which type of batsmen helps the team more?

[SaeedAnwar]

Which type of batsmen helps the team more win matches? Test team that is

Some one like Brian Lara, who would score some thing like this in some 10 innings he plays:

15
33
269
2
14
5
112
12
0
73
________
average: 53.50 in 10 innings

Or some other random batsmen who scores like this in 10 innings:

35
45
29
6
87
62
33
23
52
19
______________
average 39.10 in 10 innings

 

[SaeedAnwar]

^ now as you can see Lara only helped his team in only some 3 or 4 innings, yet his average was amazing 53.50

but the other batsmen who helped his team in some 6 or 7 innings only had a average of 39.10

so which type of batsmen helps the team win more matches?

 

[sledger]

The one that get's scores when it really matters.

 

[Uppercut]

The one that get's scores when it really matters.

That batsman isn't Brian Lara tbh. He was a true great but he certainly wasn't that man.

 

[sledger]

That batsman isn't Brian Lara tbh. He was a true great but he certainly wasn't that man.

Mmm, dunno his innings from Chennai springs to mind. Though admissably I can't think of any others.

 

[Uppercut]

There was the one against Australia in the epic run-chase.

Scored a horrendous proportion of his runs in bore-draws though. 3708 runs @ 71 in draws.

 

[sledger]

There was the one against Australia in the epic run-chase.

Scored a horrendous proportion of his runs in bore-draws though. 3708 runs @ 71 in draws.

Haha oh yeah, that was great, probably my greatest non England cricketing memory tbh. Watched it on youtube not long ago.

 

[Migara]

I would take two ducks and a 120, rather than three 40s. because with 3 40s, you cannot win a game. But with 120 you are in that direction.

 

[andyc]

Centuries win games. A 50 or 60 will help your team, but it's not going to be the contributing factor to a win.

 

[Pratters]

Centuries win games. A 50 or 60 will help your team, but it's not going to be the contributing factor to a win.

Andy Cameron saying it like it is.

 

[slugger]

I would take two ducks and a 120, rather than three 40s. because with 3 40s, you cannot win a game. But with 120 you are in that direction.

this wasn't good enough for NZC go ask Sinclair about it. 74. 21. 76. 23. 69. 0. 0. 2. then dropped for 2 years..

 

[MrIncredible]

There was the one against Australia in the epic run-chase.

Scored a horrendous proportion of his runs in bore-draws though. 3708 runs @ 71 in draws.

Many of those "bore-draws" could have been heavy defeats if he hadnt scored heavily.

 

[Uppercut]

Yeah, you could say that. Don't get me wrong, he's an all-time great player for plenty of reasons. But there's definitely an element of flat-track bully to him.

 

[MrIncredible]

And this is different from other modern batsmen how??

 

[Richard]

Centuries win games. A 50 or 60 will help your team, but it's not going to be the contributing factor to a win.

There's no hard-and-fast rule. It depends on the prevailing conditions. Sometimes (though not all that often) 60 can be a score which builds a total which, in the match's context, is a big one. Sometimes 112 isn't enough. Sometimes no matter how many you score it's meaningless because the game is always going to be drawn.

A good score depends on the conditions, and given that conditions are not identical for any two careers there's no way to say which "type" of batsman helps the team more, because different teams play different matches and thus require different circumstances.

It's possible for one team to play a three-match series on two rank seamers and one rank turner. If a batsman scores 40, 48, 70, 12, 56 and 71 in that series there's a substantial chance he's batted far better and made far more of a contribution to potential team success than a batsman who scores 30, 140, 171, 10, 0 in a three-match series where the first two games were played on rank runways and the last on a green seamer.

There is no one stereotype that can be all-consuming.

 

[Shri]

The way I see it, I would personally rate the guy who makes that match winning hundred highly. But I would also play the guy who scores 40s and 50s in the side because him sticking around is going to give the big-game player more chance to come up with a big score. Its a team game after all. No one type of player is better than the other.

 

[Richard]

Personally I'd just judge each innings on its own merits and assess players accordingly, rather than applying any form of blanket stereotype.

 

[ret]

@ Richard .... how many times are you going to write the same stuff? .... Your point has been made

 

[Prince EWS]

@ Richard .... how many times are you going to write the same stuff? .... Your point has been made

This post is hilarious in so many ways.

 

[ret]

Which type of batsmen helps the team more win matches? Test team that is

Some one like Brian Lara, who would score some thing like this in some 10 innings he plays:

15
33
269
2
14
5
112
12
0
73
________
average: 53.50 in 10 innings

Or some other random batsmen who scores like this in 10 innings:

35
45
29
6
87
62
33
23
52
19
______________
average 39.10 in 10 innings

Both guys have 3 substantial innings and there is not much of a difference in the rest of the scores

Let's assume that both of them are playing in the same side

First test
A - 15 & 33
B - 35 & 45
Result: Draw. Both of them have failed to capitalize

2nd test
A - 269 & 2
B - 29 & 6
Result: A

3rd test
A - 14 & 5
B - 87 & 62
Result: B

4th test
A - 112 & 12
B - 33 & 22
Result: A

5th test
A - 0 & 73
B - 52 & 19
Result: Draw

B/w the two A will probably have a better shot at MoS