BBL07: An old man’s game because the young blokes can’t adapt

The other over-riding question is do the younger players want need to learn The modern game/sportsperson may make money from endorsements than the game itself. Maybe not cricket for most, but having plenty of social media likes and follows and that as a revenue source potentially sees cricket as not their "job" per se. So they don't need to get better at it, as it isn't their main source of income, compared to the older players, who it would have been. Put simply being "good enough" (read still better than 99% of the population) at a sport is all it takes. Does being the number 1 test batsmen result in a bigger pay day? Or does going viral?

I think it is the premise that is the flaw. Early 20s has rarely seen batsmen playing at high level, while early 30s has always been considered peak years for batting. I would expect a 31yo Aaron Finch to be at the peak of his career, he is mid-career not an 'older' player towards the end.

"T20 is the most demanding.." I am being presumptuous but I don't think there is a single Test player who would agree with that statement. The difference in skill level from the best Test batsman in the world to the least skilled Test batsman in the world is far, far greater than the difference between the best and worst first class T20 batsman. Because the skill required to be the best is significantly greater and requires more time to develop.

Dear Liam, Lighten up. Fortunately for me, I'm a cricket enthusiast so I'm loving life more than ever with so much great stuff in the tele right now. Although I had hoped the poms would give us more fight, there is something magical and irreplaceable about a test that ebbs and flows over several days. Funnily enough, I understand the game of cricket rather well, you know having played it so many years ago and watched it for over well over 30 years. If you can't see how bowlers have to be (and are being) more innovative in a game that favours the bat far more than even modern day test cricket, let alone the 50 over format, then you're not as aware of the game than you think you are. Of course there are subtle variations in test match bowling. And of course there are more frequent and perhaps obvious ones in T20, but try bringing those test bowling plans and tweaks to the shortest form of the game and see what happens. A gift to the batters is what happens. You need greater variations of pace, line and length of you're going to be successful. I don't have an axe to grind the way you seem to, so I can see that and am happy to see the game develop. It's exciting to think how the long form game will look in 20-30 years once the techniques from T20 have started to filter over.

Voges, Johnson...no one ever looks west!

Putting a reply for everyone here, first with Brett, I'm not so sure that the high-performance coaches would agree that they should be asking that question. One of the things that I like about the culture of Australian cricket is that State bodies understand that developing test cricketers is the most important aspect of their job. The BBL hasn't really changed that culture despite the influx of money. I don't think they'd necessarily worry when younger players are not dominating the BBL, so long as players are learning more about their craft during the tournament, being exposed to pace, swing and spin in a challenging atmosphere. I think I am in agreement with Sheek in content but in disagreement on wording. Judgement, patience, concentration, endurance, sustained accuracy and a whole host of other attributes are tested in Test cricket that just don't matter in T20. I would argue that one skill that Test cricket tests that T20 doesn't is the ability to succeed in different environments and pitch conditions, but that is more for the batsmen than the bowlers. After all, spinners bowl a hell of a lot more overs on turning decks in test cricket than they do on green tops. The thing with T20 is that you don't have the time as a batsmen to really get set or wait for the ball to hit that you want to hit. Conversely, bowlers don't have the time to settle into their stock ball and then look for variations around that. So, I guess it's probably better to say that there are a certain range of skills are more important in T20 than in test cricket, would that be a better way to describe it? Oh, and I love T20 and test cricket, although I wish the pitches in Australia would have more in them for the bowlers, teams would lose their reviews if they don't bowl their overs in time and you can't overturn a decision for a no-ball if the non-striker is outside the crease when the ball is bowled. If bowlers have to bowl from 20 yards, batsmen have to run for 20 yards!

Liam Well said

The variations that bowlers use are more obvious, I'll grant you, but not greater. I really wonder sometimes how many people actually watch test cricket; not have it on in the background, not read a book or play something handheld on their phone, watch the game properly. To take in the minute variations of a true test match bowler, you need to be paying attention, because it's subtle; not a cross the seam delivery or a back of the hand slower ball bouncer, but changing the angle you bowl at marginally, to alter the direction of the ball at the point of contact, bowling with the seam askew slightly to make it hold up in a seaming deck, a proper cutter in either way, not the overemphasised wrist movement thing you see in T20, where the aim is to signify to the batsman "Hey, I'm doing something different, be careful!" And that's just the quicks, before we even get into swinging the ball or changing length. "The variations that bowlers are employing in T20 are greater than tests'; you're having a laugh, and even if you were right - which you most certainly are not - quantity is not better than quality. Funny, though, that a T20 enthusiast would try to make that argument.

