Batting SR in test cricket

[vic_orthdox]

Speaking of which, I just had a half-baked idea.

If we grant that higher strike rate for identical run production is inherently more result-oriented, then it leads to the following hypothesis:

If batsmen are of lower callibre (such as the lower order batsmen!), would the corrollary hold true ? As in, now, we'd prefer a lower order batsman with a lower strike rate for identical average ? The logic to this is, well, the lower order batsmen suck to begin with. If they took a more defensive approach and just ate up balls, would it not give more time (in general) to the top order batsmen to play out their optimal innings ? Ie, if you were the 'slowpoke' batting at #9 that allowed Brian Lara to score 165 instead of get stranded at 119*, isn't that more optimal for the team ?

Yes, they can be; but if they are stuck with another tail ender, then one who takes the game on is more valuable.

 

[Shri]

Statistical debates don't apply to freaks of the game.

I will just leave this here:

Records | Test matches | Batting records | Fastest double hundreds | ESPN Cricinfo

5 out 10 is insane no matter how you choose to look at it.

 

[Ruckus]

Sehwag was a freak on flat wickets and very good against spin, but out of batsmen with elite records he would have to be right up the top for his inability to play the moving ball. That really lowers his rating for mine...it's a pattern I really hope Warner doesn't fall into, but so far the signs are pretty good.

 

[OverratedSanity]

Any lowering of his rating because of him being a liability in swinging conditions is completely compensated by him being an unstoppable force of nature when conditions suit him. FTB isn't even an insult in his case because other FTBs get runs on flat tracks at about a third of his pace. If the pitch is flat, the bowling side could pretty much throw in the towel when facing him at his peak. Doesn't matter who the bowler is, he d blast them, more often than not successfully.

No matter how flat the pitch is, no one in history has bullied quality bowlers like Steyn,McGrath, etc to the extent that Sehwag was capable of

 

[Shri]

Sehwag was a freak on flat wickets and very good against spin, but out of batsmen with elite records he would have to be right up the top for his inability to play the moving ball. That really lowers his rating for mine...it's a pattern I really hope Warner doesn't fall into, but so far the signs are pretty good.

Not being able to deal with swing/seam is different than dealing with express pace against which he was good against. That 195 in Aus is proof of that. So lets take a count here. Attributes of bowling in cricket when he played:

Pace - Pass
Spin - Pass
Movement - Fail

So, he is good at facing most bowlers really. Weakness against one attribute of bowling can be ignored in my opinion when looking at his record.

 

[OverratedSanity]

Calling Sehwag merely a pass against spin is kinda unfair. One of the top 5 ever against spin, arguaby

 

[Shri]

Look at the context ffs.

Pass and fail are the only words I am using to imply good and bad here. Cbf explaining how good or bad he was against different crap.

 

[Ruckus]

Not being able to deal with swing/seam is different than dealing with express pace against which he was good against. That 195 in Aus is proof of that. So lets take a count here. Attributes of bowling in cricket when he played:

Pace - Pass
Spin - Pass
Movement - Fail

So, he is good at facing most bowlers really. Weakness against one attribute of bowling can be ignored in my opinion when looking at his record.

I don't think he was good against the short ball and pitches with a lot of bounce. The 195 was on a flat wicket where Ponting scored 257, doesn't really prove much given he excels on flat pitches (his other hundred in Aus was at Adelaide, enough said). His record in brisbane and perth isn't good.

If I was to summarise Sehwag it would be:

Pace of any degree on flat wickets without much bounce - excellent
Pace on flat wickets with a good deal of bounce - mediocre
Pace on seaming wickets, or swinging conditions - poor
Spin - excellent

 

[Shri]

Nah. Was great against fast pies regardless of the pitch as long as the ball was old and it was not moving. Bounce didn't trouble him when he was in form. Struggled against bounce very briefly when he was in poor form and when some bowlers had figured out he had a weakness against balls that rose to his ribs off just back of a length. When he was on form from 2008 - 2011, that didn't seem to bother him one bit.

 

[Ruckus]

Nah. Was great against fast pies regardless of the pitch as long as the ball was old and it was not moving. Bounce didn't trouble him when he was in form. Struggled against bounce very briefly when he was in poor form and when some bowlers had figured out he had a weakness against balls that rose to his ribs off just back of a length. When he was on form from 2008 - 2011, that didn't seem to bother him one bit.

In the years 2008, 2009 and 2010 he made one century outside of the subcontinent, and that being at the adelaide oval. Given the subcontinent isn't exactly known for bouncy wickets, the onus is on you then to say in which innings he was confronted with a bouncy wicket and succeeded,

 

[Shri]

Bounce can be created by bowlers bowling at good pace even in wickets not suited for it. Cbf going through old cricinfo scorecards. But lol if you think the Ad Oval is as bad as Indian wickets as far as bounce is concerned. Its more forgiving to the fast bowlers than any Indian wicket.

