• Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

Andrew Strauss - Not a bad start, chap.

Status
Not open for further replies.

Loony BoB

International Captain
If Andrew Strauss either finishes this innings with an unbeaten score or else achieves his 1159th run (he's on something like 1134 at the moment), he would finish his innings and be able to say that of any player who has played at least 20 innings in test matches, he is second in the current history of cricket when it comes to test averages behind the great Don Bradman.

Before this test, he was in 8th place - still ahead of any current player with a tidy 58.61 average.
 

Neil Pickup

Cricket Web Moderator
After 20 innings, Bradman had 1889 runs at 99.42 with eight centuries... So, erm, I think that one's out of reach.
 

Loony BoB

International Captain
Neil Pickup said:
After 20 innings, Bradman had 1889 runs at 99.42 with eight centuries... So, erm, I think that one's out of reach.
It's so far out of reach that I just don't really think about it these days. Second best in the world behind Bradman is effectively a first in the world in my eyes. Not worth comparing. :p
 

Pratters

Cricket, Lovely Cricket
Loony BoB said:
It's so far out of reach that I just don't really think about it these days. Second best in the world behind Bradman is effectively a first in the world in my eyes. Not worth comparing. :p
Who's 'second' record would he break?

Can you publish the records of say the top ten batsmen on that list? I reckon Kambli would be high in that list..
 

FaaipDeOiad

Hall of Fame Member
Ahh, so you mean his average would be the second best for any player with at least 20 innings currently, not the second best AFTER 20 innings. The second would be more remarkable, because of the number of players who had amazing starts to their careers but then dropped off to some degree or another.

Some that spring to mind are (after 20 innings):
Herbert Sutcliffe - 1348 runs @ 74.89
Sunil Gavaskar - 1047 @ 61.59
Vinod Kambli - 1056 @ 55.58
Walter Hammond - 1321 runs @ 73.39
Neil Harvey - 1268 @ 79.25

There's probably others I can't think of too. Still, a very impressive start.
 

Pratters

Cricket, Lovely Cricket
Would be cool if some one can get the best averages of players after 20 completed innings..
 

FaaipDeOiad

Hall of Fame Member
Pratyush said:
Would be cool if some one can get the best averages of players after 20 completed innings..
The only thing I can find is the "best averages after X innings" thing on howstat.com, but it only has the leader after each innings, which is basically Bradman from 10 to 80, and then Hammond, Sobers, Tendulkar and Border from there on.
 

Loony BoB

International Captain
Possible averages after this innings for Strauss...

Code:
Match Runs	Career Runs	Out	Not Out
107		1162		61.16	64.56
110		1165		61.32	64.72
120		1175		61.84	65.28
130		1185		62.37	65.83
140		1195		62.89	66.39
150		1205		63.42	66.94
160		1215		63.95	67.50
170		1225		64.47	68.06
180		1235		65.00	68.61
190		1245		65.53	69.17
200		1255		66.05	69.72
250 (maybe!)	1305		68.68	72.50
300 (erm...)	1355		71.32	75.28
350 (wishful!)	1405		73.95	78.06
400 (:p)	1455		76.58	80.83
500 (haha)	1555		81.84	86.39
 
Last edited:

Mr Casson

Cricketer Of The Year
Some of those seem wrong, Loony Bob. Just before, they had his stats up showing his current average at 64.17 (which would be the same had the innings ended with him not out then). And he definitely hasn't hit 170 yet!
 

Magrat Garlick

Global Moderator
Does have a thing about nervy 130s, though - 136 this series, 137 HS, dropped on 130 here (if I'm reading cricinfo rightly)...I suppose, if he gets there every time, no problem!
 

FaaipDeOiad

Hall of Fame Member
Scaly piscine said:
To think that someone was arguing that Strauss wouldn't make the Australian Test side the other day...
Hard to think who he would replace. He might make the Australian test side now in place of Lehmann, based on his performances in test cricket, but whether or not he would make the Australian side to begin with is debatable given the number of great domestic cricketers in Australia who never get much of an opportunity.
 

Neil Pickup

Cricket Web Moderator
Samuel_Vimes said:
Does have a thing about nervy 130s, though - 136 this series, 137 HS, dropped on 130 here (if I'm reading cricinfo rightly)...I suppose, if he gets there every time, no problem!
Either I've not been paying attention, that happened whilst I were on the toilet, or Cricinfo's talking pants again.
 

FaaipDeOiad

Hall of Fame Member
Samuel_Vimes said:
I'd think he'd replace Clarke straight away.
He's 27 and his first class average is 44, and that's in the English county system. I don't think that would get him a start in the Australian test side at all, given the number of players with averages around 50 over long periods who haven't been given a significant opportunity. Based on his test performances he would make any team in the world, but of course if he was Australian he wouldn't have had those test performances.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top