Skip to main content

England in the 90s revisited and oh, for backup bowlers!

So its come to this finally. As the cliche goes, the wheel comes full circle. Australian selection policies these days resemble that of England from the 1990s :-) Took a quick look at the last two years and over 37 Test matches since 1 Jan 2008, Australia have used 36 different players. That's an average of roughly one additional/new player every 1.48 matches! Talk about instability. When compared to India (a new player every 1.94 matches), South Africa (2.14), England (2.24) it shows how things have changed in the last two years with regards to the power balance in Test cricket.

What the overall stat also does not show directly is that most of these new players have been bowlers. With the exception of replacing Hayden and Symonds the batting line-up has been quite stable but the bowling has been the exact opposite. Indian spinners like Amit Mishra, Piyush Chawla, Ashwin, and Murali Kartik must be ruing the fact that they don't have an Australian passport! The latter in particular since his India playing days seem over. This isn't a uniquely Australian problem though. Bowling the world over has been pretty poor in the last two years, with most teams struggling to produce any Test class back-up bowlers. The over-reliance that each team has on one or two bowlers really shows them up when these guys get injured. Whether that's Zaheer for India, Steyn for South Africa, Anderson and Swann for England, most teams really lack depth in their bowling stocks. Hell, Sri Lanka was finding it difficult to bowl out the West Indies on their own soil just recently. And if Asif and Aamer get life bans the average quality will go plummeting further. Hopefully there will be a turnaround soon!

Comments

AS said…
Is there a correlation between the rate of change of players and the success of the team? I guess the analysis to answer this question will have to be slightly more complex, but interesting?
December 27, 2010 at 1:10 PM
Buttax said…
In the normal course, not really because turnover is pretty steady. But every so often a team goes through a phase where they lose a clutch of good players at the same time. That usually has a big effect (like Australia are seeing now after Warne, McGrath, Gilchrist, Hayden, Langer, and Martyn all retired in 2006/7). I think the reason the effect is magnified is also driven by the fact that when you have a clutch of really good players, they were probably driving better results than average :)
January 5, 2011 at 8:26 PM
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

When reactions lack proportion

There's been much brouhaha over India's rapid descent into one-sided football scorelines and becoming what some would term "the world's worst overseas team". And while there's some logic to the cries for wholesale changes ,  revamping the team , and attitude problems , much of it is over the top. About the only two sensible pieces I have read recently are by Ganguly and Siddhartha Vaidyanathan questioning the lack of spirit and fight shown by the team. What's most surprising to me is that some people seem to think that the team (which was ranked #1 till recently and won the World Cup less than a year back) is suddenly a pile of dung. This when there are still several pieces of information (numbers of course) that have either been ignored or not analysed clearly at all. So here's an attempt to balance the books a little. Consider the following - 1) India's overseas record in 5 year segments roughly over the last two decades is as below: 199
Post a Comment
Read more

Kohli's team on the way to greatness?

Growing up (from a cricket watching perspective) in the 1990s, I am terribly unused to Test cricket being the format in which the Indian team is most successful and looking like potential world-beaters. Still early days, but this is exactly the way things seem headed currently for Kohli and his men. Since Jan 2015 (when Kohli took over as full time captain), India's record reads: P 21, W 14, L 1, D 6. The absurd W/L ratio will of course not last and many critics will point to the fact that most of the victories have come at home. Teams can however only overcome the opposition they are faced with and so far India have ticked off the overseas boxes they have been faced with (in Sri Lanka and the West Indies). And at home they have been utterly dominant, destroying everyone they've met. But most hearteningly, it's the way they have battled back from adversity that builds the most promise for the future. Too often in even the recent past (let alone the 1990s), Indian teams
Post a Comment
Read more

Old dog, new tricks?

After Virat Kohli's stupendously successful start as India captain (admittedly in a different format), the cries for Dhoni to be replaced as captain for the shorter formats will undoubtedly renew again. And while Kohli might be ready to take over, I think India still have a lot to gain from Dhoni the batsman and captain at the Champions Trophy in England next year. Aside from the fact that we are not exactly rolling in good new limited overs keeper-batsmen and couldn't therefore find an adequate replacement at short notice, Dhoni has looked fitter and fresher since he gave up Test cricket. He has also, in a distinct departure from the recent past, looked keen to get stuck into situations tactically and work out ways to win with newer players. The Zimbabwe tour was a pretty light weight test but it definitely started there and its carried on into the current series against New Zealand. Most hearteningly, he has not been stubborn about his own waning skills as a batsman and
Post a Comment
Read more