Test Cricket (1980 Versus 2012)

Status
Not open for further replies.
E

essex boy

Striker
Just wondering how test cricket compares over a thirty year stretch

People acclaim the likes of Marhsall and Boycott as being masters of the game in there era but I never saw any of them play due to age

For the older poster on here just wondering how test cricket compares to bygone eras.

This isnt really aimed at determining who was better than who but just wondered how the game has evolved over a thirty year period.
 


essex boy said:
Just wondering how test cricket compares over a thirty year stretch

People acclaim the likes of Marhsall and Boycott as being masters of the game in there era but I never saw any of them play due to age

For the older poster on here just wondering how test cricket compares to bygone eras.

This isnt really aimed at determining who was better than who but just wondered how the game has evolved over a thirty year period.
Click to expand...

It is a different sport now much more in favour of the batsman. I was watching the 1981 Ashes series recently and one thing that struck me was how many cracking shots through the covers only went for 2s and 3s rather than 4s. A 40 average then is probably equivalent to a 50 now. You didnt really have quality mystery spinners then and when Qadir did come along nobody could play him and umpires couldnt read him and he never got LBWs!

Pitches were poorer and there was more of a role for the dogged defensive player but in my opinion shot making and the attacking aspects of batting is far superior now to then. You did have exceptional attacking batsmen but they stood out like a sore thumb.

There was definitely more top class fast bowlers around in the 1980s but how they would have fared on the better pitches of today week in week out without having to adapt would be interesting.
 
Last edited:
rentaghost said:
It is a different sport now much more in favour of the batsman. I was watching the 1981 Ashes series recently and one thing that struck me was how many cracking shots through the covers only went for 2s and 3s rather than 4s. A 40 average then is probably equivalent to a 50 now. You didnt really have quality mystery spinners then and when Qadir did come along nobody could play him and umpires couldnt read him and he never got LBWs!

Pitches were poorer and there was more of a role for the dogged defensive player but in my opinion shot making and the attacking aspects of batting is far superior now to then. You did have exceptional attacking batsmen but they stood out like a sore thumb.

There was definitely more top class fast bowlers around in the 1980s but how they would have fared on the better pitches of today week in week out without having to adapt would be interesting.
Click to expand...

conckered - but I think Marshall, Garner and co would have scarred the pants of some of these batsman now. Can't believe the cojones of the guys who manned up and faced these guys in a cap.

Sir Viv would be a pleasure to watch today more so than he was then and I can't figure what kind of averages Clive Lloyd, Richie Richardson, Gavaskar, DI Gower and the likes would have if they played today with the tracks and better bats.....
 
1980s was a tad before my cricketing time, but jeez we were terrible in the 90s - Gooch was our only decent batsmen and carried the team for the early part of the decade before Atherton became the man for that job. Criminal that Atherton finished with an average of 38 when you consider how important to the team he was.

If you think Morgan, Bell and Bopara are poor now, just look up the likes of Lathwell, McCague, Illott, Maynard and Crawley
 
One of the biggest differences is that there are now far fewer draws in Test Cricket (and fewer Tests as well), and scoring rates were generally much lower in 1980. A check of Australian records shows they had 35 draws and a tie out of 91 Tests played in the 1980's (about 40%).

Test batsmen were taught to value their wicket very highly and would often play long slow innings that wouldn't be tolerated by modern cricket fans. There were some quality attacking innings played, but as Rentaghost said they stood out like a sore thumb.

On the subject of "mystery spinners" the only one from years ago that I can think of is John Gleeson, who bowled leg spin out of the front of his hand using his middle finger to spin the ball. Google John Gleeson or Jack Iverson (who tried it even earlier).
 
MacRowners said:
conckered - but I think Marshall, Garner and co would have scarred the pants of some of these batsman now. Can't believe the cojones of the guys who manned up and faced these guys in a cap.

