, because you might be right and he’s struggled since
@@JarrodKimberYT steve smith has lost his hands since then ig .
@@JarrodKimberYT what about Viv Richards scoring 829 in 4 test matches against England, I think between Bradman and Smith, that one must feature
Virat 2018 vs ENG as well
Fukk off all. If we go like this then there are so many performances. Lara in 1999 vs Aus and 2001 vs Lanka.
T20 has profoundly influenced modern batting, exposing techniques when there is the slightest assistance off the pitch in test cricket. Batsmen seem to have lost the skill of “leaving’, especially on length.
Opening the batting is an absolute art form that is being seen less and less being able to see off 25-35 overs so that a middle order can come in and play aggressively is so underrated
Batsmen probably don't leave as well as before, but did you see the graph at 14:16? T20 hasn't had as big a negative influence as we think.
@@anweshchatterjee7595 that graph is about Strike rates and not averages...doesn't come as a surprise...scoring in tests is a lot harder
stats tells a different story
I think the t20 effect is more pronounced in the SENA countries. When it comes to India, to date in junior cricket we are told to play proper cricketing shots; shots like reverse sweep and scooping aren't really promoted by coaches at a young level, moreover, they reproach you for playing modern T20 shots. To me it makes sense cause at the junior level (u16) one is supposed to get their basics right and later after a certain level one should learn these shots, now there can be arguments against this too. All in all, I noticed players with very fine technique play modern shots in a very controlled beautiful, for ex, Kohli playing an ABD-esque shot in one of the T20i's against the Oz, even Babber Azam has quirky shots.
7:45 - "Pace looks more like an NFT owner's wallet after someone steals their monkey"🤣
Stop it, I can't breathe!
Interesting analysis and excellent video as usual! I'd love a comparison of changes in lengths and lines of fast bowlers over the years with DRS and spicier pitches now than before. While I love the era of Akrams and McGraths, I believe the current generation has the most consistent fast bowlers. The number of loose deliveries have reduced (but I have no concrete data, only what I've seen in recent years). The data available to the teams is so much more and with the kind of training regimens available to the teams, there's no wonder bowlers bowl with more concrete plans than ever before.
I agree, and it's not just consistency of the top bowlers, line ups typically have stronger 3rd and 4th seam options than before, so there's never a let up. Pressure is never realised and there is no easy time to bat (just easier times).
Which country other than NZ have better attack ?
@@rahulroy_60 It's pace attack remember so let's look. India have by far their best pace attack of all time. Vastly superior to anything they've had before. This is truer of India than NZ. Other than England they play more matches than anyone else too, so this will have a larger effect.
Australia have never had 4-5 pace bowlers this good before either. Bret Lee for instance was often the third or occasionally the 2nd best pacer in the best Australian side of all time and he averaged 30. Basically a slightly faster Starc with less bounce and less movement.
You'd have to go back to the early 90s to find a Windies attack with this much pace depth.
The Bangladeshis pace bowlers are better now than they have been maybe ever, though ym knowledge of their teams is not the best.
The Pakistanis probably have similar depth to what they've traditionally had but certainly nothing worse except fo a very brief period with the 2 W's and Khan.
England have one of their better pace line ups with the likes of Archer/Wood and Anderson, Broad, Robinson and Woakes for home matches. It's been their bowling that has meant they aren't currently embarassed constantly given how poor their batting is. In the last 30 years only the 2005 side would have better pace depth.
The curent SA attack might not have someone quite as good as Steyn, but their depth probably matches even their recent maginificent vintage. They just haven't been round long enough to prove it yet.
Only SL have an average to poor pace bowling attack by their standards, and they've never really had great pace bowlers with Vaas and Malinga obvious exceptions.
So the majoirty of sides have better than normal pace attacks by their standards, a coupel have similar and only oen is obviously worse (even then I can't remember any great SL pace bowling collectives).
