NUFAN
Y no Afghanistan flag
Really you think that's impressive? I would only consider 4 out of those 10 seasons to be impressive, and 3 quite bad seasons in a row.
-
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.
David Hussey
- Thread starter open365
- Start date
NUFAN
Y no Afghanistan flag
34.5 is indeed bad. 38 is ok for a series or two, but over the course of an entire year it's quite a disappointing year.
Jimmy Maher and Jamie Cox for starters.
Prince EWS
Global Moderator
He never said there was anyone better - especially not amongst openers - it's totally irrelevant to whether someone is going as well as you make out. But, just to answer your question:
Elliott: 68.50, 72.12, 31.03, 78.00, 68.53, 40.30, 43.33, 40.84, 52.65, 30.78
Blewett: 45.11, 47.30, 40.37, 118.70, 34.42, 68.35, 56.94, 48.22, 39.06, 32.52
Both were extremely unfortunate to be having a rare bad season at the time of the position becoming vacant really (less so Blewett, who was quite obviously on a gradual decline - but still.)
Prince EWS
Global Moderator
I haven't checked out Cox's stats, but you're wrong with Maher. He tended to either have a dire year and average sub 30, or totally dominate and average 75+.
NUFAN
Y no Afghanistan flag
I don't know the answer but did Maher have 2 or 3 disappointing years in a row?
By disappointing I consider anything under 40 as disappointing, especially for someone who doesn't bowl at all.
Prince EWS
Global Moderator
In the time period Richard mentioned before...
Maher: 34.00, 31.29, 30.26, 47.21, 28.22, 63.44, 66.33, 23.00, 44.33, 40.04
Cox: 31.90, 67.45, 43.00, 53.93, 53.72, 65.00, 38.82, 24.61, 25.93, 30.20
So yes, he had several poor seasons - some in a row, some not. Cox obviously just had a few golden years (or improved dramatically and then declined just as quickly, depending on which way you want to look at it.)
NUFAN
Y no Afghanistan flag
OK cool thanks for that Prince, I wasn't saying they were better then Hussey, and I knew Cox form dipped a lot towards the end of that period, but there was a time where he was a great opening batsmen.
Maher's stats are annoying, like you said very hot and cold.
Like you said though my original point was just that he had a few disappointing seasons.
I think David was probably closest to the test team back in 2004, he was new on the scene but he'd made a huge impression on people in high places (eg.Steve Waugh) particularly with that innings when Victoria chased down 400+ in Newcastle I think it was.
But his Pura Cup form has held him back somewhat since then, much as it did to his brother at a similar stage in his carear.
Although the numbers Richard presented look pretty good at first glance, you have to remember that those 3 poor seasons came at a crucial stage in Mike Hussey's carear(and yes averaging low to mid thirties is a poor season in Australian domestic cricket for someone on the fringes of the test team with a FC average of 50ish), up until 2000 he'd been making all the right noises and everybody in the know was backing him...during the West Indies tour in 2000-01 I remember The cricket show running a profile on him and it just seemed like he'd be in the team in no time, when Steve Waugh was injured in Adelaide apparently Damien Martyn only just squeezed in ahead of Hussey, the incumbent top 3 (Slater, Hayden, Langer) werent setting the world on fire at that stage and he looked a sure thing, then suddenly he had 3 poor Australian summers (despite great county numbers) and basically slipped off the radar where tests were concerned. At one stage I believe he lost his CA contract and wasnt even in the A teams.
What kept him afloat was good domestic one day form which got him in the ODI side in '04 and once in the one day team everyone saw once again what a rounded and mature player he was and it was a matter of time before he got into test cricket.
Oppurtunities permitting I think David is capable of following a similar path, but he's what about 30 now and the middle order arent that old so time really isnt on his side.
But his Pura Cup form has held him back somewhat since then, much as it did to his brother at a similar stage in his carear.
