Will cricket ever return to its golden era?

[Dulex9]

As a 90s kid, it was intriguing, captivating watching 50 over one day cricket.

I believe one day cricket became very attacking after 2013.

With the invention of T20 cricket, cricket has become ultra attacking and not a balanced contenst between bat and ball.

You have to look at the 2015 cricket world cup and 2023 world cup to realise how many 350+ scores were scored.

Back in the day, 2006, even 240 was a competitive score and 300 was a rarity.

I miss those triangular odi tournaments such as the Sharjah cup, Sri Lanka odi series, Carlton and United series, Morocco cup, and loads more.

Test cricket is still good.

I've stopped being passionate about cricket, I used to collect the cricket gear magazines, cricket magazines which some such as the cricketer are still a good read.

Odi cricket was like going to blockbusters or watching a nice film at the cinema.

Maybe I should watch domestic cricket.

 

[sweep_shot]

I don't think so.

Cricket has been destroyed by T20, T10 etc. Only way to return to golden era is to ban T20, T10, Hundred etc.

Another way to return cricket to its golden era is to reduce BCCI's influence.

 

[sweep_shot]

I don't think so.

Cricket has been destroyed by T20, T10 etc. Only way to return to golden era is to ban T20, T10, Hundred etc.

Another way to return cricket to its golden era is to reduce BCCI's influence.

I want to add one more thing. Cricket has been infected by radical wokeness/feminism.

You no longer see legendary commentators like Michael Holding, Boycott etc.

In order for cricket to return to its golden era, this needs to be fixed too.

 

[Dulex9]

I want to add one more thing. Cricket has been infected by radical wokeness/feminism.

You no longer see legendary commentators like Michael Holding, Boycott etc.

In order for cricket to return to its golden era, this needs to be fixed too.

I agree with you.

We need sensible commentators too. Some people say T20 has destroyed cricket.

Although thankfully test cricket hasn't lost its charm, intrigue such as the ongoing England and Pakistan test match.

 

[Buffet]

There was no golden era any time.

We just had 3-4 good teams any time in history.

Cricket has evolved and it will keep evolving.

 

[SpiritOf1903]

Golden eras are subjective.

We're in the midst of an Australian or Indian period of dominance, depending on narrative

 

[DeadlyVenom]

Pakistan may win tomorrow.

India may lose.

Seems golden enough to me.

 

[mominsaigol]

Certain things do need to change.

1) For starters odi cricket should go back to the one ball rule only. The 2 new balls rules allowing for 350 to 450 scores is annoying and takes the fun away. 1 ball was a challenging era and I'd like to return to a time where batters who are avg 40 with 80SR are considered ATG, Rather then fraud stats now days where every Tom dick and Harry is avg 50+ with 95 SR's.

The 2 new balls have made stats irrelevant compared to the past era.

2) Secondly more bilaterals and more odi tournaments are needed. Odi is my favourite format and I'm tired of seeing it often brushed aside for t20. I understand leagues make money and all but it's no excuse, at the very least icc must give equal importance to both formats.

3) ICC and BCCI really need to make an effort and have bilaterals between India and pakistan be hosted again. Heck compromise and have the 2 sides play in UAE if it's such a hassle, But these 2 boards need to realise that bi laterals will bring alot of revenue and will bring back ODI cricket. These sides don't need to play test, but do need to play odi and t20 amongst each other.

4) We need less tournaments, not more. Seems like every year theirs a new tournament coming up and it's annoying. The beauty of every 4 years for odi and every 2 years for t20 and unknown dates for champions trophy should be maintained.

5) Pakistan is doing a good job playing Test cricket but other sides need to play more. Recently it's been aus, Eng and india galore, so it's good to see pak and NZ dominating, but all sides need to start playing more and more test cricket. Besides Test does generate revenue, that much ik, since you can literally host tv ads and YouTube ads all day non stop.

6) T20 cricket is fine as is, Leagues + Bi laterals + ICC tournaments. I don't think t20 needs any changing.

 

[ExpressPacer]

Seems pretty great to me as it is. Fans like you just need to stop overrating and exaggerating the greatness of cricket’s past. Just enjoy the game as it is.

 

[sweep_shot]

There was no golden era any time.

We just had 3-4 good teams any time in history.

Cricket has evolved and it will keep evolving.

Disagree.

Cricket had 8-10 good teams in the 90's. 90's was a golden period in cricket.

Cricket has been destroyed by these 3 things --> T20/T10, BCCI's influence, wokeism/feminism.

 

[sweep_shot]

Pakistan may win tomorrow.

India may lose.

Seems golden enough to me.

In the 90's, Pakistan were superior to India. So, if Pakistan win tomorrow and India lose, it would bring back 90's nostalgia.

 

[mominsaigol]

There was no golden era any time.

We just had 3-4 good teams any time in history.

Cricket has evolved and it will keep evolving.

3-4 good teams because classic Australia was so far ahead of every other side at that time.

But every side in the modern era is weaker then their past self with the exception of a few.

For example current Australia isn't even in bootlicking distance of classic Australia.

Then you have classic sa who are superior to current sa

Then you have classic west indies who are superior to the joke wi now days.