People remember the past through rose tinted glasses focusing on the best one or two bowlers of a side, forgetting the very average backups. 3rd, 4th and 5th options are collectviely much stronger on average than before.
there have been noticeable improvements in how teams organize their bowling attacks and assignment of roles, however the comparison with the bowling attacks of the past will just be difficult , debatable and a bit unfair because of the lack of data, wildly varying pitches that have no way to be reliably recorded, technological improvements like DRS, ball by ball tracking, analytics and ton of other variables.
Comments are bound to be clouded by recency bias, this era hasn't ended yet as such.
@@11hitmanDagenius Those are all reasonable points. It's difficult to answer difinitevely, but take a look at the bowling line ups of the major test teams over the last 30-40 years (within my cricket watching life time) and look at the 1st and 2nd change pace bowlers of most bowling line ups. I think it's not too dificult to see that overall,a cross hte majority of teams, depth is better right now than in the last few eras.
Watching old footage is a dirty business and it's unfotunate bowlign data wasn't well created/measuered let alone kept but think how much more accurate bowlers are now, particularly faster ones, how much faster they are on average now, how much fitter and thus able to bowl faster and maintain accuracy for longer. Think of the accumulated skill sets that have built up over generations as well as having to adapt to bowling in the two shorter forms of the game.
The drs is definitely a factor, though much more so with spin bowling, the wobble ball is a relatively new delivery that is defintely having an effect and analysis is much mroe detailed with batters flaws much mroe apparent and ready to be exploited by bowlers. These are all factors. I just think that most teams have a superior battery right now as well than compared with most eras where you only had a few sides at any one time with a strong pace bowling unit throughout (as opposed to one or two stand outs). And I think in cricket recency bias doesn't have as much as an impact as confirmation bias, with a very clear bias to the standout moments of our early cricketing experience. I think in Cricket nostaligia tends to rule the day, rather than the other way around. I thionk too much is amde of bad batting and not enough celebrating of good bowling. That the majority of battign averages of greats who straddle the two recent eras have gone down, when they should be in their epak, suggests it's less to do with batting quality.
Having watched test cricket since the 90s, there isn't somebody who as an opposition you think "oh god not you", players like Dravid, Kallis, Ponting, Hussey, Amla, Inzamam, Yousuf, Langer and the list goes on and on. They where pure bred test players who lived on protecting there wicket at all costs. I certainly don't think t-20 cricket is entirely too blame, I think at domestic level it's very successful, but having all these internationals I think is going a bit OTT. fine have the odd ge too kick off a tour but a world cup? No thanks. And as for the hundred? I'm not even going there .....
Excellent analysis, Jarrod. The powers that be have been pushing for the balance between bat and ball to be more like 50/50 rather than the normal 70/30 in favour of the bat for several years and have altered how pitches are assessed by umpires and match referees to reflect that. Your only omission was that you did not congratulate the Curators for achieving this task, although it makes there life much more stressful and difficult as the first person the CEO’s call for when the test finishes inside 3
-4 days is always the Curator.
Well that's becasue Jarrod points out that there wasn't a concerted effort to change ptiches anywhere other than NZ, and they wen't to change them to favour batting. The Windies started using the duke's ball which lead to a change in their pitches and Jarrod believes that the MCG being rated a poor pitch may have had a minor impact too. Basically, Jarrod was implying that the change in pitches argument is often exagerated.
The lack of tour preparation, acclimatization had surely made batting away from home harder. Tour matches became week (before T20 really hit the scheduling) , hut have you looked away v home averages, not saying it;s all the answer but one of a number of things going on.
No practice games, cramped up schedule is to blame.
Also different balls used in tests and odi t20s. Most cricket now is white ball cricket.
Notice how india folded for 36 against pink ball.
Well the bowlers are now taller and faster and they now have the wobble Sean ball so the you can see why it would be hard to bat
Not sure about the bowlers being taller, the WI bowlers definitely aren’t
Taller? No. They're smarter. They're more skilful. They're not just hell bent on hitting the batsman... They hit the ball harder on deck. The ball skids and seams more. The temperament of batsmen isn't really helping as well.
