• Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

Odd Career charts

silentstriker

The Wheel is Forever
I was looking through stats of various players (no, I have nothing better to do), and I came upon Hadlee.

I put his stats into excel and came up with a graph:



This is a really odd chart, because his cumulative average just kept on getting lower and lower as he moved into his thirties (he was 39 when he retired) and for a fast bowler, that astounds me.

Anyone have any other odd players like that?
 

Jungle Jumbo

International Vice-Captain
More likely than not he played more and more ODI cricket outside of the subcontinent as he got older.
 

archie mac

International Coach
As I had the pleasure of watching Paddles bowl quite a bit, I would say that early in his career he was quite a fast bowler with not a lot of options, but later in his career he slowed down his pace and became the master of cut, swing and control:)
 

Dick Rockett

International Vice-Captain
Yeah, he put such effort into fine-tuning and improving his bowling that it bordered on obsessive. I very driven man, heavily motivated by his stats.
 

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
Hadlee was one of a tiny number of bowlers who just got better and better with age.

I'd imagine Courtney Walsh was pretty similar...?

Clarrie Grimmett would possibly be another...?

Far more bowlers and batsmen than not, though, taper-off, if only a bit, towards the end of their careers (and, indeed, most experience a rough start, though sometimes only for a game or two).
 

FaaipDeOiad

Hall of Fame Member
Steve Waugh definitely improved with age, aside from a drop-off around 2001 or so. He scored the vast majority of his test centuries after he was 32, and averaged under 40 for almost half of his career, and almost 60 in the second half. Walsh, as Richard said, is another one. He more or less consistently got better until his last series or two, when he finally dropped off a bit. Quite a number of batsmen improve plenty as they get older with improved maturity and shot selection, and spinners often improve as well. It's generally the other way around with quicks, who peak between 24 and 32 or so and then often decline quickly.

Some other players decline much earlier, obviously. Viv Richards averaged over 60 until around his 30th birthday, and 58 in his first 50 tests, and finished with a career average of 50. Up until the end of the 80/81 season (44 tests), Richards made 3969 runs @ 62.02. After that he managed 4289 runs @ 42.05, in 77 more tests. Tendulkar might end up in this group too.

Players with constant injury problems like Jeff Thomson and Waqar Younis also tend to tank later in their careers. Up until playing Australia in Pakistan in '94, Waqar had 180 wickets @ 18.79 and finished with 373 @ 23.56. Up until the end of the 70s, Thomson had 152 wickets @ 25.61 and finished with 200 @ 28.01. Before his first major injury he averaged 21 or so.
 
Last edited:

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
Steve Waugh definitely improved with age, aside from a drop-off around 2001 or so. He scored the vast majority of his test centuries after he was 32, and averaged under 40 for almost half of his career, and almost 60 in the second half.
Waugh wasn't quite that simple - his first 49 Tests weren't really that successful (though he averaged 35.76, it goes down to 29.81 if you exclude 1989 in England). In his next 90 Tests he averaged 61.06, then had some comedown in his last 25 and averaged 37.75 (Ban and Zim not included).
Players with constant injury problems like Jeff Thomson and Waqar Younis also tend to tank later in their careers. Up until playing Australia in Pakistan in '94, Waqar had 180 wickets @ 18.79 and finished with 373 @ 23.56. Up until the end of the 70s, Thomson had 152 wickets @ 25.61 and finished with 200 @ 28.01. Before his first major injury he averaged 21 or so.
Thomson was a complicated case. You might as well exclude his debut in 1972\73 because he should never have played - had a broken foot - in his first 16 excluding that he averaged 23.92. Then he had that collision with Turner at the start of 1977\78, but came back almost as good and in his next 15 still managed to average 25.76. He then joined Packer and played just 2 Tests (doing not much) in the next 3 years. In his next 11 he averaged 44.47. However, it looked like he'd end his career in excellent fashion when he averaged 18.68 in his final series (playing only after Lillee broke down) in 1982\83. Unfortunately, he gave-in to begging and came out of retirement 2-and-a-half years later, and had 2 shockers in 1985.

You can give a simpler Thomson equation - and say just that the basic number - 28 - is a poor illustration of his worth, because you knock off just 3 games (the first 1 and the last 2) and his average in the vast majority of his career is 26.47. Which is actually a pretty good average. And he should never, ever, have played those other 3 games.
 

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
Gooch would be another one - 12 of 20 Test tons after the age of 36.
Gooch was perhaps the most incredible case of modern times:

He played 2 games in 1975, which are pretty meaningless because he made a pair on a sticky on debut.

Between 1978 and 1988 he played 66 Tests (missing a load more because he decided to go on a SA rebel tour) and did very well, averaging 39.16. In 1989 he had a shocker, but reconstructed his technique so well that between 1990 (when he was 36-et-demi years old) and the First Test in 1994 he averaged a stunning 60.95 in 35 Tests. He then tapered-off, averaging just 20.89 in his last 10 games, which was a bit of a shame.

I started watching cricket in 1992, and it's no coincidence that Gooch was my first hero.
 

C_C

International Captain
I am not sure if stats reflect this but Kumble too, keeps getting better and better with age.
Kumble as a bowler now is far more potent than the bowler he was in the 90s.
 

silentstriker

The Wheel is Forever
Everyone is far from flawless. Still the second best spinner in the world, by a clear margin, now that Warne is gone. Of course, Murali is ahead of him by an even bigger margin.
 

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
Murali is a hell of a lot closer to flawless than Kumble, as you said.

Kumble has never really cracked the art of bowling on non-turning pitches, even if he's better than he was at one time.
 

silentstriker

The Wheel is Forever
Murali is a hell of a lot closer to flawless than Kumble, as you said.

Kumble has never really cracked the art of bowling on non-turning pitches, even if he's better than he was at one time.
Um, Kumble is quite indifferent on turning pitches. He fancies pitches with uneven bounce. The last test match vs SA, the pitch was turning but he wasn't that effective. First two matches, it was bouncing and he averaged 17.
 

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
Turning and\or uneven, then.

No spinner is indifferent to turning pitches. That'd completely defy the logic of their art.

Kumble thrives on both.
 

Goughy

Hall of Fame Member
Obviously Bothams career was unusual. Topical given recent threads.

After around 40 tests he averaged about 20 with the ball. After 100 he averaged 28. Great start but averaged a shocking 38 in his last 60 tests with the ball.

Guess when the back injury happened :(

 

Top