Cricket Player Manager
Results 1 to 12 of 12

Thread: Ideal T20 figures- or do they mean much?

  1. #1
    Cricketer Of The Year Arjun's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Mumbai, India
    Posts
    8,380

    Ideal T20 figures- or do they mean much?

    This is another discussion coming out of the Michael Clarke for T20 issue, about what's ideal for T20. It's not just Pup, but also a whole lot of Indian and possibly English and Lankan selections, which are highly questionable. What would you consider good enough, or very good, among T20 stats?

    For a batsman, an average over 25 would be just right, while over 30, he's quite good. He should strike at least over 120, and something over 130 is quite hot. It's difficult to put up a big score, so a few over 50 should help. Likewise, a bowling average under 22 is acceptable, and under 20, serious, and under 16, seriously good. Strike rates will also count, and under 24 will fit the bill, and under 20, top stuff. Then again, things may change from match to match, ground to ground.

    Yet, we find several international and Champions League T20 teams carrying (apparent) misfits with them. While some misfits struggle but still stay in the team for other reasons, some others step up from largely unimpressive statistics and establish themselves as their teams' top players. Conversely, very strong-on-stats T20 teams have floundered or not gone the distance. Do T20 stats really mean much, then?
    "Talent is nothing without opportunity"
    "You're not remembered for aiming at the target, but hitting it"

    Twenty20 used to be boring.

    Sponsored...by...nothing!!!

  2. #2
    International Captain Himannv's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SL
    Posts
    6,237
    In T20's I firmly believe that the only stat that really matters is the strike rate. Any team can win a match on any given day if they have a whole list of sloggers in their side. Its not really a bowlers game so i dont think any stat matters for them as long as they can get it in the blockhole and read what the batsman may do.

  3. #3
    Request Your Custom Title Now! Mr Mxyzptlk's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    Trinidad and Tobago (Trinidad)
    Posts
    36,795
    Quote Originally Posted by Himannv View Post
    In T20's I firmly believe that the only stat that really matters is the strike rate. Any team can win a match on any given day if they have a whole list of sloggers in their side. Its not really a bowlers game so i dont think any stat matters for them as long as they can get it in the blockhole and read what the batsman may do.
    Umar Gul has a SR of almost 150. He's not exactly a batsman. The SR has to be in context surely. And if the average is under 20, I don't think the SR qualifies someone as a good bat to have in the side.
    Sreesanth said, "Next ball he was beaten and I said, 'is this the King Charles Lara? Who is this impostor, moving around nervously? I should have kept my mouth shut for the next ball - mind you, it was a length ball - Lara just pulled it over the church beyond the boundary! He is a true legend."


  4. #4
    International Captain Himannv's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SL
    Posts
    6,237
    Quote Originally Posted by Mr Mxyzptlk View Post
    Umar Gul has a SR of almost 150. He's not exactly a batsman. The SR has to be in context surely. And if the average is under 20, I don't think the SR qualifies someone as a good bat to have in the side.
    You have a point. However a batsman who averages under 20 can just as easily score 40 runs in 20 balls by simply throwing the bat at everything which may not work all the time but may win his team one game. A higher strikerate is more indicative of such a player. A higher average but lower strike rate isn't really what T20 teams need.

    To digress, Umar Gul may score 15 runs in 10 balls which is a reasonably useful contribution in a T20 when compared with 30 runs from 50 balls from batsman X when a total score of 120 is considered well below par. Considering that 15 runs in 10 balls is his contribution, 11 Umar Guls will score 165 runs in 114 balls. 11 versions of batsman X on the other hand will struggle to even score past 100 considering their strike rate although their average may be much higher.


  5. #5
    International Regular bryce's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    Hamilton,NZ
    Posts
    3,370
    It is hard to judge because alot of players are still very inexperienced, over time though you will be able to read alot into the T20 statistics. Also alot of bits & pieces players can have very undefined roles, and it is just a matter of them having game time to see what sort of contributions they are able to make. Alot of misfits are often multi-skilled cricketers who's skill sets allow them to suceed in longer forms of the game, but not T20. Say an allrounder who is a defensive batsman and a one-dimensional medium pacer. Kallis almost fit this same criteria and he sure looked like a misfit in his first IPL season, yet over time he showed that he was good enough to adapt his game to suit the format. Hopes also almost fits this bill(though not defensive with the bat, just very inconsistent) and alot of people would call him a T20 misfit.

    I think with regards to specialist batsmen, if they only average 20 then they need to be striking at 130 minimum.
    With bowlers maintaining an RPO under 7 will make you a success no matter what any other statistics say.
    However if your RPO is over say 7.50 you need to be striking around every 25 balls or less.
    Last edited by bryce; 28-01-2010 at 11:50 PM.
    ODI XI to match the best
    1.Ryder
    2.McCullum+
    3.Guptill
    4.Taylor
    5.Broom
    6.Oram
    7.Elliott
    8.Vettori*
    9.Mills
    10.Southee
    11.Bond
    ringaz_ride@hotmail.com
    To answer your question, yes
    Thanks?
    METEORIC RISE ?