In New Zealand we've actually been kinda lucky with our batters. Tommy still averages 42 and hasn't really changed in the last few years, the introduction of Conway (avg69) Mitchell (avg43) and Young (avg39) has gone swimmingly so far, Kanes average (53) has held up well so far if he could just get over that dam elbow injury (he's set to return against England in the 3 match away series in June but will miss the south africa home series) and even though they are in form slumps I'd still back Nicholls and Blundel to bat their way out of it eventually.
Conway has just played 5-6 games tho
New Zealand has batting friendly pitches. Come Bat in South Africa and see those averages drop.
@@makanakamamutse1 SA produces the most interesting cricket though Aus has the best pitches when it comes to balance
Yeah ....NZ were very lucky in India though
I sense a lot of resentment here fellas, you all say your batters operate in bad conditions, I say they're simply useless 😉 everyone has their own opinions
This video is truly a piece of art and (data) science! Jarrod at his best.
The ingraining of the technology and in-depth analysis showing every batter’s weakness before they even know it themselves has to be accounted for.
Test cricket is boring when teams rack up 600 runs routinely. It's at its best when wickets are falling and one batter stands up and scores a hundred in adversarial circumstances. So an era of bowling is better than an era of batting
18:35 is the point where he gives summary of the reasons why batting has become tougher in test cricket.
Man its so sad to see suranga retire at his peak :((
How good has Root been given all this... seriously impressive
He’s struggled massively as well, just made up for it against spin
@@JarrodKimberYT Thanks, that makes a lot of sense given the subcontinent tours
@@JarrodKimberYT it’s not a child’s play to play spin either!
@EKLAVYA PRATHABHA VARMA that 1 example does not dismantle the entire thought. You are just citing a single or multiple instances of things whereas Jarrod is taking a wayyy larger sample size which generalises patterns over a period of time.
Yeah Root struggled against NZ and Australia - the 2 best pace attacks
This is an outstanding video, it also shows how you can't compare batting averages from era to era. The 1990s was a very difficult era to bat, yet the 2000s up to about 2018 was a much easier era to bat
Devon Conway seems to be doing ok
Damn, what an analysis. That was quite riveting to watch. As a more casual viewer of the game I did not realise the amount of analysis the game goes through now by professional analysts.
fantastic thorough analysis with over reliance on statistics but still well rounded. I would like to add that pace bowlers in general know a lot more today, than that species as a whole ever did before, thanks to tech, money and time spent in analysis. Batsmen,s games are always built on bowlers. Bowlers build the game, that's it, batsman have to follow. As you said this is happening from the top to down. not down to up. There has been a slow decision to taken to spice things up in tests, in terms of viewer ship. Nobody likes seeing bowlers being thrashed for 4-5 days. Its good to see them being thrashed for 40-100 overs and it kind of stops there. It them becomes evident to the average viewer this is only a batsman's game. If Tests need a separate standing then they need a different game style. You can see Test viewership has dropped over the last decade, but has slightly picked in the last few years, thanks to sensations in bowling than batting. This is a cycle, and in a few years as current batters, retire or are thrown out, the batsman will take over as they realise the standardization of bowling strategies and then bowlers will get thrashed again. Then balance is long term and not really short term. In TEST MATCHES there is only one rule/requirement to win, YOU HAVE TO TAKE 20 WICKETS to win. There is no two aways about it. Obviously you have to score more runs than the opposition before losing your 20 wickets first. BOWLING EXISTS ONLY IN TESTS.
"Oh he's bowled him there, Oh THAT'S A BRILLIANT COMEBACK"
I see what you did there
Mark Nicholas did it more. I’m just a humble editor
Couldn't get what happened there, care to elaborate
Ive been watching cricket since 1990 and one thing is for certain, pace bowlers, hell bowlers in general are no where near the quality of the 90s and 2000s, not even close. For me I'd say the last great year for pace bowling was 2014, Steyn in his pomp, Mitch Starc terrorising batsman. Even the top pace bowlers now, I think they are just decent, like Rabada averages 22 but most of the time ive seen him bowl im underwhelmed, same goes for the others.
