West Indies (70's-80's) vs Australia (2000's)?

[aussie_ben91]

Swing comes from humidity in the atmosphere. How has that changed since the 1980s?

Wtf?

So you think he always swung the ball? Because the first time I ever saw him bowl on television, he didn't swing the ball at all.

So, first, the players of the 1970s and 1980s played on seaming minefields and now you do not allow their batting averages to be lower?

Seaming minefields? Pitches look pretty flat on clips and so on. Even players from the past claim the wickets were flat.

 

[manee]

Wtf?

So you think he always swung the ball? Because the first time I ever saw him bowl on television, he didn't swing the ball at all.

Seaming minefields? Pitches look pretty flat on clips and so on. Even players from the past claim the wickets were flat.

There are some inconsistencies, here. Malcolm Marshall has a fantastic record. If the pitches were as flat as today, then that record can be extrapolated to todays era and his statistics alone will have him as one of the greatest fast bowlers of all time. In the match that Marshall didn't swing the ball, did he take many wickets? I'm guessing not, which shows that he swung the ball 95% of the time and it gave him massive success.

Finally, I am not sure how you can argue that the pitches post-2001 are not flatter than those in the 1970s and 1980s. There are far higher scores these days and although the standard of bowling decreased from 2001-2007; you can see from watching cricket that there is far less seam movement and spin than in the 1970s, 1980s and 1990s.

 

[aussie_ben91]

Maybe their is some incosistencies here with your arguement aswell when it comes to talking about Malcom Marshall, because you just completely avoided the fact that he didn't consistently bowl to accomplished and far more successful batting lineups.

Far higher scores? If it was so difficult to bat back then, then how come there is apparently allot more results decided nowadays then there was 20-30 years ago?

 

[manee]

Maybe their is some incosistencies here with your arguement aswell when it comes to talking about Malcom Marshall, because you just completely avoided the fact that he didn't consistently bowl to accomplished and far more successful batting lineups.

The batting line ups of the 70s and 80s were not poor. I'm failing to see the point.

Far higher scores? If it was so difficult to bat back then, then how come there is apparently allot more results decided nowadays then there was 20-30 years ago?

Draws come mainly as a result of rain and evenly matched teams. These bare little relation to the flatness of pitches. I am not going to go searching for statistics but scores are far higher now than in the 1970s and 1980s in Test matches - hence the far higher averages of batsmen in this era.

 

[aussie_ben91]

The batting line ups of the 70s and 80s were not poor. I'm failing to see the point.

:

You're failing to see the point but yet I just explained the reason for what you initially questioned me for?

Draws come mainly as a result of rain and evenly matched teams. These bare little relation to the flatness of pitches. I am not going to go searching for statistics but scores are far higher now than in the 1970s and 1980s in Test matches - hence the far higher averages of batsmen in this era.

As you said earlier. How has the weather changed since the 1980's?

 

[Dare]

Well according to all of the other posts, the likes of Lara & Ambrose and so on 'shouldn't' be included into the Windies XI and if you check, neither Lara or Sobers played in any of those series that I just mentioned.

Greenidge over Hayden? Gimme a break! Averaging almost 10 more runs then him in Test Cricket, I don't care what era you're in, over a long period of time, that's enough alone to justify who is the better batsman. Hayden's played like 20 less tests and made 11 more centuries?

aussie_ben91 added 1 Minutes and 11 Seconds later...


He probably would in non-swinging conditions.

I dont understand how you can be making points against the West Indies of the 70s-80s when you know so little about them. Marshall was one of the best seam bowlers of all time and he could bowl a legcutter on any wicket.

As to your earlier point of the west indies only having one great batsman I dont know if I should feel sorry for you or laugh. Sobers, Viv, Lloyd and the 2 openers.

 

[manee]

As you said earlier. How has the weather changed since the 1980's?

It hasn't. But those are the two main reasons for draws, other than flat pitches which could explain this. However, personally, I have found no decrease in draws from the 70s to today and actually believe there to have been an increase.

 

[King Pietersen]

But Dare, you're forgetting the average, Hayden averages so much higher in Test cricket, so he's obviously a far better player.........

Ben's one of these people that looks far more into the stats, and more importantly the average to detirmine how good a player is. The average isn't everything, you have to look at the players they were playing against, the pitch quality, and a series of other factors. One of the main reasons that Greenidge averages less than Hayden is because of the bowling he faced, the likes of Lillee, Thomson, Dev, Botham, Hadlee, Imran, Willis, and a whole series of others. The 70's and 80's were the true period of the fast bowler, I'm almost certain that Hayden wouldn't have done as well against these bowlers. The fact that Ben claims that Sobers, Lloyd and Greenidge aren't superstar batsman shows his lack of knowledge of the Windies team of the era.

 

[manee]

I dont understand how you can be making points against the West Indies of the 70s-80s when you know so little about them. Marshall was one of the best seam bowlers of all time and he could bowl a legcutter on any wicket.

Indeed, the arguement from Ben, has a distinct lack of knowledge behind it. The West Indies teams of the late 1970s and 1980s were unarguably some of the strongest teams of all time.

Here are some relevant speeds to show just how quick the bowlers of the era were.