Then you classic sri lanka? Sanga is being compared to Sachin in one thread, whereas current sri lanka are no bodies? Their so irrelevant that I don't even remember half their names?

Only 2023 India was superior to classic India but 2024 India has also mellowed down a bit due to their batters and bowlers struggling recently.

Then 2016-2019 England was superior to Classic England, but current England I'm not sure.

Besides India and England and maybe NZ, Which current side is superior to the classic era?

Even classic Zimbabwe wipes the floor with current Zimbabwe?

 

[Devadwal]

In the 90's, Pakistan were superior to India. So, if Pakistan win tomorrow and India lose, it would bring back 90's nostalgia.

Yes a series win for pakistan after more than 3 year at home and a series lose for india after more than a decade is enough for 90s era to back .
LAMO

 

[sweep_shot]

3-4 good teams because classic Australia was so far ahead of every other side at that time.

But every side in the modern era is weaker then their past self with the exception of a few.

For example current Australia isn't even in bootlicking distance of classic Australia.

Then you have classic sa who are superior to current sa

Then you have classic west indies who are superior to the joke wi now days.

Then you classic sri lanka? Sanga is being compared to Sachin in one thread, whereas current sri lanka are no bodies? Their so irrelevant that I don't even remember half their names?

Only 2023 India was superior to classic India but 2024 India has also mellowed down a bit due to their batters and bowlers struggling recently.

Then 2016-2019 England was superior to Classic England, but current England I'm not sure.

Besides India and England and maybe NZ, Which current side is superior to the classic era?

Even classic Zimbabwe wipes the floor with current Zimbabwe?

I don't think there were only 3-4 good teams in the 90's. I started to watch cricket in 1997 and at that time, all top 8 Test nations were competitive. Even Zimbabwe and Kenya had spirited teams (Kenya beat India twice between 1997 and 2002).

 

[mominsaigol]

I don't think there were only 3-4 good teams in the 90's. I started to watch cricket in 1997 and at that time, all top 8 Test nations were competitive. Even Zimbabwe and Kenya had spirited teams (Kenya beat India twice between 1997 and 2002).

I'm speaking from the perspective of Australia.

Problem is late 1990's to early 2000's era was so aussie dominated that the game started to feel boring, Infact it was kinda a suprise that Australia lost in 1996 lol.

Wc were the only tournaments minus Champions trophy amd it was annoying to see Australia just win nonstop.

Australia won everything and winning one series heck one game against them was seen as a god send.

They were so far ahead that people who view with blind nostalgia probably assume that their were only 1-2 good teams when in reality all teams were competitive except Australia were everything was 90% one sided.

However yes with the exception of 2023 India and 2016-2019 England, Every team from the past is superior to current teams

 

[Buffet]

Disagree.

Cricket had 8-10 good teams in the 90's.

In 90s? Aus, SA and Pak. Three really good teams. WI was declining in entire 90s.

Outside of that, India at home was good but they were extremely bad team outside home.

Take a look at away for teams in 90s?




As I said, 3-4 good teast teams maximum in any era. Cricket never had 8-10 good test teams.

If not away, see over all for 90s.

 

[Dulex9]

Zimbabwe was quite a good team from the late 90s till the 2003 world cup with the Flower brothers, Goodwin, Carlisle, Campbell, Strang brothers, Streak, Blignout, Marriliar, Evans, Rennie, Murphy, Johnson etc

 

[sweep_shot]

In 90s? Aus, SA and Pak. Three really good teams. WI was declining in entire 90s.

Outside of that, India at home was good but they were extremely bad team outside home.

Take a look at away for teams in 90s?


View attachment 147043

As I said, 3-4 good teast teams maximum in any era. Cricket never had 8-10 good test teams.

If not away, see over all for 90s.

View attachment 147044

All 8 Test nations were competitive in the 90's. It was not like what it is now. Gaps among top 8 nations were far less.

Your stats are often manipulated/biased.

 

[Buffet]

They were so far ahead that people who view with blind nostalgia probably assume that their were only 1-2 good teams when in reality all teams were competitive except Australia were everything was 90% one sided.

Nah, nothing to do with Aus. You can keep Aus out and you will see the same trend.

In 90s playing away - keeping Aus out.



Over all while keeping Aus out.



Even taking out great Aus side shows the same trend. There were 3-4 good teams in every era at best. We never had 8-10 good test teams any time.

 

[DeadlyVenom]

Yes a series win for pakistan after more than 3 year at home and a series lose for india after more than a decade is enough for 90s era to back .
LAMO

For a romantic even the faint smell of a perfume on a busy street can bring memories of ones true love flashing back.

 

[Devadwal]

For a romantic even the faint smell of a perfume on a busy street can bring memories of ones true love flashing back.

Or it may be mosquito repellent spray instead of perfume ?

It can kill all the romances before even started .

 

[Buffet]

Zimbabwe was quite a good team from the late 90s till the 2003 world cup with the Flower brothers, Goodwin, Carlisle, Campbell, Strang brothers, Streak, Blignout, Marriliar, Evans, Rennie, Murphy, Johnson etc

W/L of 0.18 from 96-03 in this best phase of Zim.


