• 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.

Shivnarine Chanderpaul

weldone

weldone

Hall of Fame Member
Richard said:
the scorebook is not everything when considering how well a batsman has batted.
Click to expand...
True...Agreed...But an assortment of hundreds of scorebooks is everything when considering how well the batsman have performed...Sometimes chances are taken, sometimes they're not...On the long run, this '+'s and '-'s even out...And if they don't then that's luck....And often luck plays a part in success....

But true, for a short period (maximum 10 matches), this 'luck' can play a massive part...So, in this case (about Yousuf and Chanderpaul) your point may be correct....But while assessing a career spanning for more than say 10 years, this factor doesn't play a considerable part...
 
Richard

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
Mostly it doesn't, no. Though you do get the odd batsman like Marcus Trescothick who simply keeps getting lucky throughout a long career. Andrew Symonds is shaping-up to be similar, unfortunately.

But the notion that luck evens itself out is patent nonsense, a tale told to appease those who've been hard-done-by in the short-term. Almost all batsmen get far more good luck than bad over a career, and it's nowhere near equal for all.
 
NUFAN

NUFAN

Y no Afghanistan flag
Yeah Michael Slater and Adam Gilchrist [especially before his last 2 or 3 years] got a lot more good than bad luck from dropped catches.
 
weldone

weldone

Hall of Fame Member
Richard said:
Mostly it doesn't, no. Though you do get the odd batsman like Marcus Trescothick who simply keeps getting lucky throughout a long career. Andrew Symonds is shaping-up to be similar, unfortunately.

But the notion that luck evens itself out is patent nonsense, a tale told to appease those who've been hard-done-by in the short-term. Almost all batsmen get far more good luck than bad over a career, and it's nowhere near equal for all.
Click to expand...
I didn't use 'even out' in the actual sense...What I meant was 5 missed chances in 10 innings is far more severe than 15 missed chances in say 100 innings...

Say, there are 2 batsmen batsman A and batsman B...Let in their first 10 innings A and B are blessed with 5 and 0 missed chances respectively....Luck favors A hugely over B....Now, in the next 90 innings say A abd B get 10 and 9 missed chances respectively...Even now luck favors A over B...But in the long run, this 15 versus 9 is not much...That's what I meant by 'even out'...Not that the case will be reverse...Of course, there are exceptions like you mentioned...But almost every rule has exceptions...
 
ohtani's jacket

ohtani's jacket

State Vice-Captain
The last proper look I got at Chanderpaul was during the 2005-06 tour to New Zealand, where he averaged 14.80 in 5 innings. Wouldn't have picked it back then.

There's been a merry-go-round in form batsmen lately, but with back-to-back centuries against the Aussies, what are the chances of Chanderpaul remaining in the upper echelon of Test batsmen? 33 years old and 111 Tests (didn't realise it was that many.) How much longer has he got?
 
Richard

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
Reckon his chances of keeping this form up are another 2 years or so. But some of the best batsmen have kept performing well into their late-30s, and the odd really special case like Graham Gooch has their best years 36-40.
 
SJS

SJS

Hall of Fame Member
Since beginning of May 2002 (last six years) Chanderpaul has scored 4730 runs at 56.3 per innings. It is a remarkable performance over a very long period of time.

In eight and a half years before that he had just managed to scrape and barely touch the 40.0 mark in average. It is an amazing turn around,

He had just 3 centuries (2 against India and one against England) in the first 53 test matches till then and now has added another 16 in 58 ! Eight of them divided equally between Australia and South Africa. !

I think Chanderpaul will challenge the 10000 run mark in Tests.
 
Richard

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
Yeah, but it was simply taking good to excellent, not turning poor to good. Generally for me it'd have to be the latter for me to describe it as a "turnaround". Guess some people use the word differently.
 
Mr Mxyzptlk

Mr Mxyzptlk

Request Your Custom Title Now!
ohtani's jacket said:
The last proper look I got at Chanderpaul was during the 2005-06 tour to New Zealand, where he averaged 14.80 in 5 innings. Wouldn't have picked it back then.
Click to expand...
Was at the tail-end of his dire run as captain. Worst selection decision, even though he started with a double ton and another big hundred.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Top