Thirty years ago, Geoff Marsh or David Boon would bat through an innings to score 92* and go on to win the man of the match award by the length of Caulfield straight.
The opposition, led by a marvellous century stand between their openers, failed to get the required 222 runs, despite having 8 wickets in hand?
Those were the days when batsman made any conditions seem difficult and it was convincing. Twenty runs off the first ten overs and you were thinking Curtly Ambrose and Courtney Walsh really could bowl.
But it also made it seem like Rameez Raja and Ameer Sohail, really could bat just for surviving. An opener like Krish Srikkanth who went for the runs was streaky, not a true batsman.
Someone like Gordon Greendidge seemed a doyen, and truly was. But the way they scrounged those initial runs set up the scene for the entire match.
After scoring at 1.87rpo in the first 10, everything that came afterwards seemed a blessed offering from the cricketing Gods.
Enter Dean Jones or Viv Richards or David Gower, and boy were we all excited. These guy had a strike rate over 70 runs per 100 balls, and could put together centuries, a thing unheard of – well almost.
Viv would crash them through cover, Gower would caress them through the same gaps, and Deano would wait til he was set and then advance down the pitch, and as soon as he did that, even before he struck a ball, we were in ecstasy – the risk taking, the daring, how could he advance down the pitch to a medium-fast bowler?
But then came 1996, and Sanath Jayasuria and Romesh Kaluwitherana, and Sarauv Ganguly and co, started ruining our preconceptions. The initial 10 overs didn’t have to be full of snicks and straight defence. You could do otherwise other than getting a few cut shots and pull shots away.
Well actually that’s what they did, Sanath and Romesh, but they got a lot away, and suddenly scoring at 4rpo during 20-40 wasn’t exciting anymore.
They ruined this white ball game truly. Because when you could trust your openers not to open the shoulders, the middle order were Gods, and the openers were too, just for not getting out easily. But now you have to score 350, and even then you can’t sit easy.
Last month Alex Carey scored a century off a hundred balls, and no one even mentioned him in Australia, it was all about Glenn Maxwell because he didn’t bat at such a pedestrian rate and only took 85 balls for his ton.
A double century in a ODI game? You mean for the team don’t you?
I wonder what percentage of games Rohit Sharmas 264 would have won in the first 20 years of ODI cricket? But the thing is runs in those games were more special, they got you more excited, and they got you watching how the runs were made, admiring each stroke, such that you knew each batsman entire repertoires.
That’s why I’m hoping that this summer when India comes for a hit and giggle, Virat Kohli orders the batsman to bat like Boon and Marsh in honour of the Australians, and the Aussies for their turn, play four spinners to honour the Indians.
That would make for an interesting game: India punishing their way to 2/165 and Australia all out for 158 chasing it down, being silly to leave a mammoth 50 runs for the final ten, though they did have seven wickets in hand.
That’s a game I’d love to see! Pujara man of the match for his 73* (157). That’s ODI cricket. Bring it back! In my mind, cricket has got ahead of itself.
Cadfael
Roar Guru
Those old games are great (currently on Foxtel). One big difference between then and now is the boundary sizes. Back then the fence was the boundary and the ball had to clear it for a six. Nowadays, the boundary rope is 10-15 meters from the fence. That has helped open up the scoring as well.
Once Upon a Time on the Roar
Roar Guru
Agree totally. That's where the world has gone mad for sure.
DaveJ
Roar Rookie
Very true too!
dungerBob
Roar Rookie
Fair enough. That makes sense.
Once Upon a Time on the Roar
Roar Guru
Paul
Roar Guru
I think you're talking about Plan B, Bob. Plan A is a game that keeps viewers watching for the full 100 overs. I don't think it matters whether side A scores 100 or 400 in 50 overs, as long as the other side has to battle to get those runs. If the game's close throughout, more will watch, the broadcaster will make more advertising revenue, etc. That last series in England was a great example of plan A. If this isn't going to happen, then the broadcasters want the home side in particular to score lots of boundaries.
Micko
Roar Rookie
The bats and the size of the fields. How much has the boundary ropes reduced the area of the playing field now?!
AJ73
Roar Rookie
Agree 100%. They could even use the little line about the width of the stumps away on the bowling crease that could be used. So tired of the batter stepping across and the ball just passes the pads and a wide is scored. Indoor cricket rules state that if the ball passes between this line and the stumps (at the popping crease) it is a legal delivery as long as the batter doesn't hit the ball.