NZ/Eng was poor test teams in entire 90s.
Ind won like 1 test in entire decade out of home.
SL was minnow in early part of 90s with W/L of 0.1 and became good only in later part and by that time WI has transitioned into a poor test team.

At any time, 3-4 good test teams has been a constant feature. It make sense because out of 8-10 test teams, we are not going to have good 8-10 test teams. Chances are slim to none. It will be extra ordinary circumtances where we can see 8-10 good test teams at any single time.

 

[Buffet]

All 8 Test nations were competitive in the 90's. It was not like what it is now. Gaps among top 8 nations were far less.

Your stats are often manipulated/biased.

Not sure what you watched then.

You have very poor understanding of stats if you think simply putting entire 90s record is manipulation of stats when discussing 90s.

 

[PAKFAN12]

Actually this is golden era of cricket . previously most of the team were losing series away from home but now all are competitive.

 

[sweep_shot]

Not sure what you watched then.

You have very poor understanding of stats if you think simply putting entire 90s record is manipulation of stats when discussing 90s.

Let's examine the teams in the 90's:

Australia - Top team

Pakistan - Top team

South Africa - Top team

NZ - Competitive enough

SL - Were very good; they won the 1996 WC

India - Competitive enough

England - A bit weak but were still good enough (won the 1997 Sharjah trophy that also featured West Indies, India, and Pakistan).

West Indies - They were declining but still a heavyweight team with likes of Ambrose, Walsh, Lara etc.

Zimbabwe - Were a very spirited side. Defeated South Africa, India etc.

Kenya - Very spirited like Zimbabwe. Defeated West Indies and India.

=============================================

I don't need stats for this. I saw these teams live in the 90's. Your stats tend to be biased because you use a lot of filters (based on your bias).

 

[sweep_shot]

W/L of 0.18 from 96-03 in this best phase of Zim.


NZ/Eng was poor test teams in entire 90s.
Ind won like 1 test in entire decade out of home.
SL was minnow in early part of 90s with W/L of 0.1 and became good only in later part and by that time WI has transitioned into a poor test team.

At any time, 3-4 good test teams has been a constant feature. It make sense because out of 8-10 test teams, we are not going to have good 8-10 test teams. Chances are slim to none. It will be extra ordinary circumtances where we can see 8-10 good test teams at any single time.

These numbers don't give the full pictures. Also, Test is not everything. You have to count ODI too.

During those days (pre-T20 days), both Tests and ODIs mattered. Teams used to play full sides during bilateral ODIs.

T20 messed up everything of course.

 

[Rajdeep]

Let's examine the teams in the 90's:

Australia - Top team

Pakistan - Top team

South Africa - Top team

NZ - Competitive enough

SL - Were very good; they won the 1996 WC

India - Competitive enough

England - A bit weak but were still good enough (won the 1997 Sharjah trophy that also featured West Indies, India, and Pakistan).

West Indies - They were declining but still a heavyweight team with likes of Ambrose, Walsh, Lara etc.

Zimbabwe - Were a very spirited side. Defeated South Africa, India etc.

Kenya - Very spirited like Zimbabwe. Defeated West Indies and India.

=============================================

I don't need stats for this. I saw these teams live in the 90's. Your stats tend to be biased because you use a lot of filters (based on your bias).

So what has changed now:

India - Top team
Aust - Top team
Eng - Top team
Pak - Competitive enough
SA - Competitive enough
NZ - Competitive enough
Afg - Competitive enough
SL - Competitive enough

Only BD and WI are poor. So we still have 8 very good & competitive teams

 

[Buffet]

Let's examine the teams in the 90's:

Australia - Top team

Pakistan - Top team

South Africa - Top team


I don't need stats for this. I saw these teams live in the 90's. Your stats tend to be biased because you use a lot of filters (based on your bias).

You said you started watching in 97 and you are claiming lot of stuff for entire 90s. Do you see a disconnect here?

Aus/Pak/SA were good team in entire 90s. WI was good till mid 90s and pretty ordinary in later half. Just won 2 tests when not playing at home out of 15. Ind were competetive? huh. They were horrible as soon as they stepped outside of India. They won 1 test in entire decade.

What bias you see in presenting over all and away record of all teams for entire 90s when we are discussing 90s.

Anyway, we are never going to have 8-10 good teams out of 8-10 teams. It's not biased stats, it's just unrealistic to have 100% of teams being good in any period.

 

[Buffet]

So what has changed now:

India - Top team
Aust - Top team
Eng - Top team
Pak - Competitive enough
SA - Competitive enough
NZ - Competitive enough
Afg - Competitive enough
SL - Competitive enough

Only BD and WI are poor. So we still have 8 very good & competitive teams

If we keep this benchmark then yes, all era have 8-10 good test teams. I mean, we can just ignore minnows and say that others are good.

I think good teams benchmark should be having ability to play well in different conditions as a team. If you can do that then you are a good team.

 

[sweep_shot]

There was no minnow among top 8 in the 90's. That's my point.

Right now, outside of top 5 are all minnows or borderline minnows. Quality of teams were far higher in the 90's.