1975 Study:
Jeff Thomson 160.45kph
Jeff Thomson 160.45kph
Andy Roberts 159.49kph
Michael Holding 150.67kph (age 22)
Dennis Lillee 148.54kph (sick at the time)

1976 Study:
Jeff Thomson 99.8mph--> 160.6kph
Andy Roberts 97.8mph--> 157.4kph
Dennis Lillee 96.2mph--> 154.8kph
Michael Holding 95.2mph--> 153.2kph
Wayne Daniel 93.7mph--> 150.8kph
Bob Willis 90.7mph--> 145.9kph
Alan Ward 86.5mph--> 139.2kph
John Snow 86.2mph--> 138.7kph

Notice the English bowlers lagging behind, to almost prove the exceptional nature of the five quick bowlers. I personally would have liked to see Marshall timed, but it was not to be.

 

[WestIndian]

LOL, am sitting here reading some of these post by ben91 and am LMAO, I see manee, KP and Dare trying to put and bring knowledge to someone who seems to know already too much about the West Indies and OUR Super Greats. They is so much I can say but will not, some people are just better left in their gloom and doom. I have one question for Ben, we (West Indies) had 1 superstar batsman, ok fine. But if we are talking 70s and 80s, if your 80s does not stop on 81 or 82, I would like to mention this name Richie Richardson, debut in 1983 and like Viv did not wear a helmet, but a wide-brimmed maroon sunhat.

I would also ask you to find out when was the 2 bouncer law pasted, because you are talking of a time when 6 could be delivered at you and back then the body protection was not as protective as they are today, and therefore if Hayden should be tipped as a better batsman then that too should be a factor in the review/analysis of the then and now as it relates to Hayden. Hayden is good, but H & G were of a special time and era in cricket, a time well ball was very often introduced to the flesh and body armor as it is today. Sorry pal but Hayden would have to "wheel and come again" to H & G.

 

[manee]

Indeed. Hayden is a brilliant batsman, but his awful batting pre-2001 and poor record in England, New Zealand and South Africa - which are the three places which aid seam bowling most shows that he is not flawless by any means.

 

[westindies2007]

here is a Video i found about the World's Fastest Bowler Competition - 1979

http://youtube.com/watch?v=bPDW7hj1yfs

 

[manee]

Must be noted that it is commonly accepted that these were the average speed of the bowler's deliveries and so cannot be compared to 1975, 1976 or modern day speeds.

 

[aussie_ben91]

I dont understand how you can be making points against the West Indies of the 70s-80s when you know so little about them. Marshall was one of the best seam bowlers of all time and he could bowl a legcutter on any wicket.

As to your earlier point of the west indies only having one great batsman I dont know if I should feel sorry for you or laugh. Sobers, Viv, Lloyd and the 2 openers.

I don't have to know much about them. I saw him bowl and he wasn't swinging the ball. In today's age, if you're bowling 130kph on the spot then you're going to go. Sure, he'd probably be extremely effective in swinging conditions but I'm sure in the modern age where batsman come at the bowlers then everything would be a whole different kettle of fish.

And if you actually read my posts earlier, when I mentioned the series against Australia. Sobers never played in any of them.

If you're going to go and add on players like Llyod, Greenidge & Haynes as 'world-class' batsman then I might aswell add Mark Waugh, Adam Gilchrist, Damien Martyn & Justin Langer while we're at it. :

aussie_ben91 added 29 Minutes and 45 Seconds later...

But Dare, you're forgetting the average, Hayden averages so much higher in Test cricket, so he's obviously a far better player.........

Ben's one of these people that looks far more into the stats, and more importantly the average to detirmine how good a player is. The average isn't everything, you have to look at the players they were playing against, the pitch quality, and a series of other factors. One of the main reasons that Greenidge averages less than Hayden is because of the bowling he faced, the likes of Lillee, Thomson, Dev, Botham, Hadlee, Imran, Willis, and a whole series of others. The 70's and 80's were the true period of the fast bowler, I'm almost certain that Hayden wouldn't have done as well against these bowlers. The fact that Ben claims that Sobers, Lloyd and Greenidge aren't superstar batsman shows his lack of knowledge of the Windies team of the era.

Stats don't justify how good Matthew Hayden is anyway. His almost as good as Ricky Ponting who is widely considered one of the best batsman of all time. He reached 30 Test centuries faster then any other player in the history of cricket and hasn't even played 100 test caps yet.

Big deal, he faced all of those bowlers. Maybe those bowlers had more success because they bowled to weaker batsman? No one will ever know.

You obviously ignore the fact that Hayden has made 100s against Murali, Pollock, Walsh, Bishop, Kumble, Donald, Waqar Younis, Vettori, Vaas & Flintoff well done.

Neither Greenidge, Haynes or Llyod are better then Hayden.

 

[aussie_ben91]

Indeed. Hayden is a brilliant batsman, but his awful batting pre-2001 and poor record in England, New Zealand and South Africa - which are the three places which aid seam bowling most shows that he is not flawless by any means.

Did you watch the Australia/India series earlier this year? The ball movement off the seam and in the air, was here, there and everywhere and Hayden made 3 centuries in 3 Tests.

Yeah, his totally flawed isn't he. :

aussie_ben91 added 7 Minutes and 35 Seconds later...

I would also ask you to find out when was the 2 bouncer law pasted, because you are talking of a time when 6 could be delivered at you and back then the body protection was not as protective as they are today, and therefore if Hayden should be tipped as a better batsman then that too should be a factor in the review/analysis of the then and now as it relates to Hayden. Hayden is good, but H & G were of a special time and era in cricket, a time well ball was very often introduced to the flesh and body armor as it is today. Sorry pal but Hayden would have to "wheel and come again" to H & G.

What nonsense.

Hayden's almost as good as Ponting and Ponting's considered one of the greatest batsman of all time, along side Sachin Tendulkar and Brian Lara.

Deadset, if cricket was as dangerous as you make it out to be then nobody would've played it to begin with.