Batting in Cricket, Harder today, or in the Years Past?

Lets see.

Harder in the "Good Old Days"

1. No Helmets - Would you be hooking and Pulling courtney Walsh, Curtley Ambrose, Jeff Thompson Dennis Lillie with no helmet? How many players have been hit on the head today, those Injuries would have been Crippling. Don't forget a top edge up into the face, and believe me, that hurts.

2. Uncovered Pitches - I know this was a fair while ago, but Pitches these days are flat tracks, great for batting and offering precious little for the bowlers. An Uncovered Pitch could do Absolutley ANYTHING

3. Smaller Bat Sizes - This should be obvious, in the Older days, you had to absolutely smack the crap out of the ball to even get a 4, let alone a 6, these days, top edges, miss timed shots, easily get over the boundary rope. Look at the Bats People like Bradman used, i wouldnt even make a fence out of them, there so thin and tiny. 500 Six's in a tournament? Thats stupid, before you would be lucky to get 5.

4. Same Caliber Bowlers as today. Look at the Legends of bowling in the past, the days where batting was Tough. Wasim, Walsh, Ambrose, Lillie, Thompson, Jim Laker, Waqar, Harold Larwood.

People who say "Spin Bowling has been found out" clearly have no knowledge of cricket - Jim laker 10 wickets in an innings, 19 in a Match.

5. Grounds were Just as big, and they didnt have the boundary rope 5M inside the fence, think of all those ball that would have been caught if that rope wasent brought in just that small amount, Many 6's only JUST go over the rope.

Batting is Harder today-

... Cant think of any?

Update:

I Forgot to mention, if you CAN tell me how batting is harder these days, please mention it, And i shall add it in

12 Answers

Relevance
  • 1 decade ago
    Favorite Answer

    Yeah mate I know what you mean, so many times I see these young guys about 20 years old effortlessly smashing 6's off the worlds best bowlers right from their very first game and making 50's from 25 balls when old timers like Border, Gavaskar, Chappell and Gower very rarely cleared the fence in their entire careers, the advantage has swung very much in favour of the batsman, other factors that may influence this...

    1) When they cut out rest days in Test matches it was a huge bonus for batsmen, tired bowlers are nowhere near as effective, the rate of injuries has gone thru the roof in the last couple of decades and bowlers are affected much more than batsmen and miss more matches and take longer to recover. As quantity rises quality falls.

    2) Minimum over rates are another thing that tires a bowler, before about 1990 you could get away with a slow over rate with no penalty, these days its strictly minimum 90 overs in a days play in Tests, before that it was more like about 80 overs in a day on average.

    3) The number of matches and tours has just about tripled in the last couple of decades,the strain is far worse for bowlers than it is for batsmen, no athlete in any sport can perform at their best if they are expected to do it all the time, even Usain Bolt couldnt break records for the 100 metre sprint if he is expected to compete at his best constantly without rest.

    4) There is no such thing as a feared bowler any more, batsmen wear such comprehensive protection that their risk of injury is very minor compared to a few decades back, when you take away the fear factor even the fastest bowlers are not even going to worry most tailenders.

    5) Bowlers are now expected to perform almost immediately after getting off the plane, 50 years ago they would have had a month of tour matches to reach their peak before the 1st Test, now tour matches are practically extinct, Test series just start with no preparation and only a couple of days between matches, then at the end of the series they are lucky to have a few days rest before the ODI and T20 series, then jump on a plane and start the next tour......

    Actually Cricinfo did a decade by decade comparison for the past 100 years on this a couple of weeks back, the average runs per wicket was higher in the 2000's than any other decade (except the 1940's in which there were only a small number of Tests played), since the 1980's average runs per wicket in Tests has risen from 37 to 43

  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    Much harder in days of yore. Pitches were quicker then because there wasn't as amny games as now so the grounds could recover. As you pointed out, grounds are smaller due to player safety. Now a bowler can only bowl 2 bouncers an over. Prior to the 90s, they could bowl 6 and prior to 1980 in Australia, 8 as we had eight ball overs then.

    The two biggest changes though are covered pitches and protective gear for batsmen and fielders.

    School out early fake Bill P.

  • 1 decade ago

    Definitely harder in the good old days - with so much protection the batsmen wear these days (and still manage to get injured) - also, bowler penalised if ball is above the shoulder twice in the same over. Both the Pataudis suffered severe injury to the eyes - and other Indian batsmen to the head (considering bodyline was started by an Indian borne). You had to have guts to play cricket in the good old days.

  • 1 decade ago

    I think i have to agree with you about this,there is a lot of stats to indicate that bowlers struggle to take wickets more now than previously,like for example in the last 50 years out of the top 50 bowlers with the lowest average only 3 are current players (Murali,Asif,Steyn),most of them long since retired,out of top 50 batsmen from last 50 years more than half are current or recent players,these figures apply only to test matches,ODI figures would take too long for me to look up but i think probably the same would apply.

  • How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
  • 1 decade ago

    Definitely it was wayyyy harder in the past. Now only 1 bouncer allowed in ODIs and T20s, thats rubbish. Past batters were unlucky as compared to modern batters to face such extreme quality bowlers that you wrote.Bbut I think because of extreme quantity of cricket batting standards have improved a lot.

  • Anonymous
    4 years ago

    If cricketers from today played back during the 30s, heaps would have higher averages and be far greater cricketers than bradman, they are used to playing against fast bowling so playing during the 30s would be piss easy, bradman would just be another average cricketer. Face it.

  • 1 decade ago

    I agree with all your points except #4, which is somewhat a contradiction to the rest of your argument. I reckon, the bowlers of modern times are much better than those of yesteryears, since they continue to cause batsmen problems despite having a myriad of factors stacked against them.

  • 1 decade ago

    I agree completely, but would also add that regulations governing the type of deliveries bowlers can deliver and how many, are much tighter these days

  • 1 decade ago

    Agreed, it is easier today.I think you forgot to mention that the grounds were much bigger back in the day as well.

  • john
    Lv 7
    1 decade ago

    batting is easier today

Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.