 

[Rajdeep]

If we keep this benchmark then yes, all era have 8-10 good test teams. I mean, we can just ignore minnows and say that others are good.

I think good teams benchmark should be having ability to play well in different conditions as a team. If you can do that then you are a good team.

True man...brother @sweep_shot 's issue has more to do with BCCI is ruling the modern day cricket than any actual concern for the sport itself. He would have loved the way things were in 90s i.e Asian boards are dependent on the masters from Aus & Eng. He still has that mentality of white people being our boss

 

[sweep_shot]

So what has changed now:

India - Top team
Aust - Top team
Eng - Top team
Pak - Competitive enough
SA - Competitive enough
NZ - Competitive enough
Afg - Competitive enough
SL - Competitive enough

Only BD and WI are poor. So we still have 8 very good & competitive teams

SL are inconsistent. They lose to BD often during ICC events (WC 2023 and 2024 World T20).

Afghans need spin tracks to do well.

Quality was far higher in the 90's.

 

[sweep_shot]

True man...brother @sweep_shot 's issue has more to do with BCCI is ruling the modern day cricket than any actual concern for the sport itself. He would have loved the way things were in 90s i.e Asian boards are dependent on the masters from Aus & Eng. He still has that mentality of white people being our boss

BCCI is very greedy and doesn't understand anything beyond money. Cricket should be more than just money.

Before BCCI became influential, it wasn't like that.

I don't look at white people or brown people. I want to see competency and good management.

 

[Rajdeep]

BCCI is very greedy and doesn't understand anything beyond money. Cricket should be more than just money.

Before BCCI became influential, it wasn't like that.

I don't look at white people or brown people. I want to see competency and good management.

BCCI is not greedy. They generate most amount of revenue for world cricket and hence take biggest cut from ICC. There is nothing wrong in it and cricket has not impacted due to it in anyway. If anything we have an ICC event every year in multiple formats which was not the case before.

 

[Buffet]

SL are inconsistent.

Last 5-6 years, SL has won test series in SA and a test in Eng.

SL had won a grand total of 4 tests, all at home, by the end of 1994 in their entire history.

SL is not a consitenly good team now , but far better team than SL of early 90s. SL was a minnow team in early 90s. SL improved after that period.

 

[sweep_shot]

Last 5-6 years, SL has won test series in SA and a test in Eng.

SL had won a grand total of 4 tests, all at home, by the end of 1994 in their entire history.

SL is not a consitenly good team now , but far better team than SL of early 90s. SL was a minnow team in early 90s. SL improved after that period.

SL have been getting knocked out frequently in World Cups. BD beat them in both 2023 WC and 2024 World T20 (which also knocked them out of CT 2025 and T20 Super 8).

It is only in Test where they have been okay (mostly home dominance).

SL in 1990's were far better. They scored 952 once. They had Murali, Jayasuriya etc.

 

[Dulex9]

I was only speaking about odi cricket.

Aus, Pak, Sa were the best odi teams of that decade.

Sri Lanka had a good odi side from the mid to late 90s.

Zimbabwe from mid 90s onwards had a good odi team. I mentioned their greatest ever players who played in the 90s in my previous post.

WI had a decent odi side, Chanderpaul, Adams, Lara, Hooper, Ambrose, Walsh, Dillon, Arthurton all decent.

NZ wasn't the best, still had useful players in Astle, Cairns, Harris etc. Solidifying from the 92, 96 WC teams.

England won a tournament in Sharjah 97.

Many Sharjah cups, tournaments in Sharjah, Asia cup, tournaments in Sri Lanka were played in this decade. Carlton and United series.

 

[HARKS]

Not sure what you watched then.

You have very poor understanding of stats if you think simply putting entire 90s record is manipulation of stats when discussing 90s.

You are talking to wrong guy about facts , he just speaks whatever rubbish he thinks with great bias towards the team he hates most always, so don't waste ur energy argue with him.

 

[sweep_shot]

I was only speaking about odi cricket.

Aus, Pak, Sa the best odi teams of that decade.

Sri Lanka had a good odi side from the mid to late 90s.

Zimbabwe from mid 90s onwards had a good odi team.

WI had a decent odi side, Chanderpaul, Adams, Lara, Hooper, Ambrose, Walsh, Dillon, Arthurton all decent.

NZ wasn't the best, still had useful players in Astle, Cairns, Harris etc. Solidifying from the 92, 96 WC teams.

Many Sharjah cups, tournaments in Sharjah, Asia cup, tournaments in Sri Lanka were played in this decade.

Indeed.

Bilateral ODIs were very entertaining to watch during those days. I remember classic series like Sharjah Cup, Sahara Cup, Independence Cup, Australian tri-series (Carlton & United Series) etc. They even hosted ODI series in places like Malaysia, Singapore etc.

Cricket was far more fun back then. Golden era.

 

[Dulex9]

Odi cricket needs to come back.

I wish for days where I'm watching a day night traisngular tournament and a score of 260 is competitive. A bit like India Vs Pakistan 2011 world cup semi final. Twist, turns, intrigue.

