Batsmen who deserved 50 test avg

[Lillian Thomson]

inzy averages 50 anyway for his country.

Actually he doesn't, but never mind.

 

[Lillian Thomson]

Hmm, but i don't think "would have averaged 50 had they played from 2002 onwards" equates to "deserved to average 50."

The thread was hi-jacked from the first reply.

 

[G.I.Joe]

I can only think of VVS Laxman and Damien Martyn. Laxman has an average of 50+ when he's not forced to open the innings anyway, if I'm not mistaken. In general, I think the number of batsmen averaging 50+ is just right. Someone posted stats a while ago that generally not more than 7 batsmen average 50+ every decade. Seems about right, one 50+ batsman per test team. This decade has been exceptional though, with the quality teams having more than just one of that variety (India with Tendilkar, Dravid and Sehwag with VVS Laxman almost making it; Ponting, Hayden and Steve Waugh for Australia with Martyn almost making it too), and the quality of those batsmen is hard to argue against.

 

[Richard]

Hmm, but i don't think "would have averaged 50 had they played from 2002 onwards" equates to "deserved to average 50."

That's the trouble with "deserved to average 50", it's not really quantifiable. How do you designate "deserved"?

I'd say that if quite a few people who've averaged over 50 from 2001/02 onwards "deserve to" (I'd say they don't) then many of their equals and superiors from the previous 30 years (and more) who didn't because batting was quite a bit harder then quite possibly deserve to.

 

[Richard]

The thread was hi-jacked from the first reply.

Threads are not means of transport. They cannot be hijacked.

 

[Goughy]

Most of the names mentioned here have pretty much the average one would expect.

Many listed are very good International pros. A mid-40s averages fits with that. IMO, none of them deserve to average over 50 or deserve consideration. Not Mark Waugh, not Aravinda, not Gower etc

 

[Lillian Thomson]

Threads are not means of transport. They cannot be hijacked.

Actually in forum speak they can. It means deliberately transporting a thread off-topic to suit ones own obcessions.

 

[Migara]

Aravinda de SIlva for sure. If he had better support (post 1996) From 1984 to 1995 he averaged 31.5. He had only Ranatunga and Gurusinha as consistent performers, 1996 to 2002 when Tillekaratne, Jayawardane, Jayasuriya and Atapattu started to perform well, his average shot up to 52.6. The batting average for SL batsmen went up from 25.4 to 32.8

 

[Xuhaib]

Most of the names mentioned here have pretty much the average one would expect.

Many listed are very good International pros. A mid-40s averages fits with that. IMO, none of them deserve to average over 50 or deserve consideration. Not Mark Waugh, not Aravinda, not Gower etc

The stats don't lie groupe?

 

[Goughy]

The stats don't lie groupe?

An average is just a basic calculation. If they wanted to average 50 then they should have scored more runs or had more not outs.

Stats certainly can lie when people try and twist and interpret them but a player deserves to average over 50 when they didnt in real life as much as 2+2 should = 5. Its a simple mathmatical calculation rather than a conclusive assessment of their quality.

Coincidently these players tend to be players a shade below top quality.

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

There was a time when it looked like Steve Waugh would finish his career with an average under 50, which would have been a bit of a travesty IMO.

Otherwise nobody really springs to mind for me. There's a few recent guys who went close (Inzy, Martyn, Langer) but I don't think any of them really should have been a 50+ averaging player and just suffered because of a poor patch or playing on too long or something. Maybe Langer because of his poor start, but he had his flaws.

 

[Uppercut]

Anyway, players who averaged/currently average 48 or 49 after 20+ tests:

G Smith
S Chanderpaul
Inzamam Ul-Haq
F Worrell
KP Pietersen
Younis Khan
KC Bland
B Mitchell
FS Jackson
RN Harvey
KD Walters
WH Ponsford
SJ McCabe
DR Jardine

Any of those who seems a bit hard done by?

 

[Beleg]

Actually he doesn't, but never mind.

No?

 

[aussie]

VVS Laxman. Never had a lean patch other than the start of his career when he was very young and was always made to open the batting. He's been very consistent since that time and certainly is a player of top quality.

All true, but don't agree with the idea he deserves to average 50. I expect strong backlash for this but his wonderful record vs Australia outside the 2001 magic is inflated by the fact the Australia attacks in 2003/04, 2007/08 & 2008/09 the he faced where either poor of just good (2007/08). Given how he was well exposed in 2004, if he had faced a powerful attack in 03/04 his legacy that he generally "likes playing againts Australia" wouldn't be so strong.

But no doubt a stylish player who has solid runs againts most nations. Just think bowlers have hit his weakness often enough as Australia did in 04.

 

[aussie]

Anyway, players who averaged/currently average 48 or 49 after 20+ tests:

G Smith
S Chanderpaul
Inzamam Ul-Haq
F Worrell
KP Pietersen
Younis Khan
KC Bland
B Mitchell
FS Jackson
RN Harvey
KD Walters
WH Ponsford
SJ McCabe
DR Jardine

Any of those who seems a bit hard done by?

Harvey, Worrell, Inzamam defiantely hard done. KP & Chanderpaul hopefully will average 50 by time they retire.

 

[G.I.Joe]

All true, but don't agree with the idea he deserves to average 50. I expect strong backlash for this but his wonderful record vs Australia outside the 2001 magic is inflated by the fact the Australia attacks in 2003/04, 2007/08 & 2008/09 the he faced where either poor of just good (2007/08). Given how he was well exposed in 2004, if he had faced a powerful attack in 03/04 his legacy that he generally "likes playing againts Australia" wouldn't be so strong.

But no doubt a stylish player who has solid runs againts most nations. Just think bowlers have hit his weakness often enough as Australia did in 04.

He wasn't really exposed in 2004, given he played pretty much one of the two best knocks of the entire series.

 

[zaremba]

The best player that I've seen play who averaged less than 50 was Martin Crowe.

Honourable mentions (and I'm limiting this to those I've seen play whose careers are over): Greenidge, Gower, M Waugh.

Of those from days gone by, WG Grace, obviously.

 

[Richard]

Most of the names mentioned here have pretty much the average one would expect.

Many listed are very good International pros. A mid-40s averages fits with that. IMO, none of them deserve to average over 50 or deserve consideration. Not Mark Waugh, not Aravinda, not Gower etc

I think that also sums-up the likes of Ponting, Kallis, Chanderpaul etc. as well. And I'd say that had their entire careers fallen between 1985 and 2001, they'd have done precisely that. Mid-to-late 40s and no better.

 

[Richard]

All true, but don't agree with the idea he deserves to average 50. I expect strong backlash for this but his wonderful record vs Australia outside the 2001 magic is inflated by the fact the Australia attacks in 2003/04, 2007/08 & 2008/09 the he faced where either poor of just good (2007/08). Given how he was well exposed in 2004, if he had faced a powerful attack in 03/04 his legacy that he generally "likes playing againts Australia" wouldn't be so strong.

That legacy is basically based on misunderstanding. Since Eden Gardens 2000/01 has scored runs against everyone and anyone and has had only a very, very short piece of downtime (including the 2004/05 series).

 

[Richard]

Actually in forum speak they can. It means deliberately transporting a thread off-topic to suit ones own obcessions.

Some people might try to manufacture words to mean what they'd like them to mean, but hijacking means putting a stop to a method of transport and stealing from it. None of which can happen to a thread.