Why do cricket teams declare?

[HangTime]

...instead of just launching a massive slog?
One thing I've never been able to get my head round is the benefit to the team from a declaration compared to just telling every batsman to attempt to hit every ball for six. If they get out, they haven't used up much time and the wickets lost are irrelevant if you are going to declare your innings anyway. But the point is you can accumulate runs quicker and potentially build a bigger more unassailable target.

The only thing I can think of is protecting personal averages but that seems to go against the team ethos. Surely the important thing is trying to win the game, not whether Joe Bloggs got 50 not out or was caught for 62 and hence reduced his average slightly.

Here's an example, it's after tea on the 4th day. Your team has a lead of 320. You can try to accumulate another few runs and then declare to get a bowl at them before stumps. But why don't you just go ballistic, tonking the ball here there and every where. Maybe you get bowled out for 335. Who cares, you were going to declare anyway.

 

[mid_gen]

...instead of just launching a massive slog?
One thing I've never been able to get my head round is the benefit to the team from a declaration compared to just telling every batsman to attempt to hit every ball for six. If they get out, they haven't used up much time and the wickets lost are irrelevant if you are going to declare your innings anyway. But the point is you can accumulate runs quicker and potentially build a bigger more unassailable target.

The only thing I can think of is protecting personal averages but that seems to go against the team ethos. Surely the important thing is trying to win the game, not whether Joe Bloggs got 50 not out or was caught for 62 and hence reduced his average slightly.

Here's an example, it's after tea on the 4th day. Your team has a lead of 320. You can try to accumulate another few runs and then declare to get a bowl at them before stumps. But why don't you just go ballistic, tonking the ball here there and every where. Maybe you get bowled out for 335. Who cares, you were going to declare anyway.

I would guess it's two things :

1) They do try to, but hitting boundaries off test level bowlers is hard
2) Having someone slinging a hard ball at you at 90mph+ and just dancing down the wicket to slog every ball isn't always appealing, especially for tailenders

 

[d_brennen]

In all seriousness there is a good summary of why teams declare if you google why cricket teams declare, first result. I'm not a cricket fan but it makes perfect sense

 

[robfosters]

...instead of just launching a massive slog?
One thing I've never been able to get my head round is the benefit to the team from a declaration compared to just telling every batsman to attempt to hit every ball for six. If they get out, they haven't used up much time and the wickets lost are irrelevant if you are going to declare your innings anyway. But the point is you can accumulate runs quicker and potentially build a bigger more unassailable target.

The only thing I can think of is protecting personal averages but that seems to go against the team ethos. Surely the important thing is trying to win the game, not whether Joe Bloggs got 50 not out or was caught for 62 and hence reduced his average slightly.

Here's an example, it's after tea on the 4th day. Your team has a lead of 320. You can try to accumulate another few runs and then declare to get a bowl at them before stumps. But why don't you just go ballistic, tonking the ball here there and every where. Maybe you get bowled out for 335. Who cares, you were going to declare anyway.

Those extra runs are useless if you don’t have enough time to bowl your opponents out.

it’s a balancing act between ensuring you have enough runs to avoid defeat and enough time to bowl the other team out. It’s really that simple.

 

[mid_gen]

Those extra runs are useless if you don’t have enough time to bowl your opponents out.

it’s a balancing act between ensuring you have enough runs to avoid defeat and enough time to bowl the other team out. It’s really that simple.

I think OP understands fundamentally WHY you declare.....because you need enough time to bowl out the opposition.

The question is why declare, rather than just go full T20 mode and smash as many runs as you can before you run out of wickets, rather than the somewhat conservative pace it appears some batsmen go at before declaring sometimes.

 

[fez]

Hes not asking why they declare from a "trying to win the match point of view", hes asking why they don't just hit a certain point and say "right, we want to be bowling in 45 minutes, just go for it". Everyones job at that point is to score as many runs as possible in 45 minutes and if they are all out in 20 minutes so be it.

The only rational reason is protecting batting averages as far as I can tell. Its something I have always wondered as well. When you declare with 500 for 3 wickets you probably could have got 550+ if you were willing to just go for it at the end instead of playing more conservatively.

The only mitigating circumstance I can think of is that when you declare you usually only do so when you think there is close to 0 chance of losing the match so its not such a big issue not striking out.

 

[robfosters]

Hes not asking why they declare from a "trying to win the match point of view", hes asking why they don't just hit a certain point and say "right, we want to be bowling in 45 minutes, just go for it". Everyones job at that point is to score as many runs as possible in 45 minutes and if they are all out in 20 minutes so be it.

The only rational reason is protecting batting averages as far as I can tell. Its something I have always wondered as well. When you declare with 500 for 3 wickets you probably could have got 550+ if you were willing to just go for it at the end instead of playing more conservatively.

The only mitigating circumstance I can think of is that when you declare you usually only do so when you think there is close to 0 chance of losing the match so its not such a big issue not striking out.

They more often than not do throw caution to the wind in the run up to a declaration. Sometimes they might be trying to give someone enough time to hit a ton.

Also, if they’re into the tail, they don’t want the batsman exerting themselves too much as they’ll be needed to bowl straight after.

 

[HangTime]

Those extra runs are useless if you don’t have enough time to bowl your opponents out.

it’s a balancing act between ensuring you have enough runs to avoid defeat and enough time to bowl the other team out. It’s really that simple.

I know, I'm not advocating batting for significantly longer. I'm advocating playing MUCH more aggressively so you are either scoring at an extreme rate or getting out. It's exactly because it is a balancing act that I'm bringing this up, because the point is if you score runs quicker then you have a bigger lead with X amount of time left, or you reach the point where you can get more time bowling at them because you got runs quicker, unless you started slogging way too early.

They more often than not do throw caution to the wind in the run up to a declaration. Sometimes they might be trying to give someone enough time to hit a ton.

Also, if they’re into the tail, they don’t want the batsman exerting themselves too much as they’ll be needed to bowl straight after.

They play more aggressively ahead of a declaration but not the extent I'm talking about. They might score 6 an over. I'm talking about plundering 30+ off 3 overs and losing a few wickets. I do appreciate with an old pitch and test match fields it's not that straightforward to score big but the point is they don't need a huge amount more runs and nor should they care about losing wickets.

The final point is a good one I hadn't considered, wanting to keep the bowlers fresh.

 

[div0]

Usually the remaining top order batsmen have already been playing aggressively in run up to the declaration. Once they are out it makes more sense to declare rather than asking your lower order batsmen (typically bowlers) to try and do something they're not very good at - when you could just keep them fresh to do what they are meant to be good at (trying to bowl out the other team).

 

[Semple]

I guess there's also the risk that playing more aggressively could take a few more hours before you run out of wickets. Which could cost you a win if you can't then bowl out the other team in time, or even worse you get a change in weather and it's called off early.

 

[MikeTimbers]

Let's say you have 200 and want to declare at 250 and you have five wickets in hand. You tell the guys to slog and maybe they do it in five overs but maybe two or three are out quickly. In the latter, you now have a problem: you may not get to 250., perhaps you're out for 220 and now the other team have more time and less runs to get. In the "happy path" scenario, the acceleration now means the other team have more time, so you bat for a little longer and get to 275 instead of 250.

But cricket is a very unpredictable game. Especially in the longer four- or five-day versions.