Morocco cup, Singapore cup.

A lot of cricket fans maybe agree with my sentiments.

 

[Buffet]

I was only speaking about odi cricket.

Oh, then 90s was surely better when it comes to ODI cricket. ODI was also given lots of importance in 90s with multi team tournaments.

But ODI has lot less importance now with T20 in picture. Since most fans wants to watch T20, boards are playing more T20. I am not sure if most boards make money in Test and ODI now days.

ODI was evolution from pure test days. T20 is another evolution. I don't think we are ver going back to days where ODI was that big.

 

[sweep_shot]

Odi cricket needs to come back.

I wish for days where I'm watching a day night traisngular tournament and a score of 260 is competitive. A bit like India Vs Pakistan 2011 world cup semi final. Twist, turns, intrigue.

Morocco cup, Singapore cup.

A lot of cricket fans maybe agree with my sentiments.

Morocco Cup was in 2002. That was a top quality tri-series. It involved Pakistan, SL, and South Africa.

We don't see series like that anymore sadly.

 

[Devadwal]

Morocco Cup was in 2002. That was a top quality tri-series. It involved Pakistan, SL, and South Africa.

We don't see series like that anymore sadly.

Bangladesh surly can Play with Pakistan and Afghanistan .

 

[Dulex9]

I'm speaking from the perspective of Australia.

Problem is late 1990's to early 2000's era was so aussie dominated that the game started to feel boring, Infact it was kinda a suprise that Australia lost in 1996 lol.

Wc were the only tournaments minus Champions trophy amd it was annoying to see Australia just win nonstop.

Australia won everything and winning one series heck one game against them was seen as a god send.

They were so far ahead that people who view with blind nostalgia probably assume that their were only 1-2 good teams when in reality all teams were competitive except Australia were everything was 90% one sided.

However yes with the exception of 2023 India and 2016-2019 England, Every team from the past is superior to current teams

India made a lot of tri series and tournament finals between 2000-2004.

X2 Champions trophy final, 2003 world cup final.

Staggering stats.

 

[BouncerGuy]

Morocco Cup was in 2002. That was a top quality tri-series. It involved Pakistan, SL, and South Africa.

We don't see series like that anymore sadly.

Yeah because India does not want to play cricket anymore.

 

[Jazx]

As a 90s kid, it was intriguing, captivating watching 50 over one day cricket.

I believe one day cricket became very attacking after 2013.

With the invention of T20 cricket, cricket has become ultra attacking and not a balanced contenst between bat and ball.

You have to look at the 2015 cricket world cup and 2023 world cup to realise how many 350+ scores were scored.

Back in the day, 2006, even 240 was a competitive score and 300 was a rarity.

I miss those triangular odi tournaments such as the Sharjah cup, Sri Lanka odi series, Carlton and United series, Morocco cup, and loads more.

Test cricket is still good.

I've stopped being passionate about cricket, I used to collect the cricket gear magazines, cricket magazines which some such as the cricketer are still a good read.

Odi cricket was like going to blockbusters or watching a nice film at the cinema.

Maybe I should watch domestic cricket.

240 competitive in 2006!!!
I don't think so, it was only competitive during early 90s. And all the scenarios changed since 96 world cup. Yes, its more easier to score since 2013 due to that rubbish 2 new ball rules and shorter boundaries.

 

[Dulex9]

240 competitive in 2006!!!
I don't think so, it was only competitive during early 90s. And all the scenarios changed since 96 world cup. Yes, its more easier to score since 2013 due to that rubbish 2 new ball rules and shorter boundaries.

Dlf cup with Australia and India. Australia defended scores of 230!

 

[Bewal Express]

What we know and love as cricket is in its final days. The pointless crap that is commonly known as franchise cricket will eat all before it.

 

[Nikhil_cric]

Yeah because India does not want to play cricket anymore.

Yes, India does not want to play cricket anymore and that's what is stopping PAK,SL and SA from playing a tri series in North Africa

 

[mominsaigol]

Odi cricket needs to be played more and odi cricket needs ro go back to one ball rule.

And abuse Youtube ads to make test profitable again amd host more series.

 

[Nikhil_cric]

There was no minnow among top 8 in the 90's. That's my point.

Right now, outside of top 5 are all minnows or borderline minnows. Quality of teams were far higher in the 90's.

Don't deliberately mix up formats to make whatever point you are trying to make.

As @Buffet showed, there were 2 exceptional Test sides in SA and OZ in the 90's and one good side in PAK.

The rest were nowhere near as good.

In ODI cricket, the gap was smaller but how many ODIs did Zimbabwe beat PAK, SA or OZ in, in the 90's?

But I do agree that the 1999 World Cup was the last time where 9 teams had a legitimate shot at the semis .

 

[ElRaja]

need to scrap ODIs, meaningless cricket that most players, esp fast bowlers just see as an injury risk. have a 50 over world cup every four years, but outisde of that its a total waste of time.

 

[uppercut]

Indeed.

Bilateral ODIs were very entertaining to watch during those days. I remember classic series like Sharjah Cup, Sahara Cup, Independence Cup, Australian tri-series (Carlton & United Series) etc. They even hosted ODI series in places like Malaysia, Singapore etc.

