Martin Crowe vs Virender Sehwag

[ashley bach]

How do these player comparisons work? Two different players, batting in two different positions, for different teams in different eras. Just what parameters/criteria do you use?

That's a million dollar question, and you can be sure it's forever complicated.

 

[ashley bach]

@shortpitched713 really interesting breakdown of stats there. Have severe doubts about number 3 being referred to as middle order though.

 

[srbhkshk]

Yeah but opening in India or Australia in the 2000s for Sehwag and Hayden is actually a prime position rather than a liability.

???

Average of all away openers in India and Australia since 00 - 31.4(AUS) , 33.4(IND)
Average of all away 3-5 in India and Australia since 00 - 35.9(AUS) , 36.9(IND)

 

[shortpitched713]

Average for Openers vs 3-5 in the "flat pitches era"

https://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/stats/index.html?batting_positionmax1=2;batting_positionmin1=1;batting_positionval1=batting_position;class=1;filter=advanced;groupby=overall;orderby=runs;spanmax1=10+Sep+2016;spanmin1=11+Sep+2001;spanval1=span;template=results;type=batting

Batting records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPNcricinfo.com

stats.espncricinfo.com

37.18 to 43.46, a difference of over 6 runs. If anything, the gap is growing wider over time.

 

[Coronis]

why though? An opener averaging 30 wouldn't be all that terrible for a poor batting line up and he would win them games when the conditions are in his favor. Surely any team with a poor batting would actually grab him asap.

Why is he suddenly averaging 30?

Averaging 30 is so low in output its not going make a difference.

Yeah totally when talking about these current **** teams. Even if this 30 crap was accurate, Bangers has only had Tamim and some bloke who’s played 2 tests average 30+ over the past 5 years. SA have had Elgar and Markram (who has already been dropped). Windies are in the exact same situation as Bangers except with Braithwaite and Baby Chanders. Any of these teams would jump at a chance for Sehwag even if he averaged 30.

 

[srbhkshk]

Why is he suddenly averaging 30?

He's averaging 30 in Eng/NZ/SA for the supposed poor team, elsewhere he is still averaging 60. Any team with a poor batting will grab that with both hands imo.

 

[shortpitched713]

@shortpitched713 really interesting breakdown of stats there. Have severe doubts about number 3 being referred to as middle order though.

Limiting to 4 and 5 actually further supports my point, as the number 3 position has been less productive in recent decades of test cricket.

 

[subshakerz]

Based on what? You made it the **** up?

At the time, lateral movement wasnt really a big thing in India and Australia, and the type of players Hayden and Sehwag were, they would prefer to stamp their authority on the bowlers early rather than play them when they are settled.

 

[subshakerz]

He's averaging 30 in Eng/NZ/SA for the supposed poor team, elsewhere he is still averaging 60. Any team with a poor batting will grab that with both hands imo.

Not if they cared about winning in Eng/NZ/SA. They would perfect a performer across conditions to provide needed stability.

 

[Bolo.]

Not sure if he could have scored more by moderating himself. Doesn't matter to the quality of his career if he couldn't or chose not to, and it's not much of a criticism considering how high his average was for an opener.

He was out early unusually often though. Out in 30 or fewer balls about half of his innings. You would like to see your openers face 40+ basically every innings in an ideal world to see off the new ball, irrespective of what they are scoring.

OFC his biggest scores are typically going to be more valuable for scoring fast. But there aren't so many of these, while he is getting out too early in most games.

 

[srbhkshk]

Not if they cared about winning in Eng/NZ/SA. They would perfect a performer across conditions to provide needed stability.

This is moving away from the point, a poor team is going to have an opener that's going to average 30-35 everywhere. Replacing him with Sehwag is great for that team, they lose nothing in the places Sehwag flops at but gain a **** load where he doesn't.

Regardless, someone who dominates in half his games is actually a better addition to poor teams, one extra good batsman isn't going to win them anything, they'll just lose somewhat more respectably everywhere (aka Sachin with the 90s Indian team away). Sehwag would at least give them a chance to win in his favored places.

 

[shortpitched713]

At the time, lateral movement wasnt really a big thing in India and Australia, and the type of players Hayden and Sehwag were, they would prefer to stamp their authority on the bowlers early rather than play them when they are settled.

