There's a reason or two why scores in ODI cricket are the highest they've ever been - should you compare yourself to them?
We should all be trying to score as quickly as we can, that's pretty much a given, but there are times in the club game that you're going to look quite silly with the movement on offer in particular to bowlers here in England.
So how do the pro's make it look so easy?
Well the first thing is that bats have become so light yet the edges have increased in size meaning its easier to swing the bat quickly and the ball goes further (assuming you time it correctly of course). I remember packing nets away with Dermot Reeve and he was telling me how he nailed this ball from Allan Donald, "couldn't have hit it any better", he retorted, in the 1992 World Cup semi-final at Sydney yet the result was a one-bounce four!
The next thing is the pitches. Professionals are blessed that they get to play on the flattest pitches going. Pretty obvious this, no batsmen wants to play on puddings of wickets where the ball isn't bouncing true, and if it's not turning, not seaming and not swinging well that makes things easier doesn't it. We're not always so blessed, again for numerous reasons.
Then there's the balls they use. In Test matches in England we use a red Dukes ball but all over the world we use the Kookaburra in white-ball cricket. These white Kookaburra's swing for about 5 overs if you're seam presentation is very good - and that's it. They also give next to zero seam movement even when brand new unless you get plenty of grass on the wicket like the 2019 World Cup final.
Another way they keep the runs ticking over is keeping the outfields nice and short so that they run all day long. Add to that the size of the grounds which are slightly smaller now to allow the athleticism that modern fielding brings with running full pelt and diving to stop a ball. Then you add fielding restrictions on top that they've given captains and it's very hard to plug gaps on these rapid, small outfields.
Coaching and innovation has also played a part. You wouldn't see Ian Chappell switch-hitting or scooping many of the bowlers he faced. Also while you're at work sitting at your desk getting assignments done for your boss and answering calls off that snooty woman who you can never seem to please, the pro's are hitting a couple of hundred or so balls a day.
So when you compare all this to a guy sat at work thinking about his previous failures the last two weekends who then has to come up against a moving red Dukes ball on a slow-ish pitch, with plenty of grass combined with a long outfield when all he's hit all week is 30 throw downs half an hour before the game then you can't expect the scores to be anywhere near what they are on TV, even if the bowling isn't as good.
So why do they pack it in the batsmen's favour?
Our attention spans are getting shorter and shorter meaning that to sell the game to the next generation we want to make it easier to see sixes and fours as often as possible - and we don't want to see our favourite and the best batters dismissed. Not many are really interested in the beauty which angles in and jags away forcing a play and miss and settling in the 'keepers gloves, as good as a delivery as it may be.
The price of a beer at grounds is another thing. Last time I went to an England game you paid £1 for your cup and your drink of choice was upwards of £5. They flow a bit quicker towards the end of the day too.
But what's that got to do with anything?
If a 50-over game goes the distance it would start around 10.30am and end around 7pm. If it doesn't go the distance and one side is bowled out for 120 in 30 overs and the opposition get it in 25, that's just 55 overs bowled. That's 45 overs worth that the paying public are missing out on so they don't want people to think a ticket is overpriced.
It'll probably finish about 3pm too. What are the fans going to do for the rest of the day? Go home to their wives? They've started now so they want to finish. Find the nearest pub would be the first option. But the grounds don't want this. This is 4 hours worth of spectating and spending money on beer at £5 a drink, plus by this time you're getting peckish and are in a happy mood to not worry about the overpriced fish and chips with curry sauce.
You also decrease the chances of people spending money on merchandise in the club shop if you're only there 50% of the time.
All this means for the average club cricketer is that you should be giving respect to the opening bowlers and earning your right to score runs later on. The rest of the team should value their opening batters who look like they're getting bogged down. They do a great job for the team allowing the rest of you to come in and start progressing the score upwards. They also prevent an embarrassing collapse by not giving the opposition bowlers an early chance to get their tales up.
Just remember that 250 is still a very decent score in club cricket what with the ball jagging about early doors, fitness levels not being so good and longer outfelds mean that you actually have to run instead of watching the ball roll along the carpet all the way to the rope.
It also means we'll have to get used to scores of around 400 more and more in the professional game with batsmen just lining the bowlers up and not having to worry about much swing or seam movement and mishits going for six. Mishits certainly never went for six thirty years ago. Please don't think the IPL or even the new LPL are the highest standard of cricket around. Yes the bowlers are quicker and more accurate than club cricket, but the batters only need good bat on ball and the ball flies away.
Personally, I think low-scoring thrillers are the best where it is a little difficult to score runs. 140ao plays 141-9 would be a far more nail-biting game than 450-2 plays 451-1 but of course the former only lasts 60 overs or so. The 1999 semi-final has to have been the greatest game ever until last years super over finish. Bats weren't on PEDs and there was a new ball that gave plenty of assistance to bowlers early on. Then we got the finish that everyone remembers. I think the World Cup final of 2019 is about as low-scoring as it's going to get nowadays so well done to the ground staff I say for making the pitch a little tricky. It should be with a new ball.
Have you noticed how distinctly average England's batting has been in test cricket in recent years. They look too obsessed with putting pressure on the bowlers rather than soaking up a tough period here and there. When it comes off it looks very good but all too often Sam Curran has had to rescue us and get us up near 300. Bit harder against a decent attack with often helpful conditions compared to hitting medium pacers on small flat roads with lightning quick outfields!
I don't think much is going to change though. We need the excitement of fours, sixes and wickets and a match finished in an evening to entice young kids to the game as we compete with so many other distractions nowadays. I just hope when they're older they appreciate watching the Test game and the skill sets required to do well at that level and that club level 50-over cricket is very different to the ODI's you see on TV.
Comentarios