Cricket was far more fun back then. Golden era.

Did I not predict just few weeks ago that you will change your tune ? Suddenly ODI cricket is the yardstick to determine Golden era instead of Test Cricket ?

 

[mominsaigol]

Did I not predict just few weeks ago that you will change your tune ? Suddenly ODI cricket is the yardstick to determine Golden era instead of Test Cricket ?

With the exception of the fact that Pakistan vs India don't play bi laterals and test series anymore, Test cricket has not changed.

Their was never any golden era of test cricket, It's all the same.

What changed is whiteball Bi laterals no longer being given the same importance.

The rise of t20 leagues has taken away some of the fun from odi.

To top it off the 2 new balls rule is very irritating, followed by the fact that sides tend to send c teams because main players want more money via leagues.

In the past a 40 avg batter with an 80 sr and 10-20 centuries was considered an ATG.

If you achieved those statistics but reached 30 to 40 centuries then you were top 10 odi batters of all time

Flash forward to today, A 55+ avg batter with an 89 Sr and 19 odi centuries is considered a fraud, has been and a total medicore player.

This 2 new ball and over obsession with leagues needs to stop. Now any Tom dick and Harry is avg 50 in odi due to the ball not even being 23 overs old by the time the death overs roll in

 

[uppercut]

With the exception of the fact that Pakistan vs India don't play bi laterals and test series anymore, Test cricket has not changed.

Their was never any golden era of test cricket, It's all the same.

Absolutely categorically not !!. Just look at the number of draws prior to 2000 and now. Test Cricket used to be a drag and it started changing gradually due to the overdose of White ball cricket first and then T20's in the 2010s and it is just fascinating to watch. Just the number of really EPIC contests has gone up soo much that I cant keep up.

I agree that ODI cricket as it is played today needs to change. Perhaps use the pinkball and make it closer to test-cricket.

 

[Nikhil_cric]

need to scrap ODIs, meaningless cricket that most players, esp fast bowlers just see as an injury risk. have a 50 over world cup every four years, but outisde of that its a total waste of time.

Scrap Test cricket if you want to scrap meaningless cricket.

Domestic crowds even for a Champions Cup is miles better than for a PAK v ENG series.

There is no point to a World Cup if there are no bilateral ODIs.

 

[BouncerGuy]

There is no point to a World Cup if there are no bilateral ODIs.

I agree. If there is no ODI bilateral then what is the point of having a World Cup as well? Might as well just scrap the whole sport.

 

[jeeteshssaxena]

Let's examine the teams in the 90's:

Australia - Top team

Pakistan - Top team

South Africa - Top team

NZ - Competitive enough

SL - Were very good; they won the 1996 WC

India - Competitive enough

England - A bit weak but were still good enough (won the 1997 Sharjah trophy that also featured West Indies, India, and Pakistan).

West Indies - They were declining but still a heavyweight team with likes of Ambrose, Walsh, Lara etc.

Zimbabwe - Were a very spirited side. Defeated South Africa, India etc.

Kenya - Very spirited like Zimbabwe. Defeated West Indies and India.

=============================================

I don't need stats for this. I saw these teams live in the 90's. Your stats tend to be biased because you use a lot of filters (based on your bias).

You don’t need stats but logical people do.

Just writing stuff on a cricket forum doesn’t make it true.

What Buffet is saying is actually true and I don’t think he has any reason/ bias to prove 90s wasn’t golden period.

 

[Aang_The_last_airbender]

Let's examine the teams in the 90's:

Australia - Top team

Pakistan - Top team

South Africa - Top team

NZ - Competitive enough

SL - Were very good; they won the 1996 WC

India - Competitive enough

England - A bit weak but were still good enough (won the 1997 Sharjah trophy that also featured West Indies, India, and Pakistan).

West Indies - They were declining but still a heavyweight team with likes of Ambrose, Walsh, Lara etc.

Zimbabwe - Were a very spirited side. Defeated South Africa, India etc.

Kenya - Very spirited like Zimbabwe. Defeated West Indies and India.

=============================================

I don't need stats for this. I saw these teams live in the 90's. Your stats tend to be biased because you use a lot of filters (based on your bias).

Very logical, So what happened at the end of 90s that caused the decline of Cricket's glory days???
Anybody?? Anybody.....

Maybe the cricketing world invited a crappy team into its fold and led to the overall decline in quality from which we are yet to recover

 

[Aang_The_last_airbender]

I agree. If there is no ODI bilateral then what is the point of having a World Cup as well? Might as well just scrap the whole sport.

Most of us have grown loving the good old ODI glory days. Our time will fade just like Test cricket.
T20 is what most of the school kids care about, We are old now. ODI cricket will fade away

 

[Bilal Ahmad15]

I agree. If there is no ODI bilateral then what is the point of having a World Cup as well? Might as well just scrap the whole sport.

need to scrap ODIs, meaningless cricket that most players, esp fast bowlers just see as an injury risk. have a 50 over world cup every four years, but outisde of that its a total waste of time.