You know what? I would probably back the older team!

I do think it will improve test match bowling over time too. Guile matters heaps there too obviously.

Okay BennO, I can accept that. it makes sense if you only have 24 balls & the batsmen are aiming to hit every single one of them over the fence, you have to employ just about every trick you know about line, length, loop, flight, pace, spin, swing, cut, width, etc, in those 24 balls.

"Other than that, they don’t have to think too hard to dismiss the batsman..." That's not true. The variations that bowlers are employing in T20 are greater than tests. The slower balls are more important and used to great effect and the line and length variations are many. It's got much more happening than everyone here is claiming.

I'm not sure your reasoning is very sound. Chris Lynn is not even 28 yet and you call him a senior citizen?? The reason the players you mention are the top run scorers is because they have played since the start of the competition - Travis Head has only just turned 24 and I doubt he played any BBL till 03 or 04 (can't seem to find stats). Same could be said of many other players. So basing your argument on the top run scorers is unfair to the younger players. If you picked a team of the best 22-30 year olds to play a team of the best over 35 year olds, I know who would win (and it wouldn't be the older guys). Their fielding is carried by the younger players and as much as we love him, Hoggy can not contribute significantly with the bat (much like Mitchell Johnston and others). Of course, the other point is that Warner, Smith, Khawaja, Mitch Marsh, Starc, Cummins etc would all excel in BBL if they played as much as Klinger, Peitersen, Dunk, Hodge, Hoggy etc.

Nathan, I wonder if you're drawing a long bow here. I don't recall anyone seriously suggesting it is harder to run 100m, than it is to run 1500m, which might be one way of illustrating your difference between T20 & test cricket. They require different skill sets, different techniques, different effort & stamina, but both are appreciated for their differences. The 100m is done & dusted in under 10 secs (WR), requiring the runner to run at about 98% max effort. The reason he doesn't run at 100% is because he might/probably will lose some technique, which will affect time. The 1500m is completed in just under 3.30 mins (WR), requiring the runner to maintain a pace at about 90% max effort. Although it is getting away from the discussion, perhaps the 400m is the hardest, requiring the runner to perform at 95% max effort for one lap. It is just about the limit of explosive speed at endurance. T20 is done & dusted in 20 overs. The batsman is not required to build an innings, but score runs quickly. It's the DNA of the game. Every person who plays T20 knows this. Bowlers are credited for bowling 'dot balls'. Other than that, they don't have to think too hard to dismiss the batsman, other than force him into a miss-stroke or skied chance. However, T20 does damage young bodies, especially fast bowlers. They might only bowl 4 overs, but it is at maximum effort. And they must also compete at the ball in the outfield. T20 is more stressful on the body in short, sharp bursts, but not necessarily requiring better skill than test cricket. They are different games, just like the 100m & 1500m are completely different events.

Perhaps another thing to consider is that the cream of the younger crop are busy playing Test cricket while the BBL is on? How good would the Sixers be with (say) Smith, Starc, Lyon and Warner in the lineup!

I think you've missed the mark completely Brett. T 20 is a game of skill and that is acquired through experience. It is normal for spinners to get better and better as they get older. Shane Warne would have lasted a few more seasons if he hadn't been over bowled by Ricky Ponting. T20 is great in that it only lasts for three hours and older bodies can easily handle that and recover in time for the next day. I like the mix of old / young thrown up. Cutting must have been with-in a ball of ending his T20 career yesterday but came out with an enhanced reputation. That is what the game throws up constantly.

I can think of a few young players who are performing well in the T20s. Darcy Short has been a revelation for the Hurricanes. Could be looking at an opening spot for Australia in T20s. Clive Rose has been their best bowler. The young leggies Boyce, Swepson and Zampa are all performing well. Young Carey and Head are batting well for the Strikers. Ross, Lyn and Cutting are playing well for the Heat and aren't exactly veterans. Jhye Richardson for the Perth Heat has been very effective and has been called up to the Australian ODI team. The Sixers have some young fast bowlers in Sams and Dwarshuis. I reckon there is a pretty decent mix of youth and experience going around in the Big Bash at the moment - which is a good thing.