Although the numbers Richard presented look pretty good at first glance, you have to remember that those 3 poor seasons came at a crucial stage in Mike Hussey's carear(and yes averaging low to mid thirties is a poor season in Australian domestic cricket for someone on the fringes of the test team with a FC average of 50ish), up until 2000 he'd been making all the right noises and everybody in the know was backing him...during the West Indies tour in 2000-01 I remember The cricket show running a profile on him and it just seemed like he'd be in the team in no time, when Steve Waugh was injured in Adelaide apparently Damien Martyn only just squeezed in ahead of Hussey, the incumbent top 3 (Slater, Hayden, Langer) werent setting the world on fire at that stage and he looked a sure thing, then suddenly he had 3 poor Australian summers (despite great county numbers) and basically slipped off the radar where tests were concerned. At one stage I believe he lost his CA contract and wasnt even in the A teams.
What kept him afloat was good domestic one day form which got him in the ODI side in '04 and once in the one day team everyone saw once again what a rounded and mature player he was and it was a matter of time before he got into test cricket.
Oppurtunities permitting I think David is capable of following a similar path, but he's what about 30 now and the middle order arent that old so time really isnt on his side.
Richard
Cricket Web Staff Member
That's crazy IMO. Over-expectations.
Virtually no-one is going to average over 40 season after season - it's only once it goes under 30 IMO is it a genuinely poor time. A season between 30 and 40 is OK for me, if it's coming alongside seasons averaging over 40.
Richard
Cricket Web Staff Member
Didn't actually realise Elliott was doing quite so well, TBH, but for good and bad you need context. You can't say someone had a bad time without knowing what a bad time was.
NUFAN
Y no Afghanistan flag
Again I disagree. Yep ofcourse over 10 seasons its going to be tough to average over 40 each year, but still the year under 40 is disappointing.
Look at the Pura Cup Stats from last season http://http://www.cricinfo.com/db/ARCHIVE/2006-07/AUS_LOCAL/PC/STATS/PC_2006-07_BAT_HIGHEST_AVS.html
Players like Mark Cosgrove who averaged 37 would definately consider his year disappointing. I'm sure Bailey, Klinger and Birt wouldn't have been too happy either.
Your not going to get a look in if you average less then 40, even if you average 40 to 45 it's not going to do it, 45 or 50 plus seasons is what's needed to take the next step.
Richard
Cricket Web Staff Member
I think you're misunderstanding what I'm saying. I'm not saying someone should be getting into a Test team with a season's average of 37, not at all.
And for someone like Cosgrove who's, to date, a complete waster, 37 is simply an expression of underachievement. Nothing more. He's got to do better if he wants an international career.
But 35 in the context of loads of 40-plus seasons is not poor, it's just not-quite-up-to-the-usual-standard. If someone went from averaging 45 for the last 3 seasons and had one where he averaged 22, that would be poor. But context is essential in assessing a middling season. If something's current, too, it's different to if it's 3 or 4 years past.
And for someone like Cosgrove who's, to date, a complete waster, 37 is simply an expression of underachievement. Nothing more. He's got to do better if he wants an international career.
But 35 in the context of loads of 40-plus seasons is not poor, it's just not-quite-up-to-the-usual-standard. If someone went from averaging 45 for the last 3 seasons and had one where he averaged 22, that would be poor. But context is essential in assessing a middling season. If something's current, too, it's different to if it's 3 or 4 years past.
Pup Clarke
Cricketer Of The Year
Cosgrove actually averages 40.58. 
Perm
Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Nobody said he didn't.Cosgrove actually averages 40.58.
Prince EWS
Global Moderator
We were talking about his 2006/07 season.Cosgrove actually averages 40.58.
NUFAN
Y no Afghanistan flag
Ok then, the comment I made though was he only had 4 good seasons out of 10, and 3 poor ones in a row. If a batsmen averages in the 30's 3 years in a row I wouldn't think he had much going for him.
Pup Clarke
Cricketer Of The Year
Richard said he averaged 37.
Prince EWS
Global Moderator
... in 2006-07.Richard said he averaged 37.
Pup Clarke
Cricketer Of The Year
Right.