I also agree that the current ODI model - aka playing an ODI World Cup every 4 years, but the other remaining 3 years and 10 months is just useless bilateral ODI matches - is not sustainable and we saw problems due to this in the world cup last year.

Two solutions:

1) Just straight up get rid of ODI cricket: Problem with this is there will be too big of a gap between T20 - 20overs vs Test - 4 days, it will feel awkward, but people would eventually get used to it.

2) The other solution, which is so much better, is to have a World ODI Championship, spans 2-years, 13 or 11 teams in division 1, top 4 make semi-final and final play-offs, top 8 qualify for current champions trophy, bottom 3 in relegation or relegation play-off. Everyone plays everyone (except Pakistan vs India unfortunately), every odi series can only be 3-macthes, so 36 matches in total, 6 home and 6 away series.

Obviously having this World ODI championship would get rid of the ODI World Cup

 

[Josh]

This is the golden era. Pakistan winning a home series finally. Bangladesh won first time a test and series against Pak and that too in Pakistan, NZ have first time won a series in India and ending a 12 years streak, India won two consecutive test series in Australia, Sri Lanka won a test series in South Africa. What else would one want !

No more atrocious boring draws on flat surfaces of 2000's and before. Best Era of test cricket in modern times.

 

[uppercut]

This is the golden era. Pakistan winning a home series finally. Bangladesh won first time a test and series against Pak and that too in Pakistan, NZ have first time won a series in India and ending a 12 years streak, India won two consecutive test series in Australia, Sri Lanka won a test series in South Africa. What else would one want !

No more atrocious boring draws on flat surfaces of 2000's and before. Best Era of test cricket in modern times.

good post add to that WI won a Test in Aus !

 

[ElRaja]

Scrap Test cricket if you want to scrap meaningless cricket.

Domestic crowds even for a Champions Cup is miles better than for a PAK v ENG series.

There is no point to a World Cup if there are no bilateral ODIs.

players actually like test cricket, no players really like odi cricket. thats why odi cricket has no context outside of world cups, players literally dont even care 1% of a bilateral odis results. leagues mean players have far more vested interest in performing in meaningless t20s.

it served a purpose a few decades ago, now it doesnt. the only reason they exist is because boards can make more money from a pointless 9 hour odi than a pointless 3 hour t20.

 

[Nikhil_cric]

players actually like test cricket, no players really like odi cricket. thats why odi cricket has no context outside of world cups, players literally dont even care 1% of a bilateral odis results. leagues mean players have far more vested interest in performing in meaningless t20s.

it served a purpose a few decades ago, now it doesnt. the only reason they exist is because boards can make more money from a pointless 9 hour odi than a pointless 3 hour t20.

I'm pretty sure players don't like playing bilateral T20's either. What purpose do they serve?

And also there is enough research to show that players' interest in Test cricket has dramatically declined in the last 5 years. They mentioned in that MCC meeting recently.

 

[ElRaja]

I'm pretty sure players don't like playing bilateral T20's either. What purpose do they serve?

And also there is enough research to show that players' interest in Test cricket has dramatically declined in the last 5 years. They mentioned in that MCC meeting recently.

performances in bilateral t20s serve as a platform to get league contracts. tests are still the ultimate format for eng, aus, and a lot of test specialist players from india, pak, sl, sa, nz. i couldnt think of any odi specialists anymore.

 

[Nikhil_cric]

performances in bilateral t20s serve as a platform to get league contracts. tests are still the ultimate format for eng, aus, and a lot of test specialist players from india, pak, sl, sa, nz. i couldnt think of any odi specialists anymore.

As far as I know , the ones who do end up playing franchise cricket are picked up from domestic cricket . At least that's what scouts from the top franchises do.

At least in the IPL, the players who made it in 2024 - the guys who made it big like Cummins, Starc, Daryl Mitchell, Rachin etc were all big performers in the ODI World Cup in either KO's or against India .

The ones playing bilateral T20Is have already made it to franchises. The likes of Will Jacks were killing it in The Hundred and SA20 before making it for England.

 

[Jazx]

Dlf cup with Australia and India. Australia defended scores of 230!

Examples here and there will be in every era. New zealand knocked Out India in WC 2019 semi defending less than 240.
And there are plenty of more examples. So, its actually the conditions than the era. But mentality is different since 96 WC.

 

[sweep_shot]

You don’t need stats but logical people do.

Just writing stuff on a cricket forum doesn’t make it true.

What Buffet is saying is actually true and I don’t think he has any reason/ bias to prove 90s wasn’t golden period.

@Buffet seems biased toward India. There are many posts from him which suggest that.

I can say the same about you when you say "just writing stuff on a cricket forum doesn't make it true."

Based on your past posts, I think you are probably a young fan who didn't watch pre-2008 cricket.

 

[sweep_shot]

1877-2008 = Real cricket.

Post-2008 = BCCI and franchise cricket (T20, T10, Hundred etc.) circus.

 

[JaDed]

The match fixing era of 1990s? Shady bowling techniques and all?

The only good thing about 1975-2000 was WI domination, everything else was a joke.

Forcing mentally weak teams like Bangladesh by BCCI since 1998 has caused issues but atleast match fixing is hardly existent, camera angles has made sure there is cheating on swinging.

