Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 38

Thread: Mouth-watering analysis this

  1. #16
    Global Moderator Matt79's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Colll----ingggg---woooooodddd!!!!
    Posts
    17,426
    Quote Originally Posted by silentstriker View Post
    People averaging 50+ during the 1990s (20 Test minimum): Tendulkar, Waugh, Lara, Gooch.

    People averaging 50+ during the 2000s (20 Test minimum): Flower, Yousuf, Ponting, Kallis, Imzamam, Hussey, Sangakkara, Jayawardene, Tilakaratne, Gambhir, Lara, Chanderpaul, Dravid, Thorpe, Waugh, Hayden, Tendulkar, Younis, Samarweera, Pietersen, Graeme Smigh, Virender Sehwag.

    People can decide for themselves, and I've been given a few reasons for this. Sorry, I don't buy any of them so far. To me, it has been patently easier to score runs. 4 people vs. 22 people. Sorry, personally, I can't rate those runs the same way.

    Obviously, people have their own ideas, and they are welcome to them. Not for me though.
    Ponting is a standout amonst them however.
    Quote Originally Posted by Irfan
    We may not like you, your filthy rich coffers or your ratbag scum of supporters but by god do we respect you as a football team
    GOOD OLD COLLINGWOOD - PREMIERS IN 2010

    Is Cam White, Is Good.

  2. #17
    The Wheel is Forever silentstriker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    37,867
    Quote Originally Posted by Matt79 View Post
    Ponting is a standout amonst them however.
    He is, and he made it into CW top fifteen for that reason (I would have had him around #18-20 but minor quibble that). Not enough though to reach top ten or whatever though, for mine.
    Last edited by silentstriker; 07-05-2009 at 05:11 PM.
    Quote Originally Posted by KungFu_Kallis View Post
    Peter Siddle top scores in both innings....... Matthew Wade gets out twice in one ball
    "The future light cone of the next Indian fast bowler is exactly the same as the past light cone of the previous one"
    -My beliefs summarized in words much more eloquent than I could come up with

    How the Universe came from nothing

  3. #18
    International 12th Man Slifer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    1,611
    Quote Originally Posted by Matt79 View Post
    That's like the third time you've posted that article. It doesn't make any sense. It jumps from telling us who Lindwall is, to starting a new para telling us what Bodyline is, without directly linked the two. The suggestion that Weekes was targeted using Bodyline tactics is implied but not stated. But what Lindwall bowled was not Bodyline - that field was illegal by then, and the pitches were a hell of a lot flatter.

    What Lindwall bowled was no worse than plenty of other bowlers have bowled. Colin Croft and Andy Roberts come to mind. He was, however one of the first bowlers to commonly employ the bouncer at speed since the Bodyline series and people knee jerked in a predicable fashion. He and Miller targeted Hutton for plenty of short stuff as well, believing he didn't like it. And they were booed around England for it. And there were no shortage of scribes keen to raise the spectre of Bodyline to sell papers - it's the same kind of hysteria we see today for any suggestion of ball tampering etc.

    The injury to his leg is a different matter, but all that article suggests is that he had a weakness against high quality fast bowling.
    It points out that on top of being injured when he faced these two teams away, he also was hampered in Australia by short pitched leg-theory tactics employed against him. Nothing like the bumpers sent down by the Windies later
    Cause Slifer said so.........!!!!

  4. #19
    Cricket Web: All-Time Legend Top_Cat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Location
    Adelaide, South Australia
    Posts
    23,160
    Quote Originally Posted by silentstriker View Post
    People averaging 50+ during the 1990s (20 Test minimum): Tendulkar, Waugh, Lara, Gooch.

    People averaging 50+ during the 2000s (20 Test minimum): Flower, Yousuf, Ponting, Kallis, Imzamam, Hussey, Sangakkara, Jayawardene, Tilakaratne, Gambhir, Lara, Chanderpaul, Dravid, Thorpe, Waugh, Hayden, Tendulkar, Younis, Samarweera, Pietersen, Graeme Smigh, Virender Sehwag.

    People can decide for themselves, and I've been given a few reasons for this. Sorry, I don't buy any of them so far. To me, it has been patently easier to score runs. 4 people vs. 22 people. Sorry, personally, I can't rate those runs the same way.

    Obviously, people have their own ideas, and they are welcome to them. Not for me though.
    That's pretty specious although I think the conclusion, essentially, is right. For one, a few of those guys averaging less than 50 at the turn of the century were still right up there average-wise but the confound is that they were starting to hit their peaks as batsmen at the same time (getting into late-20's, knowing their games, etc.). Couple that with roped-in boundaries, bat tech, changes in batting techniques at the elite level (batters work on developing all-round game rather than playing to their strengths and waiting for the right ball to come along) and a greater preponderance of flat decks and it's no surprise averages will be a few points higher.

