Do you know that!

[cricket player]

Do you know that Andy Flower Averaged more then Viv Richards in test match,Andy Flower averaging 51 in test matches,That is incredible

 

[archie mac]

Do you know that Andy Flower Averaged more then Viv Richards in test match,Andy Flower averaging 51 in test matches,That is incredible

I think Viv should have finished with an ave:54.00+ He played on a little too long imho

 

[dinu23]

Do you know that Andy Flower Averaged more then Viv Richards in test match,Andy Flower averaging 51 in test matches,That is incredible

nevertheless, he was a great batsman.

 

[JASON]

nevertheless, he was a great batsman.

I agree Viv was a far far far greater batsman, In many people's opinion than Andy .

 

[Craig]

Andy Flower is one of my favourite keeper - batsmen ever, how many of his top innings when his team where heading for defeat and earned themselves a draw or saved themselves from an innings defeat etc?

And is power of concentration is something I admire, to be able to keep for so long, then go out and bat for a long time and make a big score which saved his country.

 

[Blaze]

I think that it just shows how good a player Andy Flower was

 

[tooextracool]

Do you know that Andy Flower Averaged more then Viv Richards in test match,Andy Flower averaging 51 in test matches,That is incredible

its not incredible at all. it shows that andy flower is a very very good player, it shows that viv retired a lot too late, it shows that pitches have gotten flatter, bowling has gotten worse, and it shows that averages are never reliable.

 

[masterblaster]

its not incredible at all. it shows that andy flower is a very very good player, it shows that viv retired a lot too late, it shows that pitches have gotten flatter, bowling has gotten worse, and it shows that averages are never reliable.

Well said, summed it up nicely.

 

[Richard]

its not incredible at all. it shows that andy flower is a very very good player, it shows that viv retired a lot too late, it shows that pitches have gotten flatter, bowling has gotten worse, and it shows that averages are never reliable.

No, it shows that taking average as the pure decider of who was the better batsman is never a good idea because it can often be unreliable.
But it certainly shows Viv retired too late, and exactly the same thing applies to Botham.

 

[marc71178]

its not incredible at all. it shows that andy flower is a very very good player, it shows that viv retired a lot too late, it shows that pitches have gotten flatter, bowling has gotten worse, and it shows that averages are never reliable.

I think it shows that they're not reliable for comparing players from different eras, rather than comparing players full stop.

 

[tooextracool]

I think it shows that they're not reliable for comparing players from different eras, rather than comparing players full stop.

the only thing that the average(and im referring to the overall average) is useful for is to tell whether someone is good enough to play international cricket or not. unless you are comparing players with a 15-20+ average difference, averages alone never tell the entire story, because it doesnt account for conditions, opposition, pitches, circumstances, consistency or reliability(of the player).

 

[Kweek]

Andy Flower played in his early 20's for my club(VCC in holland) and only avg about25 in the dutch domestic league. but he did bring a lot to the club. a lot of lefties

 

[sledger]

Do you know that Andy Flower Averaged more then Viv Richards in test match,Andy Flower averaging 51 in test matches,That is incredible

so what ? ian bell averages higher than any of the india or australian batsman in tests

 

[Richard]

And with any luck it'll go up before it goes down given that his next 2 "Tests" are against Bangladesh.

 

[Craig]

Accept it Richard, Bangladesh are an official Test playing nation, so therefore their Tests are official.

 

[Richard]

They are, never denied it, just said you've got to get rid of them to get the real picture.

 

[C_C]

I think it is fairly accurate to compare averages in the same era.
Cross era comparisons are largely dubious.

That being said, i don't think Botham retired 'too late' - unless you mean he retired a decade or so too late ( 83-92 stats are 29 batting ave. and 37 bowling ave- terrible ).
Its one thing having success for over a decade or so and then tailing off near the end of one's career ( ala Viv) and having 5-6 stunning seasons and then sucking for the next 10. Its called being 'found out'.
Botham was 'found out' as a bowler and largely curbed as a batsman. Pure and simple.
IMO, out of the 'big 4' allrounders of his era(Imran,Kapil,Hadlee and himself), he ranks as the worst overall.

 

[archie mac]

Accept it Richard, Bangladesh are an official Test playing nation, so therefore their Tests are official.

unofficialy their Tests are a joke

 

[age_master]

what shows how good flower is/was is that compared to the averages of his Zimbabwean team mates and in that context, and its comparible to a S Waugh or AB average for mine.

 

[Richard]

I think it is fairly accurate to compare averages in the same era.
Cross era comparisons are largely dubious.

That being said, i don't think Botham retired 'too late' - unless you mean he retired a decade or so too late ( 83-92 stats are 29 batting ave. and 37 bowling ave- terrible ).
Its one thing having success for over a decade or so and then tailing off near the end of one's career ( ala Viv) and having 5-6 stunning seasons and then sucking for the next 10. Its called being 'found out'.
Botham was 'found out' as a bowler and largely curbed as a batsman. Pure and simple.
IMO, out of the 'big 4' allrounders of his era(Imran,Kapil,Hadlee and himself), he ranks as the worst overall.

No, he wasn't found-out, he was very clearly afflicted by injury (only had himself to blame for it, he was overweight, but had he maintained fitness he'd have gone on far longer).
If you can tell me how a batting average of 37.36 after 66 Tests and a bowling average of 20.93 after 42 qualifies him as being a worse batsman than Richard Hadlee and worse bowler than Kapil, I'd like to hear how.
Simple fact is, out of 102 Tests, Botham was a very, very fine batsman for 66 of them and a quite magnificent bowler for 42.
For the other 60 he was a wholly mediocre bowler and for the other 43 he was a below-average batsman, while still playing the odd match-winning innings. But as so often, using the time (5 years to 10) is actually incredibly misleading, when what matters is number of matches.
But like many players, his career can be clearly split into two parts and in the first he was easily the best of the big-four; in the second clearly the worst.