 

[OverratedSanity]

Blah blah Sehwag can't play swing , can't play bounce whatever yadayadayada... Tell me which other batsman can score run a ball triples against bowlers like Steyn, Murali, Saqlain, Akhtar

 

[Shri]

Clearly you are a biased Indian fan boy. See Saqlain was out of form, Akhtar masturbated during lunch and was too tired to bowl as fast as he otherwise could, Steyn had smoked a little weed and wasn't angry enough that day, Murali couldn't eat his favourite ice cream etc.

 

[Daemon]

Play the post, not the poster. The BCCI, market principles and whether or not Heef likes capitalism have nothing to do with the discussion being had. We want debate here, not attacks in which the political ideology of a poster somehow discredits their opinion on Mike Garnham.

So yeah, that's enough of that. 8 points for the next poster to mention political ideology in this thread.

#Dantheman

 

[Shri]

Your job is to go put out real fires ffs not ones on forums. Piss off.

 

[Jono]

Off topic, but Sehwag's career died when he got shoulder surgery after the IPL which delayed his start to the England tour in 2011. He was then even more hackish than usual, and was just never the same again.

 

[Muloghonto]

Bounce can be created by bowlers bowling at good pace even in wickets not suited for it. Cbf going through old cricinfo scorecards. But lol if you think the Ad Oval is as bad as Indian wickets as far as bounce is concerned. Its more forgiving to the fast bowlers than any Indian wicket.

Err no, I'd say Mohali and Dharmasala are consistently more bouncy wickets than Adelaide.

 

[Muloghonto]

Sehwag was a freak on flat wickets and very good against spin, but out of batsmen with elite records he would have to be right up the top for his inability to play the moving ball. That really lowers his rating for mine...it's a pattern I really hope Warner doesn't fall into, but so far the signs are pretty good.

I disagree, one does not score centuries in England and South Africa if they cannot play the moving ball, as an opener.
It should be kept in mind that England rolls out the seamiest wickets against India and Sri Lanka because of the huge gulf in seam bowling between England these two teams.

Sehwag hasn't been a failure against moving balls in the way Jayawardene or Anwar were. If you look closely, Sehwag has gone through purple patches, bashing everything in sight and dismal patches, failing against everyone. He's been unlucky that his dismal patches tended to coincide with away tours (but in both cases, started prior to the away tours and continued on, indicating that it was an issue of form, not quality) but he isnt the type of batman to go around averaging 30 in an overseas tour and follow it up with 80 at home on consistent basis, ala Jayawardene.

 

[Muloghonto]

I don't think he was good against the short ball and pitches with a lot of bounce. The 195 was on a flat wicket where Ponting scored 257, doesn't really prove much given he excels on flat pitches (his other hundred in Aus was at Adelaide, enough said). His record in brisbane and perth isn't good.

If I was to summarise Sehwag it would be:

Pace of any degree on flat wickets without much bounce - excellent
Pace on flat wickets with a good deal of bounce - mediocre
Pace on seaming wickets, or swinging conditions - poor
Spin - excellent

Did you even watch that 195 or are you going by the scorecards ? His 195 came in a match where the ball was consistently bouncing the awkward height of stomach area from full length but the pitch offered no seam movement whatsoever, it took Kumble's guile to get any wickets, everything else was pretty much bowled straight as a broom handle.

Sehwag is mediocre against swing. Against pace & bounce, he is excellent, against spin, when he doesnt get too overzealous,he is a God.

 

[Ruckus]

I disagree, one does not score centuries in England and South Africa if they cannot play the moving ball, as an opener.
It should be kept in mind that England rolls out the seamiest wickets against India and Sri Lanka because of the huge gulf in seam bowling between England these two teams.

Sehwag hasn't been a failure against moving balls in the way Jayawardene or Anwar were. If you look closely, Sehwag has gone through purple patches, bashing everything in sight and dismal patches, failing against everyone. He's been unlucky that his dismal patches tended to coincide with away tours (but in both cases, started prior to the away tours and continued on, indicating that it was an issue of form, not quality) but he isnt the type of batman to go around averaging 30 in an overseas tour and follow it up with 80 at home on consistent basis, ala Jayawardene.

One swallow doesn't make a summer. I'm not sure exactly why your using the examples of Eng and SA to bolster your point, his overall record in those countries is abysmal. As it is in NZ (another place where the ball often does something). His record in Australia on pitches where the ball actually does something (i.e. Brisbane and Perth) is poor too. The only away location outside the subcontinent he has a good record in is the WI, and the wickets there are more or less similar. Think it's a massive cop-out to say he has a poor away record just because he happened to have been in bad form then. He has a bad away record, especially in places where the ball does something for the pacers, because his technique is fundamentally ill equipped to deal with it. My opinion on Sehwag has actually been formed solely on having watched him play...it's a rare situation where the stats almost directly coincide with observation.