    I know you didn't say this but I absolutely dispute that bowlers are any worse than they were in the 90's. The flat pitches haven't done much to nullify the top-shelf few, sure, but guys who aren't quite there regularly get smashed. Batters can throw their hands at the ball or play confidently through the line because there won't be any nasty movement to catch them unawares or a top edge will sail over the fine leg fence. Can imagine that a bowler like Lee would have been averaging a few points lower in the 90's.

    My point, though, is that I don't think this should be held against the guys doing it now because it's all, in my view, stuff outside their control.
    Last edited by Top_Cat; 07-05-2009 at 08:50 PM.
    The Colourphonics

    Bandcamp
    Twitderp


  5. #20
    The Wheel is Forever silentstriker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    37,867
    Quote Originally Posted by Top_Cat View Post
    I know you didn't say this but I absolutely dispute that bowlers are any worse than they were in the 90's. The flat pitches haven't done much to nullify the top-shelf few, sure, but guys who aren't quite there regularly get smashed. Batters can throw their hands at the ball or play confidently through the line because there won't be any nasty movement to catch them unawares or a top edge will sail over the fine leg fence. Can imagine that a bowler like Lee would have been averaging a few points lower in the 90's.

    My point, though, is that I don't think this should be held against the guys doing it now because it's all, in my view, stuff outside their control.
    Well, it's not their fault, but they would need to score more - probably a lot more - to be considered the same level of quality, as far as I am concerned.

    The whole point is rating people against their peers - averaging 55 when 20 other people are averaging 50+ is a lot less impressive than averaging 55 when only three other people are. There is obviously some ups and downs depending on who just happens to be around, but not four vs. twenty-two.

  6. #21
    Cricket Web: All-Time Legend andyc's Avatar
    Yeti Sports 1.5 Champion!
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Canberra
    Posts
    23,856
    Quote Originally Posted by zinzan12 View Post
    The highest adjusted average is that of Bradman, whose average of 99.96 has been adjusted down to 96.75. He gets 19.35 points and is followed by Hobbs (61.68) with 12.34 points and Weekes (61.06) with 12.21 points.
    Quote Originally Posted by flibbertyjibber View Post
    Only a bunch of convicts having been beaten 3-0 and gone 9 tests without a win and won just 1 in 11 against England could go into the home series saying they will win. England will win in Australia again this winter as they are a better side which they have shown this summer. 3-0 doesn't lie girls.

  7. #22
    International Debutant Evermind's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    2,250
    Quote Originally Posted by silentstriker View Post
    14,13,18,2,60,9,16,0,6,0,0,11,11,12,123,17,5,2,87, 24,8

    And I still have a problem rating people from this era as similar to people in the 90s. Sorry, I don't buy that its just luck we have so many people averaging 50+, when in the 90s, we had only a handful.
    There is a similar run in Tendulkar's record, I'm sure.

    It's so weird how people have a problem rating people from this era as similar to people in the 90s (just one decade ago) whereas they have no problem declaring people like Hobbs, Hutton, Barrington etc from way before the Packer era to be demi-gods and better than Tendulkar, Lara, etc. So many more people averaged in the high-50s then - isn't it possible that scoring was far easier than it is now?

    I guess there's no explaining looking at the past with rose-tinted glasses. That is why I think putting Tendulkar, Lara and Ponting next only to Bradman feels deeply satisfying, and I genuinely believe they're three of the best the world has seen, far better than any of the pre-Packers when cricket was a much slower and less demanding game.

    Look at this, for example:

    http://stats.cricinfo.com/statsguru/...s;type=batting

    A ridiculous number of no-namers averaged over 60 during this period, in spite of the fact that test cricket was played far less frequently than it is now, and there were far fewer international players around. So is this proof that during Hutton's and Weekes's era, batting was considerably easier?
    Last edited by Evermind; 08-05-2009 at 01:57 AM.