@SynthMusicFan 501 I'm a South African fan and he is one of the best, just not compared to Donald, Ambrose, Wasim, Mcgrath, Steyn etc etc of the past.
@@jamesw5713 he has not even completed his career for God's sake.
Replay has helped the bowlers tremendously there was a time when you could never get an LBW bowling around the wicket. Nicks carry further with the big bats.
20:56 Sums it up all..
Only Ashwin made it to top20.. No other Spinners.. pacers will be dominating for a long time now.
I think a lot of it is down to pitch doctoring-not necessarily for entertainment but teams realize now more than ever that you (almost surely) can't win a test unless you take 20 wickets and so they design pitches to suit their bowling strengths much more. India's preparing more rank turners than before (starting with that SA series, I feel), pitches in Australia and England are much greener than they were 10 years before. Also, SENA teams are doing much more with their pitches to nullify Asian spin threats, I feel, than they have in the past, which would explain why the same drop isn't seen against spin overall. If you look just in India I'm sure you'll see a much bigger drop in averages against spin as well.
But still pitch doctoring is harder to do for spin--rank turners are much more likely to be criticized than green mambas or whatever, and no one bats an eyelid when an Ashes test finishes in under three days of play on a pitch that can be barely distinguished from the outfield but everyone is up in arms when the same thing happens on a spinning wicket.
And finally, rank turners also assist pace more than previously flat subcontinental wickets as they're more conducive to reverse swing and uneven bounce, hence the bigger drop seen against pace overall.
*NZ SA ENG Are scapegoat when it comes to doctrine pitches*
This was very insightful and I think more needs to be done about doctoring home pitches. Don't think we'll see much away wins
As an Englishman, I am genuinely curious how our domestic and international game would be impacted by switching back to the Readers “Test and County” ball. I treat myself to the luxury of a fancy, fat seamed Dukes for nets every couple of years… and have produced some ridiculous, unplayable deliveries with it… as a VERY average village medium pacer.
Younis Khan was a fucking machine!! REALLY underrated. Guy dominated at all conditions and killed it everywhere. Best test batsman of my generation.
I'd like to polling on spectator preference. Surely people prefer 4 day tests to draws.
Jarrod, what about the impact of on field umpire's call in Tests starting 2017. I believe that had a huge impact on bowling strike rates
Why not for spinners
Have to say... That this is the only channel with this extensive analysis.
Unpopular opinion: batsmen such as Sehwag were immensely successful in tests because of the flat Road like pictures.
Hi exclusively played in the era were batting was easy
While this has been a change for good but it needs to stop now, team winning by scoring just 200 doesn't seem right
I wonder if you could augment famous batsmen's averages by multiplying them by a factor that correlates with the advantage in the decade that they had (and perhaps even by the team that they played in) for an even more interesting level of analysis?
The biggest hole in the argument for authorities "encouraging" sub par wickets is England,where for much of the last decade test wickets have tended to be prepared by accountants, more interested in fifth day revenue than a quality contest between bat and ball.
Scott Boland Skewing the average haha.
So glad that the game turned in favour of seamers lately. I still remember tests from 2000s where the first innings was played for at least five sessions
Batsmen are suffering in Test Cricket cz almost everyone has forgotten how to play the red ball. If in t20 and odi game is skewed in batsman's favor, in test's it is skewed, although justifyingly for the bowlers. Yes there will be batting collapses but if it is happening every other match, and matches finishing inside 3 days, that's not a good sign. I don't see any batsmen can ever come close to the Laras and Sachins in test cricket.