Golden era is the era of purity- football from 2006-2014 was very good, has sucked after that due to Fifa corruption and before that due to fake hand of god.

 

[sweep_shot]

The match fixing era of 1990s? Shady bowling techniques and all?

The only good thing about 1975-2000 was WI domination, everything else was a joke.

Forcing mentally weak teams like Bangladesh by BCCI since 1998 has caused issues but atleast match fixing is hardly existent, camera angles has made sure there is cheating on swinging.

Golden era is the era of purity- football from 2006-2014 was very good, has sucked after that due to Fifa corruption and before that due to fake hand of god.

Just because India was a garbage team in the 1990's doesn't mean 1990's was not a golden period.

Are you saying fixing doesn't happen anymore? I am not so sure. Check the documentary below:

 

[uppercut]

The match fixing era of 1990s? Shady bowling techniques and all?

The only good thing about 1975-2000 was WI domination, everything else was a joke.

Forcing mentally weak teams like Bangladesh by BCCI since 1998 has caused issues but atleast match fixing is hardly existent, camera angles has made sure there is cheating on swinging.

Golden era is the era of purity- football from 2006-2014 was very good, has sucked after that due to Fifa corruption and before that due to fake hand of god.

You forgot the bigger menace - rogue umpires like Bucknor, Benson, Billy - the three B's and ofcourse the likes of Darrell Hair, Harper etc. Infact the best thing that happened to world cricket was getting rid of these and permanently fixing the scourge of dodgy umpiring. Its been years since I have heard fans complain about umpiring. DRS is the best thing that happened to Test Cricket. It took test cricket to a completely new level.
​

The only thing I miss from the 90s is the Aussie commentators - Tony Grieg, Bill Lawry ( what a legend ) and Ian Chappel.

 

[uppercut]

@Buffet seems biased toward India. There are many posts from him which suggest that.

And you are the most un-biased poster on topics involving India ? Laughable. Unlike you @Buffet provides proper reasoning and facts that went behind his posts and stats.

Refute him based on facts, logic, cricketing know how not ad-hominem and bluster. Stand up and debate like a man instead of throwing your toys out of the pram.

 

[DeadlyVenom]

Test cricket is in similar shape now as it was in the 90s. 90s may appear more competitive because of the higher number of draws.

But yes for ODI cricket the 90s and early 00s was just sublime. Only those who have witnessed it can comment about how good it was. Every series was an event. The tri series being played all across the world were a treat.

This was the best form of cricket and the pinnacle of cricket ( across all formats). There was so much variety packed into these 100 overs.

I really miss those days.

When you interact with some posters you can sometimes tell who witnessed them and who saw them on a spreadsheet or scorecard.

 

[sweep_shot]

Test cricket is in similar shape now as it was in the 90s. 90s may appear more competitive because of the higher number of draws.

But yes for ODI cricket the 90s and early 00s was just sublime. Only those who have witnessed it can comment about how good it was. Every series was an event. The tri series being played all across the world were a treat.

This was the best form of cricket and the pinnacle of cricket ( across all formats). There was so much variety packed into these 100 overs.

I really miss those days.

When you interact with some posters you can sometimes tell who witnessed them and who saw them on a spreadsheet or scorecard.

Exactly.

Those who didn't see pre-2000 cricket wouldn't understand what they missed. It is like comparing current WWE to WWE from 90's. There is a huge gap in quality.

Test cricket has always been the same. Test cricket is evergreen. It doesn't change much.

ODI got messed up due to T20. Giving T20 international recognition was the worst decision from ICC.

 

[JaDed]

Just because India was a garbage team in the 1990's doesn't mean 1990's was not a golden period.

Are you saying fixing doesn't happen anymore? I am not so sure. Check the documentary below:

It doesn’t not even come close to what happened during Dawood-Miandad times, why would India be garbage we won 1983 wc, 1985 BH and were a formidable home also won a test series in England, think you are confusing Bangladesh with India.

 

[JaDed]

If anything I would say we have a formidable Afghan team on current era compared to timid bangla tigers all these years.
So yeah I’m all happy with HD cameras making sure nothing silly happening anymore.

 

[sweep_shot]

It doesn’t not even come close to what happened during Dawood-Miandad times, why would India be garbage we won 1983 wc, 1985 BH and were a formidable home also won a test series in England, think you are confusing Bangladesh with India.

1983 was not part of 1990's.

India were indeed very ordinary in the 1990's.

 

[JaDed]

1983 was not part of 1990's.

India were indeed very ordinary in the 1990's. I remember Pakistan used to manhandle them very often.

Not sure why you had to bring in Bangladesh. Bangladesh didn't have ODI status for most of 90's. You are more insecure than Nupur Sharma.

Manhandle India often? How often did we even play in 1990s plz enlighten us, we won both the wc encounters even made a wc record chase in Dhaka in 1998 final game.

Please tell us what manhandle imp game are you talking about?

Also I said WI in my original post so clearly I was talking about 1975-2000, go cry in your corner.

We also won the Sharjah cup in 1998 against your fav Aus