Making_Splinters wrote:In the modern game, at all levels, you can't really get by being a traditional player any more.
Making_Splinters wrote:In the modern game, at all levels, you can't really get by being a traditional player any more. In the limited squads at domestic level, sides can't have a player on their books who is unselectable in limited overs cricket. The most striking feature of this Ashes series is how poorly both sides have looked to leave the ball outside off stump. It's a basic skill we coach at age group in club level cricket, but seems to have been lost as players move up the ranks.
I suppose it is similar to death of the gloveman in cricket. You don't see wicketkeepers who can't bat anymore.
sussexpob wrote:Making_Splinters wrote:In the modern game, at all levels, you can't really get by being a traditional player any more. In the limited squads at domestic level, sides can't have a player on their books who is unselectable in limited overs cricket. The most striking feature of this Ashes series is how poorly both sides have looked to leave the ball outside off stump. It's a basic skill we coach at age group in club level cricket, but seems to have been lost as players move up the ranks.
I suppose it is similar to death of the gloveman in cricket. You don't see wicketkeepers who can't bat anymore.
Surely though, moving forward into the future, selectors and teams will look at the current crop of test players as being devoid of certain skills, and the sheer inefficiency of asking players to average 30 but blast them off 15 balls, will make way once again for players who can put match winning and long innings together?
Its unsustainable for this to continue, the drop in test match style application can be seen generally in dropping scores at the moment. If teams care about winning, the problem will sort itself out.
bhaveshgor wrote:Funny thing is most player in the Test team don't even play much T20 or didn't even play much IPL.
Clarke, Rogers, Voges, Nevill.
Warner a tough one since he does score runs but doesn't really bat long and gives his wicket away too easily when set scoring 30-40 run a ball isn't that great in test matches compared to scoring 30-40 off 120 balls.
Could blame that on T20 or on Australian mindset.
Like I said before it is too easy to blame it on T20/Schedule but in reality it is down to the players.
how india goes on Test in the next 5 year will prove or disprove the T20 theory.
Kohli new team have all played IPl since the beginning and all the players coming through the set-up would have started playing domestic cricket with the IPL included in it.
Anyway T20 cricket hasn't affected domestic cricket, has anyone First class career suffered because of T20.
Surely if it affects Test cricket it should affect First class cricket.
Making_Splinters wrote: How is that in the interest of domestic teams though? Domestic squads need to be made of players who can play all three formats.
sussexpob wrote:Making_Splinters wrote: How is that in the interest of domestic teams though? Domestic squads need to be made of players who can play all three formats.
Its hardly like the ECB give a toss about the counties, after all, its their money that keeps most from going bankrupt. Produce test players, get dosh.... dont produce them, dont get money.
Making_Splinters wrote:Well given how England have been struggling to find a decent gloveman for nearly 10 years, we've not seen any keepers who aren't selected for county sides based primarily on their batting.
I'd love to be in the fantasy world of yours where the ECB mandates counties to produce a certain type of player and they magically appear.
sussexpob wrote:Making_Splinters wrote:Well given how England have been struggling to find a decent gloveman for nearly 10 years, we've not seen any keepers who aren't selected for county sides based primarily on their batting.
Completely different, that is the culture of the era that has decided that batting takes precedent over keeping, and to be fair the fact Buttler and Prior are picked for the national team is further rubberstamping of that policy. Fielding in general nowadays in the outfield is far better than any previous era, and I doubt many slippers in era's gone by would have took a few of those slip catches we seen at Trent Bridge. If keeper over keeper-batters were considered an overall positive, there would be more of them. The truth is, I very much doubt a keeper averaging 20 with the bat but magical glovework would pay the debt for that skill over someone like Prior or Gilchrist.... he would have to regularly save 40 runs with fielding every game to make that a pay off, which I doubt happens with any fairly competent keeper.I'd love to be in the fantasy world of yours where the ECB mandates counties to produce a certain type of player and they magically appear.
Its in the interests of the game to produce the best player for any given situation, and in multi day cricket, that is the person who bats the most runs. Playing very aggressive cricket has lead to lower scores this series, its higher risk. If that aggressive filters downwards to First Class cricket then unless players are SR80 and averaging 45, you will find the more patient and adaptable players will rise to the top naturally.
If Alistair Cook was batting at Essex at 19 the way he is now, with bowlers less inclined to plug away patiently, he might bat all day. A drop in quality from T20 style innings naturally makes for a proper test capacity batsman to do well..... I am not saying the ECB will create it, its simply natural
In the same way you argue they have to be an all format batsman, well FC cricket is a format, so are mindless sloggers all format batsman?
bhaveshgor wrote:Funny thing is most player in the Test team don't even play much T20 or didn't even play much IPL.
Clarke, Rogers, Voges, Nevill.
Warner a tough one since he does score runs but doesn't really bat long and gives his wicket away too easily when set scoring 30-40 run a ball isn't that great in test matches compared to scoring 30-40 off 120 balls.
Could blame that on T20 or on Australian mindset.
Like I said before it is too easy to blame it on T20/Schedule but in reality it is down to the players.
how india goes on Test in the next 5 year will prove or disprove the T20 theory.
Kohli new team have all played IPl since the beginning and all the players coming through the set-up would have started playing domestic cricket with the IPL included in it.
Anyway T20 cricket hasn't affected domestic cricket, has anyone First class career suffered because of T20.
Surely if it affects Test cricket it should affect First class cricket.
Return to International Cricket
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 92 guests