The term performance is a conundrum in more ways than one, primarily because of the relative nature of the expression. These days, performance is valued on the basis of winning and losing. Can there be an ideal evaluation? Pardon me for being sceptical.
Standard of performance is the point of deliberation here. The relativity is an issue here too. At Hamilton, we saw a real fight from Zimbabweans at many a point. Now, was it a dip in standard from the South African side or was it due to a potent fighting spirit of their neighbours? One can argue on both counts with valid reasons. So what actually is the reality when it comes to ascertaining the standard of performance in a Cricket match? I think the definition has to be found before concluding on the subject.
Lot has been said and wrote about the deterioration in the quality of all rounders of the recent generation. My belief is that the fraternity should first define what an all rounder is before evaluating one. How can a Ravindra Jadeja be weighed up with the same yard stick with which we assessed a Kapil Dev or an Imran Khan 35 years ago? They were of a different genre. No one around us falls in the same category of these awesome talents. Yet we all try to see a modern day all rounder through the same eyes. Isn’t it a mere injustice to both?
Batting on the other hand has changed drastically over a period of time. The wristy elegance has almost disappeared and in place the muscular clout is the dominant factor. The power of forearms determines the efficiency of the strokes. Batsman leaning into the drive is an old cliché which has evacuated the commentator’s vocabulary. Square cut is no more a signature shot of a stylish batsman. So things have changed for sure. But that doesn’t necessarily mean that the art of batting is deteriorated. On the other hand the performance or the standard of it may have increased in a potential point of view. Artistry, as they call it may have its absence felt!
Bowlers are a confused lot these days when the state of affairs is compared. Speed alone is a criterion to judge a so called fast bowler. Movement, be it in the air or off the wicket is fast becoming a thing of past mainly because of the prevailing circumstances. Dearth of talent alone isn’t a cause for this. Placidity of the pitches around negates this quality of any bowler unless he is in the same league as a Dale Steyn or a James Anderson. Very rarely we come across a natural swing bowler. That for some reason may have affected the length of their deliveries too. Modern fast bowlers’ over obsession with short of length deliveries is quite evident now a days. Can that be considered as the fall in standards? Doubtful, to say the least.
Spinners have found it difficult to find their rhythm going. There one must suspect a possible fall in the standard of performance. Heavy bats and shorter boundaries may have contributed to the cause. That wouldn’t be a concern for a genuinely talented spin bowler who can beat the willow with his wily breaks! Spin bowling on e fears is fast losing its charm and merely transforming into slow bowling.
Last but not the least comes the fielding aspect where the standards have been lifted to a much higher level. Athleticism, a term associated with the westerners mainly, has become a part of every cricketer around. Catching has immensely improved. Rarely do we see a catch being dropped these days. Instead, spectacular catches are like routines now. Ground fielding techniques and skills took the game to a different notch.
So the final estimation has to be that the game has changed vastly. Whatever amends have happened it is for the existence in this modern era. So leave the standard part alone. Let us just concentrate on the performance part only.