  6. #6
    Eyes not spreadsheets marc71178's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    England
    Posts
    57,850
    I'd say a strike rate of 25 is a bit too high, seeing as that's less than 1 wicket per match.
    marc71178 - President and founding member of AAAS - we don't only appreciate when he does well, but also when he's not quite so good!

    Anyone want to join the Society?

    Beware the evils of Kit-Kats - they're immoral apparently.

  7. #7
    World Traveller Craig's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Super Happy Fun Sugar Lollipop Land!
    Posts
    34,131
    If a bowler can aim for around 6 an over then that is pretty good, whilst a batsmen should be aiming for a S/R of over 100.
    Beware the lollipop of mediocrity. Lick once and you suck forever...

    RIP Fardin Qayyumi, a true legend of CW

    Quote Originally Posted by Boobidy View Post
    Bradman never had to face quicks like Sharma and Irfan Pathan. He wouldn't of lasted a ball against those 2, not to mention a spinner like Sehwag.

  8. #8
    Cricket Web: All-Time Legend Furball's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    #banblocky
    Posts
    20,360
    Quote Originally Posted by bryce View Post
    It is hard to judge because alot of players are still very inexperienced, over time though you will be able to read alot into the T20 statistics. Also alot of bits & pieces players can have very undefined roles, and it is just a matter of them having game time to see what sort of contributions they are able to make. Alot of misfits are often multi-skilled cricketers who's skill sets allow them to suceed in longer forms of the game, but not T20. Say an allrounder who is a defensive batsman and a one-dimensional medium pacer. Kallis almost fit this same criteria and he sure looked like a misfit in his first IPL season, yet over time he showed that he was good enough to adapt his game to suit the format. Hopes also almost fits this bill(though not defensive with the bat, just very inconsistent) and alot of people would call him a T20 misfit.

    I think with regards to specialist batsmen, if they only average 20 then they need to be striking at 130 minimum.
    With bowlers maintaining an RPO under 7 will make you a success no matter what any other statistics say.
    However if your RPO is over say 7.50 you need to be striking around every 25 balls or less.
    Hopes is a T20 misfit because his bowling is fodder in T20s. He's a serviceable option in ODIs because he bowls at a reasonable pace and is quite consistent in line and length. Used properly (ie when the batsmen go into defensive mode), he's more than capable of going through some pretty economical overs and maybe nicking off a wicket here or there.

    In T20, there's not really a period of the game where batsmen are looking to build rather than hit, so a guy who bowls at Hopes' pace and who doesn't really do anything with the ball other than land it in a consistent area is a prime target for batsmen to line him up and simply smash him.

  9. #9
    International Coach Shri's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    11,178
    Stats don't matter in T20s and can't be used as guidelines, for the time being. Maybe after a decade the sample size will become large enough and the format serious enough for statsguru discussions. T20 = uncertainty atm.

  10. #10
    State Vice-Captain slugger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Auckland
    Posts
    1,053
    B McCullum has played the most Int 20/20 30 matches 30 inn avg 31 str 124

    that probably is the current bench mark

  11. #11
    International Captain Pup Clarke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Glasgow
    Posts
    6,067
    Quote Originally Posted by GingerFurball View Post
    Hopes is a T20 misfit because his bowling is fodder in T20s. He's a serviceable option in ODIs because he bowls at a reasonable pace and is quite consistent in line and length. Used properly (ie when the batsmen go into defensive mode), he's more than capable of going through some pretty economical overs and maybe nicking off a wicket here or there.

    In T20, there's not really a period of the game where batsmen are looking to build rather than hit, so a guy who bowls at Hopes' pace and who doesn't really do anything with the ball other than land it in a consistent area is a prime target for batsmen to line him up and simply smash him.
    Proud member of the Twenty20 is boring society


    E-Mail - liamhowgate@yahoo.co.uk
    MSN - liamhowgate@hotmail.com

  12. #12
    Cricket Web: All-Time Legend Furball's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    #banblocky
    Posts
    20,360
    Quote Originally Posted by Pup Clarke View Post
    Hopes is slightly faster than medium pace but isn't particularly sharp.

    If you're going to bowl 80mph then you need to be able to have some sort of variation, if you're just going to land it on a length in T20 you will get battered.



Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

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

Similar Threads

  1. Battle of the political/religious figures.
    By cover drive man in forum Off Topic
    Replies: 147
    Last Post: 22-06-2009, 09:56 AM
  2. Fixated on facts and figures!
    By DanielFullard in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 44
    Last Post: 29-04-2006, 02:43 PM
  3. Replies: 116
    Last Post: 06-04-2006, 02:32 PM
  4. The Hamilton Trophy.
    By NZTailender in forum World Club Cricket
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 03-11-2005, 04:59 AM
  5. Replies: 42
    Last Post: 13-10-2002, 02:37 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
  •