The star of this 2015 Cricket World Cup is no individual, but a concept: powerful, free-flowing batting.
In this tournament alone there have been three team totals of over 400 – that’s 20 per cent of the total of 15 in over 3,500 one-day internationals.
Only five players have scored 200 runs in a one-day innings, yet two of them did so during this World Cup.
These selected statistics provide a small insight into global cricket’s dramatic change. This is not just happening in one-day cricket but in all forms and all over the world.
Multiple reasons have been cited as to why batting is taking precedence over bowling: more field restrictions, bigger bats, two new balls, and shorter boundaries have all played a role in the shorter forms of cricket. But this is not just in the shorter form of the game.
This summer, the pitches have been designed for batsman. Fast bowling tyro Ryan Harris said he felt like “a bowling machine”.
One possible reason is the drop-in pitches, but another goes back to 2012, when the curators were berated, by Australian players and coaches, for creating result friendly wickets in Sheffield Shield cricket.
There has been a clear push in all forms of the game towards batting. The reason, summed up nicely by Mr Cricket himself, Michael Hussey, is “Fans and broadcasters and administrators want to see excitement… They want to see fours and sixes being hit.”
Note the three parties mentioned: fans, broadcasters and administrators. Commercially, it makes sense.
Broadcasters are significant financial contributors to sport, in some cases providing over 50 per cent of revenue. More boundaries can lead to more highlights, more replays, and more ways to introduce sponsorship. Just look at how many people are wearing orange for the beer sponsor in the crowd in New Zealand. They are trying to take a one-handed catch off a six.
Better bowling performances will likely lead to more wickets and shorter matches, creating shortfalls of revenue for broadcasters and administrators alike.
However, I question whether fans of cricket actually want to see the dominance of bat over ball. I love a score of 300-plus runs in a 50-over match, it used to be perceived as a pinnacle of batting prowess for a team to score at over a run per ball. However, when there are so many scored, is it still a big deal? Australia did it, New Zealand did it, even Scotland did it and Bangladesh matched it.
Besides Tuesday night’s epic semi-final, the best match of the Cricket World Cup so far has been the Australia vs New Zealand match. Despite the satisfaction of my New Zealander friend, the result left me with the slight contentment that I watched a good contest.
Two innings, 303 runs scored, and 19 wickets for the match left most cricket fanatics with a warm and fuzzy feeling, despite the early finish.
I love the contest in cricket, no matter what form of the game. However it is no fun when one aspect of the game completely dominates another.
High scores are only good when they are hard to achieve. If 300 becomes a par score for teams in one-day cricket, then you may as well take Harris’ advice and use a bowling machine.
Rudolph Lambert Fernandez
Roar Rookie
Thoughtful Daniel. If you're interested, there was a similar discussion recently where two cricket writers suggested - and I'm paraphrasing - that balance be damned. http://www.theroar.com.au/2015/03/08/no-contest-no-sport-the-balance-between-bat-and-ball/ The point is less about getting the balance down to micro-fraction perfection. The point is to try and retain that semblance of balance, even if the scales tilt every few years or seasons. A vast majority of fans, fresh from the heat of this World Cup don't agree that the overall quality, depth and range of bowling has fallen when compared to 1990s and early 2000s ODI bowling greats. But it's worth a thought while reflecting on the more obvious rule changes and fielding tweaks that seem to have made it easier for batsmen. The quality of the bowling challenge remains one of the key bits of 'resistance' that a batsman has to overcome, to be called good or great. Yes, there's bowling resistance sparking every now and then but it seems to lack the ferocity and effectiveness (especially in containing) that we've seen in previous years.
Alex L
Roar Rookie
You sure about that mate?
Garth
Guest
Most of New Zealand's games, including the one vs. Australia, were dominated by their bowlers. Much vaunted batting line-ups (& England :) ) were skittled for low scores.
Chris Kettlewell
Roar Guru
Absolutely. What's it's basically highlighted is the difference between the bowlers who are bowling really well and those that aren't. It's still possible to bowl well and get good results, and with batsmen looking for such fast scoring, if you do you can get pretty awesome results, like 18 wickets @8.5! But if you are just a bit off and aren't able to do something to make it hard to hit the ball, then you are going to get hit around a lot. Watch many of these innings where batsmen have gone ballistic at the end and hit the ball everywhere, and I guarantee you that you'll see a lot of balls right in the slot to hit, full-tosses, poor short balls (as opposed to really good bouncers) etc. You often get a snow-ball effect. A bowler overpitches and gets hit for six, then overcorrects with a short ball and it goes as well, then they are lost and don't know what to bowl, and their bowling really is all over the place with no real plan or at least no ability to execute. Go back a few years and bowlers would aim for yorkers, but be totally happy to err on the full-side and bowl low full-tosses. These days batsmen have worked out how to hit low full tosses and full half-volleys for six. The result, if you are going to bowl a yorker you need to get it right! A lot of bowlers simply aren't accurate enough to execute with enough quality, a few are, and they've done really well.
Jack Smith
Roar Guru
Definitely hasn't been all bat this world cup. One only has to look at Starc, Vettori and last week Wahab to see bowlers are still enticing in the game of cricket. I'd say perhaps apart from select bowlers, bowling itself has been poor perhaps...
VL98
Guest
One might as well watch a baseball game than watching a game so-called cricket.