So you have nothing to respond to the objective evidence, myself and srbhkshk posted about the relative difficulty of opening vs middle order batting in the eras and locales of relevance?

 

[subshakerz]

This is moving away from the point, a poor team is going to have an opener that's going to average 30-35 everywhere. Replacing him with Sehwag is great for that team, they lose nothing in the places Sehwag flops at but gain a **** load where he doesn't.

Regardless, someone who dominates in half his games is actually a better addition to poor teams, one extra good batsman isn't going to win them anything, they'll just lose somewhat more respectably everywhere (aka Sachin with the 90s Indian team away). Sehwag would at least give them a chance to win in his favored places.

Ok I see what u are saying.

 

[shortpitched713]

Not sure if he could have scored more by moderating himself. Doesn't matter to the quality of his career if he couldn't or chose not to, and it's not much of a criticism considering how high his average was for an opener.

He was out early unusually often though. Out in 30 or fewer balls about half of his innings. You would like to see your openers face 40+ basically every innings in an ideal world to see off the new ball, irrespective of what they are scoring.

OFC his biggest scores are typically going to be more valuable for scoring fast. But there aren't so many of these, while he is getting out too early in most games.

If there was a single number 3 batsman in the world who was going to be okay facing the new ball every few innings, it would be the guy coming in for India at the time, Rahul "The Wall" Dravid.

 

[subshakerz]

So you have nothing to respond to the objective evidence, myself and srbhkshk posted about the relative difficulty of opening vs middle order batting in the eras and locales of relevance?

Sure. Comparing away batters who come for a handful of games to local ones who play half their careers in a familiar setting is misleading.

Sehwag and Hayden generally did better than their compatriots in the middle order at home while opening.

 

[shortpitched713]

Sure. Comparing away batters who come for a handful of games to local ones who play half their careers in a familiar setting is misleading.

Sehwag and Hayden generally did better than their compatriots in the middle order at home while opening.

How about the >6 run difference in middle order vs opener productivity for the flat pitch era as a whole. Doesn't that mean that Viru and Hayden both would have been better off dropping to the middle order if they wanted to take such advantage of easy flat pitch conditions in Australia and India?

Or is it just more evidence that doesn't even penetrate into your preconceived views to maintain at all costs that they were just technically bad, FTBs?

 

[Bolo.]

If there was a single number 3 batsman in the world who was going to be okay facing the new ball every few innings, it would be the guy coming in for India at the time, Rahul "The Wall" Dravid.

Ya, he was absolute quality for those situations. But he would still prefer coming in to face a slightly older ball. Sachin was a fair bit better coming in later as well.

 

[subshakerz]

How about the >6 run difference in middle order vs opener productivity for the flat pitch era as a whole. Doesn't that mean that Viru and Hayden both would have been better off dropping to the middle order if they wanted to take such advantage of easy flat pitch conditions in Australia and India?

Or is it just more evidence that doesn't even penetrate into your preconceived views to maintain at all costs that they were just technically bad, FTBs?

Maybe I am not impressed by taking raw averages of nearly 200 cricketers and applying them to two specific openers we talked about. I am more convinced that the record shows that Sehwag and Hayden thrived well in their opening positions at home where they played the majority of their careers and didnt show they had some disadvantage compared to the middle order. Not the same for away though.

Overall, I think a 1-2 boost for Hayden and Sehwag is fair being openers. You believe they deserve 6+ plus each.

 

[shortpitched713]

I guess they must have had magically different conditions and magically different bowlers facing them with the new ball than all of the other openers who were their contemporaries. Damn, there really is no reasoning with you, is there.

 

[subshakerz]

I guess they must have had magically different conditions and magically different bowlers facing them with the new ball than all of the other openers who were their contemporaries. Damn, there really is no reasoning with you, is there.

It's not rocket science. They were comfortable in these home fortresses and opening gave them the first crack at bowlers who found it difficult to adjust here. India and Australia were the most difficult places to tour in this time.

Sehwag averaged 54 at home, more than Tendulkar and Dravid. Hayden averaged 57 at home, more than Ponting and Steve Waugh. Even adjusting for 2000s, I don't think there is any case that they suffered more by playing at the top at home.