CWeb Investigations

[Magrat Garlick]

If he stays fit, then there is no reason why he can't achieve it, I don't like your negative attitude. Assuming NZ play 15 tests a year then, Chris Martin would be 540 years old.

NZ play more like 2 Tests a year, so Martin would only need to go on till about 4,000.

 

[Neil Pickup]

It's a scatter graph, not little spots of blood.

Vague resemblance to one of those old style telephones maybe?

 

[superkingdave]

Almost certain it is too; that was a graph with Domestic records calculated by subtracting Test records from FC ones but I can't for the life of me find the raw data...

Ramps figures looks a bit off tbh if thats the case, he averages over 55 excluding tests, though thats increased over the last few years.

 

[PhoenixFire]

NZ play 2 tests a year?........

 

[Neil Pickup]

Ramps figures looks a bit off tbh if thats the case, he averages over 55 excluding tests, though thats increased over the last few years.

Start of 2005 season.

 

[steds]

NZ play 2 tests a year?........

NZ play tests?

 

[Kweek]

Vague resemblance to one of those old style telephones maybe?

more like gingers...

 

[shortpitched713]

Back on topic, something I put together a few months/years ago on the Test-FC divide:

Hmm, do you have the correlation coefficient of this plot? Wouldn't seem to be too high, really.

 

[Neil Pickup]

Off the top of my head it was about 18%.

 

[shortpitched713]

Weak, very weak.

 

[Matt79]

Here's something I've been wondering for the past few days. People talk about making the step up to international cricket. Some players excel in First Class but yet lack that certain something to convert their good record at FC level to international success.


What about players who have had a somewhat poorer FC record to their international team mates yet excelled in that arena, after somehow getting a call up?

Again, not so much a weak FC record as almost no FC record - Ian Healy. Wasn't even the regular keeper for Queensland when the selectors saw him filling in for the Bulls 1st choice gloveman and decided to give him a go.

 

[Matt79]

And Shane Warne's FC record, in Australian competition at least is very average.

 

[Goughy]

What about players who have had a somewhat poorer FC record to their international team mates yet excelled in that arena, after somehow getting a call up?

This is based on some work I did a little while ago. To me it clearly proves that FC averages are an indiction of ablity. ie you cant be great in Tests if not great in FC

Hypothosis 1
Of the players that average 50 or more in tests how many average 45 or less in non-test FC cricket. ie how many palyers have great Test careers with less than exceptional FC careers.

Players Specialist Batsmen only
Compton, Viv Richards, Border, Yousuf, S. Waugh, Gavaskar, Ul-Haq, Sehwag, Miandad, Lara, G. Chappell, Hayden, Tendulkar, Hutton, Walcott, Kallis, Hobbs, Sobers, Dravid, Ponting, Hammond, Weekes, Barrington, Sutcliffe, Bradman.

Batsmen with non-test FC average greater than 45
= 23 total = 92%

Batsmen with average less 45
= 2 total = 8%

Clearly showing it is very unlikely to go from good in FC to great in Tests.

Hypothosis 2
Even very good players have a Test average less than their FC average.

Players Specialist Batsmen only
Test average 40-50. 32 Players looked at.

Test average lower than non-test FC average
= 21 Total = 66%

Test average above non-test FC average
= 11 Total = 34%

There is a clear link that players average better in FC than in Tests. However, it is clearly not all players.

Hypothosis 3
Players that average 40-50 in Test cricket and average more in Tests do so only marginally. Few players average over 5 more in Tests than in FC

Players Specialist Batsmen only
H. Gibbs, Trescothick, B. Mitchell, Walters, Dexter, R. Richardson, Viswanath, Jayasuriya, M. Taylor, C. Cowdrey, Gower

Batsmen that average less than 5 more runs in Tests
= 6 total = 55%
Batsmen that average more than 5 more runs in Tests
= 5 total = 45 %

The difference in this is relatively small.

Conclusion
However taken as a group, 27 of the group that averaged 40-50 in test cricket averaged more in FC or if less then marginally so. That is 84%. Only 16% went from an average FC career to good FC career.

Clearly it is not 100% inclusive, but FC average gives and indiction of potential performance in Test cricket. Effectively, the bestter a FC average the better the chance of having a very good Test career.

Taking the players that average 50 or more (non of which have a bad FC record), 57 players were looked at and 5 went on to have a good-great test career with a poor FC record.

The moral of the story. Pick players with good FC records as poor FC records = Failure at test level unless named Trescothick, Gower, Richie Richardson, Dexter, Walters

A great FC record is no guarantee of high-level Test success but it is a condition of entry.

NB- Before it is mentioned, Vaughan was not included as there are so many guys averaging 40-45 (all 45-50 players were included) that only a large but random selection was taken

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

But you haven't taken into consideration the players with good FC averages and low Test averages.

 

[Goughy]

But you haven't taken into consideration the players with good FC averages and low Test averages.

I did make an edit before reading this.

A great FC record is no guarantee of high-level Test success but it is a condition of entry

The failing in Tests with a good FC average is a white elephant. There are 100s of reasons why a player could fail. Ranging from personality clashes, bad treatment, injuries, bad run of form etc but there is only one way a player can succeed and that is high FC average.

With a high FC average a player may fail, with a low FC average a player will fail.

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

The failing in Tests with a good FC average is a white elephant. There are 100s of reasons why a player could fail. Ranging from personality clashes, bad treatment, injuries, bad run of form etc but there is only one way a player can succeed and that is high FC average.

With a high FC average a player may fail, with a low FC average a player will fail.

Again, you're ignoring the fact that a player's FC average changes over the course of his career, and that test matches are included. Look at Michael Clarke for instance. There's no doubt he's talented, and say for instance he goes on to play 100 tests averaging 45+ and scores 20 test centuries. That will make him a good player. He may well have a 50+ FC average by the end of his career, after a decade of playing domestic cricket in Australia and perhaps England, as well as scoring test runs. This will be irrelevant to the fact that when he was picked his FC average was in the 30s.

The same goes for the likes of Warne, Steve Waugh, Trescothick etc.

As a current late-career example though, Warne's domestic FC average in Australia is in excess of 30, while his test average in Australia is around 25.

 

[Goughy]

Again, you're ignoring the fact that a player's FC average changes over the course of his career, and that test matches are included. Look at Michael Clarke for instance. There's no doubt he's talented, and say for instance he goes on to play 100 tests averaging 45+ and scores 20 test centuries. That will make him a good player. He may well have a 50+ FC average by the end of his career, after a decade of playing domestic cricket in Australia and perhaps England, as well as scoring test runs. This will be irrelevant to the fact that when he was picked his FC average was in the 30s.

The same goes for the likes of Warne, Steve Waugh, Trescothick etc.

As a current late-career example though, Warne's domestic FC average in Australia is in excess of 30, while his test average in Australia is around 25.

Well with a number of modern Aussies with poorer domestic records than tests *before they play in the UK) may suggest that Australian FC cricket is of a higher standard than Test cricket.

As it stands with Clarke, I would put money on him averaging below 45 in Tests. Saying he could do something does not mean he will. Add into the fact he is averaging 36 now, means he is not the best example of a batsman with a low FC av succeeding in Tests