• 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.

Abdul razaq retires.

Sanz

Hall of Fame Member
Tendulkar also hardly had a poor season. 38 players out-averaged him, but he still scored at 46.
It didn't matter how much he averaged, The point is those who out averaged him didn't suddenly become any better batsman by virtue of that.
 

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
It's still perfectly conceivable, however, that Tendulkar batted better than most. His home ground for that season was Headingley, and in those days you could usually bank on Headingley being a seamer's paradise most games. Taking a look at the Yorkshire averages that season, there was actually just 1 batsman - Martyn Moxon - who outperformed him.

Averaging 46 playing for Yorkshire is every bit as notable a feat as, for instance, averaging 83 or 78 on the flat decks at Chelmsford (which Graham Gooch and Mark Waugh did).
 

Sanz

Hall of Fame Member
It's still perfectly conceivable, however, that Tendulkar batted better than most. His home ground for that season was Headingley, and in those days you could usually bank on Headingley being a seamer's paradise most games. Taking a look at the Yorkshire averages that season, there was actually just 1 batsman - Martyn Moxon - who outperformed him.

Averaging 46 playing for Yorkshire is every bit as notable a feat as, for instance, averaging 83 or 78 on the flat decks at Chelmsford (which Graham Gooch and Mark Waugh did).
Err who is saying that 46 avg. is not notable ? But If I said that Martin Moxon was a useless batsman compared to Michael Artherton and you come up with he was not, he outscored Tendulkar in 1992 county season, well that wouldn't prove anything, would it ?
 
Last edited:

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
Err who is saying that 46 avg. is not notable ? But If I said that Martin Moxon was a useless batsman compared to Michael Artherton and you come up with he was not, he outscored Tendulkar in 1992 county season, well that wouldn't prove anything, would it ?
Martyn Moxon wasn't a useless batsman, though - far from it.

Whether he was as good as Atherton we'll never know, as he was never given a fair crack of the whip.
 

Top