This is such a GOATED video, even I keep telling everyone that one of the main reason why batsman of this era are not doing well is the quality of bowling which has increased but everyone tells me look at sachin's era how tough bowlers were back then 🤦🏼♀️ bro 2000-2010 was one of the easiest era to bat on yes there were bowlers like akhtar Lee McGrath Warne Steyn Pollock but if you leave SA aside no other bowling line-up had 4 quality bowlers like now Aus has(Cummins Starc Lyon Hazelwood) NZ has (Boult Southee Jamieson and Wagner) SA has(rabada nortje ngidi Janson/philander (now retired)) or ENG who have(Anderson Archer broad woakes stokes and Sam Curran)
Sachin was abysmal from 2003 to 2006 in tests so he never benefitted from the best test batting decade
there are no conclusive comparisons because there is not much data . as such the current pace era has been very short with other variables like bad batting standards which means any conclusion you put out are premature
Such brilliant analysis, goes on to show guys like Glenn McGrath, Wasim Akram were real geniuses
Great analysis. One stat I did not see was whether the improvement in pace bowling wicket averages was greater with home ground advantage (which suggests 'prepared' wickets) or did the average pace bowler take more wickets per fewer runs regardless of whether they bowled at home or abroad?
Lol. Batsmen have super bad technique these days and the art of protecting the off stump is almost non-existent.
Since White Ball is such a batsman's game, I think red ball cricket should be a bowler's game.
Makes Roots 2021 even more extraordinary
Great research man, 👏, I am amazed that you have analyzed so much data. Can you tell me from where you get the century old data?
Don't forget, even with liquid turds until the late sixties pitches were still uncovered,there is nothing today' s batsmen have to face that can replicate the ond fashioned "Sticky Dog"
In Steve Smiths’ case, he’s got no technique and is all eye. Can’t believe it took teams this long to find him out.
Has he actually been found out? Still a world class batsman just not God level.
I wish Shoaib Akhtar followed your channel! He keeps rambling about drop in bowling quality
This is the kind of analysis which india needs not like @sportstak and @sportsyari who just call themself analyst and run agendas.
But the Windies attack if the seventies and eighties had minimal effect ? I'd still prefer to bat in today's wickets against today's quicks than on a Sabina Park "glass top" against Andy Roberts, Michael Holding, Malcolm Marshall and Joel Garner.
Surprised U didn't quote anything from Katherine Brunt and her Independent article before the AUS v ENG series. Blocking batting like Boycott, Taverae & Perry is boring, particularly with kookaburra balls that create graveyard shifts for bowlers after the 30 over mark, on Cricket Australia's addiction to low and slow drop-in wickets.
Couldn't give a single solitary damn what Brunt says about cricket. Totally and utterly irrelevant.
Another important change were the bat size restrictions in October 2017. It tracks with the drop in batting averages but only to pace. Interesting to think about.
Great Analysis. That is why i feel Kohli is a better batsman than sachin who batted mostly on flat pitches and had the luxury of scoring 6 centuries against zimbabwe and 4 against bangladesh
Sachin batted From 1993 to 2012....in every part of world.... Facing mcgrath to wasim akram...... U should rethink your comment....
9:31 - Heartbreaking that we don't get data for Pakistan in this chart. Wishing cricket makes a big return there!
*They needs Stop terrorism University*
Found the Jimmy Highroller of cricket, you should make more videos on India, so that you get more views for now
Batting collapses have become the norm in modern day test matches. It is not that the bowling has suddenly become unplayable. It is a temperament thing. With players playing more limited over cricket (especially T20s), I do not see the batting averages improve this coming decade as well!
7 very decent, several great bowling line-ups. Little respite for batters at the moment.
If I was opening the batting these days I'd use an old fashioned small light bat, giving me more chance to react to those wobble balls. Switch to the Kahuna when I've got my eye in or the spinners come on.
I absolutely love the data science behind cricket that you’re providing for everyone on YT. Unfortunately, New Zealand is quite far behind the world in its use of it even at the International level let alone their domestic scene and how they integrate it into their training. I’d kill to get a look in with analysis like this but there’s no market for sports scientists here in NZ
wait what? do you think the black caps or domestic teams don't use this kind of information? or do you just mean in general?