  8. #23
    Hall of Fame Member Goughy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    still scratching around in the same old hole
    Posts
    15,133
    Quote Originally Posted by Evermind View Post
    A ridiculous number of no-namers averaged over 60 during this period
    *chokes*

    Seperate to the point, there was a small interuption in cricket during the 40s called WWII
    If I only just posted the above post, please wait 5 mins before replying as there is bound to be edits

    West Robham Rabid Wolves Caedere lemma quod eat lemma

    Happy Birthday! (easier than using Birthday threads)

    Email and MSN- Goughy at cricketmail dot net

  9. #24
    Global Moderator Matt79's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Colll----ingggg---woooooodddd!!!!
    Posts
    17,426
    Quote Originally Posted by Slifer View Post
    It points out that on top of being injured when he faced these two teams away, he also was hampered in Australia by short pitched leg-theory tactics employed against him. Nothing like the bumpers sent down by the Windies later
    The tactics the Aussies used were not Bodyline, in that the field settings that made Bodyline so hard to combat weren't used. And the conditions were generally more benign. Was it intimidatory bowling using a nasty barrage of dangerous short bowling? Probably. So exactly like what plenty of other bowlers have used, inc. the Windies all pace attacks, Lillee and Thompson, etc etc.

    I explained why calling that Bodyline is misleading.

    Him carrying an injury is a more valid excuse. But succeeding against nasty fast bowling in adverse conditions is the ultimate test for a batsman, you can't cite the fact they bowled short at him as an excuse.

  10. #25
    Hall of Fame Member Goughy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    still scratching around in the same old hole
    Posts
    15,133
    Quote Originally Posted by Matt79 View Post
    But succeeding against nasty fast bowling in adverse conditions is the ultimate test for a batsman, you can't cite the fact they bowled short at him as an excuse.
    that screws Bradman then

  11. #26
    Global Moderator Matt79's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Colll----ingggg---woooooodddd!!!!
    Posts
    17,426
    Yeah, only averaged 57

  12. #27
    International Debutant Evermind's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    2,250
    Quote Originally Posted by Goughy View Post
    *chokes*

    Seperate to the point, there was a small interuption in cricket during the 40s called WWII
    WWII is pretty irrelevant.

    And really, Stollmeyer? Loxton? FB Smith? Who?

  13. #28
    Hall of Fame Member Goughy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    still scratching around in the same old hole
    Posts
    15,133
    Quote Originally Posted by Evermind View Post
    WWII is pretty irrelevant.

    And really, Stollmeyer? Loxton? FB Smith? Who?
    They played 15 tests between them in that period. That is no sample size and pointless to comment on.

    And if you dont know who they are then that is your issue. Stollmeyer was a fine player and Loxton was one of the 1948 Invincibles

  14. #29
    Cricket Web: All-Time Legend Samuel_Vimes's Avatar
    Defend Your Castle Champion! Monkey Diving Champion!
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Bonn, BRD
    Posts
    22,937
    Quote Originally Posted by Evermind View Post
    WWII is pretty irrelevant.

    And really, Stollmeyer? Loxton? FB Smith? Who?
    In 6 Tests.

    Taking a period with roughly similar amount of Tests...

    Streak, Key, Kirsten, Gibbs all averaging 60+.
    Messi scores on the rebound.

    Founder of ESAS - Edgar Schiferli, the best associate bowler
    A follower of the schools of Machiavelli, Bentham, Locke, Hobbes, Sutcliffe, Bradman, Lindwall, Miller, Hassett and Benaud
    Member of JMAS, DMAS, FRAS and RTDAS

    Quote Originally Posted by Adolf Grünbaum
    Is the conduct approved by the gods right ("pious"), because of properties of its own, or merely because it pleases the gods to value or command it?

  15. #30
    International Captain Migara's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Just under your skin
    Posts
    5,820
    5. The batsman's career strike rate has become an important measure. This should be recognized, if available. For those batsmen whose strike rate information is not available, this parameter will not be included. If the strike rate is available for part of the batsman's career, it will be considered for that part only. This is explained in detail later. There is a case for the innings strike rate to be incorporated in the Match Performance calculations. However this revised methodology necessarily requires the strike rate to be a career-based calculation rather than match innings based.
    However this will be beneficial for the batsmen with NO SR available. It should have not been criteria.
    Member of the Sanga fan club. (Ugh! it took me so long to become a real fan of his)

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast


Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. An analysis of test grounds since 1980
    By Precambrian in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 07-02-2009, 07:51 PM
  2. Who likes putting nuts in their mouth
    By cpr in forum Off Topic
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 14-09-2007, 05:13 PM
  3. Performance Analysis from 03-07 in ODI's
    By rodzilla1010 in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 24
    Last Post: 24-02-2007, 03:38 PM
  4. People with big mouth....
    By warrioryohannan in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: 02-02-2006, 09:35 PM
  5. An Analysis of McGrath
    By C_C in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 38
    Last Post: 31-03-2005, 09:15 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •