Best Test opener of the 21st Century?

[h_hurricane]

Would India have benefitted from batting Sehwag in middle order in Eng, NZ or SA, and may be send a scapegoat like Kumble opening there ? Interesting point to ponder about, but we will never know.

 

[subshakerz]

Generally speaking I'd summarize my idea on batting SR in Test cricket as such. In general, for the average batsman out of all the Test batsmen that exists playing on the Test team with the most average overall capability (hard to define both those things, I know) varying his SR upward with the same batting average will very, very slightly be better. This is more for psychological reasons than objective ones, as there is an auto-suggestive benefit to playing with a more positive than negative approach, even though he can't always actually predict which will end up being more helpful for the team.

But this is a very, very small positive effect for mine, in comparison to just the average run value he places on his wicket. If we can instead vary this batting average up even just 2-3 runs, to me that's a more important and universally applicable positive, regardless of his team or match circumstance, as compared to any big change into an attacking, fast run scorer.

I think you are underestimating the psychological effect of fast scoring on the opposition. Most high quality sides in cricket will have most of their batting lineup be on the fast scoring side.

I think a SR of 55 is more preferable to a SR of 45 with an average 2-3 points higher.

 

[honestbharani]

Why is this analysis an inconsistent reversal of literally everything you've ever said about the value of higher strike rates in batting?

Coz of the team Sehwag played for.

 

[subshakerz]

Coz of the team Sehwag played for.

I am a fan of that particular 2000s team he played in.

 

[Jayro]

When a batsman with good or more agressive strike rate bats it rubs on the whole situation of the match, a bowler who was earlier looking so tight and in control suddenly starts to look mediocre and start making unforced/forced errors and it puts batting side in ascendance,that guy will be the first wicket (the price wicket) for the opposition, that's particularly what seperates guys like Lara, Sachin, Viv from Kallis, Chanderpaul etc. who have equally high or even higher averages but still not considered in the same league by the contemporaries, the opposition bowlers /commentators etc.

 

[shortpitched713]

I think you are underestimating the psychological effect of fast scoring on the opposition. Most high quality sides in cricket will have most of their batting lineup be on the fast scoring side.

I think a SR of 55 is more preferable to a SR of 45 with an average 2-3 points higher.

Does the fast scoring batsmen in the lineup cause them to be a better quality side? Or does the team having a better overall batting lineup allow these batsmen on an individual basis to score more quickly, more often?

This is something you have to prise out before you can start to make any conclusion on how valuable individual batsmen's career Strike Rate's are in indicating their quality.

 

[Gob]

High SR bad good?

No read whole but saw hear there. It important if saving game

 

[TheJediBrah]

The cost of Sehwag's super strikerate was being near useless in swinging conditions.

The 2 aren't necessarily related. Sehwag had glaring weaknesses but they weren't because he had a high strike rate. They were technical and plenty of slow scoring players have similar weaknesses.

 

[trundler]

Man had concrete feet and would move them in position for the photographer after completing the shot lmao

 

[subshakerz]

Does the fast scoring batsmen in the lineup cause them to be a better quality side? Or does the team having a better overall batting lineup allow these batsmen on an individual basis to score more quickly, more often?

Much more the former than the latter.

 

[subshakerz]

The 2 aren't necessarily related. Sehwag had glaring weaknesses but they weren't because he had a high strike rate. They were technical and plenty of slow scoring players have similar weaknesses.

Sehwag had a compulsive urge to score and that reflected in his loose strokeplay, especially outside off. Any competent pacer in these conditions would just need to wait before he would try something silly and give a chance. Sehwag wasn't the type to shoulder balls and let them go to the keeper over after over and wait for the shine to leave the new ball.

 

[Flem274*]

can't buy into goldilocks strike rates. everyone who has played or watched the game knows you'd rather the 'normal fast' scorer on strike instead of the guy blasting you out of the ground.

 

[Burgey]

Would India have benefitted from batting Sehwag in middle order in Eng, NZ or SA, and may be send a scapegoat like Kumble opening there ? Interesting point to ponder about, but we will never know.

Teams never seem to ponder doing stuff like this, but occasionally they’re worth a go imo

 

[subshakerz]

can't buy into goldilocks strike rates. everyone who has played or watched the game knows you'd rather the 'normal fast' scorer on strike instead of the guy blasting you out of the ground.

In an individual innings, perhaps.

I guess the point for me is that once you start scoring at an 80 SR over a career, it will come at certain costs to your record.

 

[Daemon]

Laxman was a great example, dunno why it’s not more commonplace

 

[subshakerz]

Teams never seem to ponder doing stuff like this, but occasionally they’re worth a go imo

Dravid and Sehwag IMO should have switched places when touring in SA, ENG and NZ.

 

[Chrish]

It’s true Sehwag being useless in certain conditions but that also applies to Hayden; check his record at the places where it would swing/ seam around..

 

[subshakerz]

It’s true Sehwag being useless in certain conditions but that also applies to Hayden; check his record at the places where it would swing/ seam around..

Yes, Hayden had a similar problem but not to the same degree. He had a couple of good series in SA but otherwise he wasnt that effective in these places. One reason why Smith is better than both.

 

[Chrish]

For smith, I just can’t look past his record against Australia. Still, I can see why he is leading the list.

 

[Bolo.]

can't buy into goldilocks strike rates. everyone who has played or watched the game knows you'd rather the 'normal fast' scorer on strike instead of the guy blasting you out of the ground.

How often are you preferring an opener who scores 20(6) above one who scores 20(40)?

Or a number 11 that scores 4(2) above one who goes 4(20)?

It's a theory everyone buys into, its just a question of degree.