No. Situation is exactly the opposite. NZ uses most of Data Science + Sports Analytics techniques then India and AUS. That's how NZ got their success in recent years. Leaving the losing in final, they were there in all major finals with less resources. You should be proud of your team, 2015 Odi final, 2019 odi final, WTC final, 2021 T20 final. And hence, great scope of data analytics in cricket in NZ.
India still believes in legacy system of cricket, exception is IPL.
A working theory on this... test bowlers are not bowing at 100% in the nets, so the batsmen come underprepared and end up facing far superior stuff than what they felt confident against.
Pass the weed
Good content, but I wish you could record your audio a bit louder.
It surely is a fast bowlers era, and I am not complaining,
but we really need to appreciate R ashwin, being the sole spinner to average under 25 in these conditions.
Only in india
Jarrod,
Interesting as always.
On Cummins. Whilst he is probably the best pace bowler around, when talking pure averages, you do need to factor in that he gets to play against woeful England players a lot!
well he played against india, south africa too. and the 2019 ashes english team was not that bad at all.
Joe roots looking pretty good
The way it should be. I never liked batathons. I have noticed too that just of late, it is the dashers that are getting the milestones rather than the attritional players. Players like Travis Head, Mitch Marsh rather than Steve Smith and Marnus. Khawja is maybe an exception.It may be that with the quality of bowling being so high there are too many good balls with your name on it to try and sasfely leave your way through a tough spell, rather than take your chances and put pressure back on the bowlers. You are a master stats man Jarrod. If you can keep on eye on attritional vs dashing batsmen (batsmen scoring at 70+ strike rate in tests) to see if playing in a bold way and taking all your scoring chances is becoming a necessity in tests.
How much might improved fielding have decreased the runs scored by test batsmen? There have been excellent fielders for a long time but there used to be players who were renowned as bad fielders in most teams. The low end standard has improved a lot has it not? Why would it affect both types of bowlers but pace bowlers more? Possibly because the ball comes off the bat faster on average from pace bowlers and a fielder’s ability to cut off boundaries from pace bowling has improved more. Fast bowlers on average also seem to be far less erratic than they were in the past.
I wont really consider that there is pace bowling pandemic is going on. Fast bowling has definitely degraded since the 90s and early 2000s . Currently there is no genuine pace bowler playing who can bowl 150 consistently and swing it both ways.
Because T20 has destroyed the art of batting. Do you think we will get batsmen of the discipline and skill of Kallis, Dravid or Sangakkara again?
What is Ashwin doing there...🤔
It is wobble ball. There's is no other explanation. This takes out the whole getting your eye in. Normally if you are in you bat long.
With wobble ball that's no longer the case.
Answer batsmen need to start scoring more freely.
Loving cricket more that the bowlers are better. Batters overcoming adversity and bowlers getting great wickets. Win win
So this guy is a failed batsmen I assume.
I'd call it a pace bowler's revolution or renaissance. Test cricket hasn't been this exciting for some time.
Or specifically why can't England make any totals? Blame their domestic system which is quite simply dreadful in all respects.
Staying in bubble life is bizzare and that also affect their stability.eventhough they are scoring but affecting consistency level..
Hopefully they won't turn county pitches into roads just because the England coaching staff can't get it through to batsman not to swish at the ball at 6th stump.
I loved your analysis...so does it mean that someone like labuschange is even better than his actual figures
wait dont judge him so quickly. his real test will be this year in india
Great video . One thing I believe you missed is the depth of bowling attacks and supreme fitness of the current bowlers . Every top team has 5 quality bowlers atleast for their home conditions playing every match. This was never the case in the history of test cricket. Which means that batsman have to struggle to score runs throughojt the innings . There are hardly any easy periods with part timers coming on
5 is a little too much. 3 is a good number. Although WI and SL don't have any quality bowlers but other teams definitely do.
bro , copied every analysis clip of akash chopra XD , and haven't gave any credits.
‘Only’ 90s for don against England
Impact of aggressive batter's stance, limited over cricket, quality of cricketers.....
Test batsmen who are exclusively test batters didnt do well either, and most test batters aren't top tier t20 batters anyway.