Sir Viv would be a pleasure to watch today more so than he was then and I can't figure what kind of averages Clive Lloyd, Richie Richardson, Gavaskar, DI Gower and the likes would have if they played today with the tracks and better bats.....
Click to expand...

have you watched fire in babylon mate?? some of the footage in that is unreal - i think it robin smith facing the west indies attack in a visorless helmet - very brave man!!!
 
SAFC2403 said:
have you watched fire in babylon mate?? some of the footage in that is unreal - i think it robin smith facing the west indies attack in a visorless helmet - very brave man!!!
Click to expand...

Sadly I remember watching those tests 'live' it was totally normal then, non of this H&S bs.

Robin Smith.... almost forgot he was a sporting hero of mine. Heart as big as a lion from his native Engla... err Africa
 
TopCat said:
1980s was a tad before my cricketing time, but jeez we were terrible in the 90s - Gooch was our only decent batsmen and carried the team for the early part of the decade before Atherton became the man for that job. Criminal that Atherton finished with an average of 38 when you consider how important to the team he was.

If you think Morgan, Bell and Bopara are poor now, just look up the likes of Lathwell, McCague, Illott, Maynard and Crawley
Click to expand...

Atherton was a decent player, his average was destroyed by his injuries. Far better than 38, more like mid 40's....
 
essex boy said:
Just wondering how test cricket compares over a thirty year stretch

People acclaim the likes of Marhsall and Boycott as being masters of the game in there era but I never saw any of them play due to age

For the older poster on here just wondering how test cricket compares to bygone eras.

This isnt really aimed at determining who was better than who but just wondered how the game has evolved over a thirty year period.
Click to expand...

Nobody saw much of Boycs. Everyone was sound asleep within 6 overs
 
rentaghost said:
It is a different sport now much more in favour of the batsman. I was watching the 1981 Ashes series recently and one thing that struck me was how many cracking shots through the covers only went for 2s and 3s rather than 4s. A 40 average then is probably equivalent to a 50 now. You didnt really have quality mystery spinners then and when Qadir did come along nobody could play him and umpires couldnt read him and he never got LBWs!

Pitches were poorer and there was more of a role for the dogged defensive player but in my opinion shot making and the attacking aspects of batting is far superior now to then. You did have exceptional attacking batsmen but they stood out like a sore thumb.

There was definitely more top class fast bowlers around in the 1980s but how tthey would have fared on the better pitches of today week in week out without having to adapt would be interesting.
Click to expand...

Abdul Qadir certainly got lbws in Pakistan - I remember 6 in an innings v England in 1977.
 
As mentioned, too much been swung in favour of batsmen now - better pitches/outfields, one bouncer per over and the emergence and encourgement of T20 cricket. There are far more "dashers", as I'd call them - lads who can go out and whack a quick 100 on a good pitch and look like a world beater, in replacement of an anchorman, someone like a Boycott/Lawry/Viswannath who would look to bat all day. The point I would make is that those 3 could play in any era with their style and be effective, how many of these so called top batsmen now could have batted the way they do now, on uncovered pitches against Lillee and Holding for example, 30/40 years ago? - not many I bet.

Real destructive batsmen batsmen of today's era like Sehwag were around before, look at Greenidge/Haynes/Fredericks but the majority of batsmen are certainly flattered by poor bowling attacks and featherbed wickets. Ian Bell and Kevin Pietersen average nigh on 50 in test cricket, yet one can't hit a quality spinner off the square and the other goes to pieces at the sight of a left-arm spinner. Top quality batsmen these days will be decided by longevity and something that is often forgotten in the face of a packed international calender - match winning innings made under pressure. Players such as Dravid, Kallis, Tendulkar, Ponting, Jayawardene have the technique and mental strength to score runs in all conditions, I'm not sure some of the so-called "best around" are quite as consistent, flat track bullies some would say where years ago, very rarely did you not have to work hard for your runs. Now, with bigger bats, quicker outfields, shorter boundaries and authorities preparing batting pitches to last 5 days for financial gain, scoring runs almost looks too easy, but you can tell the class apart, as they will make it look easy on a cloudy day at Headingley, or a raging bunsen burner in Colombo.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top