Once Upon a Time on the Roar
Roar Guru
Even with my superior method outlined above, we still sometimes struggle to get overs in on account of averaging nearly an extra delivery every over.
Pope Paul VII
Roar Rookie
If wides were called for every legside wide in park cricket we would be there until doomsday. Plus there would be even more acrimony than usual.
dungerBob
Roar Rookie
In my local bush league at a match last year I saw an umpire call a wide on one that actually grazed the leg stump but didn't knock off the bail !! .. The ensuing argument with the fielding captain was a sight to behold but in the end common sense won out and he reversed his decision.
Insult_2_Injury
Roar Rookie
Why is a batsman allowed to change batting stance from left to right, move to leg, or off, advance down the wicket, be 2m out of his crease as a non striker, put his hand up while the bowler is running in, complain because a paying customer moved a plastic cup in the 4th tier above 125m2 of white sheet, yet if a bowler reacts it’s not etiquette and extra runs and free hits are awarded. That is after having the umpire advise the batsman which side of the wicket, what style of bowling and with which hand you’ll be teeing it up with! They say it’s a different world, Bernie, but some things haven’t changed from the amateur gentry batting and the hoi polloi pro bowlers from 200 years ago!
Insult_2_Injury
Roar Rookie
Interestingly though, Gibbo, players like Kohli, Williamson, Root, Finch even for the most part Buttler.....still play it primarily along the carpet, or in the air in the gap with cricket technique in white ball cricket and have strikerates around 100. That is still effective, the problem for me is the player is commended but the innings not dissected by commentators enough to have kids understand that 10 off 20 after losing a wicket or a good over, can turn into 100 off 85 with game awareness, rather than 'he has to hit out now, he's used up too many balls'. 3 wickets in 10 balls later they're lamenting nobody batting through. Someone has to accept that role and the media plays a part in that by showing how building innings and hitting the fence regularly aren't mutually exclusive.
Once Upon a Time on the Roar
Roar Guru
I hate free hits. Why should a bowler be prevented from taking a wicket on a two deliveries for simply bowling one illegal one. It is double punishment and most unjust.
Once Upon a Time on the Roar
Roar Guru
Sometimes the ball cuts away sharply only momentarily before passing the stumps (after it has well and truly passed the batsman) so that would not always be fair to bowlers.
Insult_2_Injury
Roar Rookie
Not sure if you saw the footage on the Roar the other day of an IPL player receiving a free hit for a beamer which hit him in the chest on the off side return crease? He’d ‘moved inside the line’ as the bowler delivered to hoick it to leg. Of course the ball wouldn’t have hit him if he hadn’t made the move, but he was commended by all and sundry for flicking the free hit for six! That’s entertainment apparently! Well, for those whom think batsmen should have all the rules in their favour. Ashwin WAS patted on the back though, for not mankading Finch who was a metre and half out and still going forward. I’m not interested in the game going backwards, but we have to be smarter how it goes forward. I actually believe those two instances are a bigger blight on the game than players rubbing rather shining a ball. Apparently though the ICC thinks otherwise.
Nathan Absalom
Roar Guru
I've always thought that the ball should have to pass the stumps beyond the line of the danger area to be a wide. I think about 20cm from the stumps?
Insult_2_Injury
Roar Rookie
Good read Umesh! No sport can ever stand still, nor completely go back, but it can get ahead of itself. I noticed the deference to Maxwell over Carey for their hundreds and expected it, with the some hits, more misses nature of his 'game plan'. It appeals to the media headline writers and the 'get off Maxi's back' social mediars. Carey's achievement was applauded but not loudly enough as his style of innings will contribute to far more wins than Maxwells ever has. There is something out of kilter when hit and miss is applauded, yet the culmination of the 2 styles of 80's innings is ho hum! 100 off 100 balls? Every coach and player would take that every game, I know I would.
Once Upon a Time on the Roar
Roar Guru
The ICC no doubt think that would make it too hard for international umpires. There is no easier task an umpire will ever have to perform than calling wide for anything down leg side.
Once Upon a Time on the Roar
Roar Guru
Yeah no worries … I did think you might be with the Gavaskar thing … actually agreed somewhat with the first 3 points.