• 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.

Runs Scored by Top Batsman After Every Innings in Test Cricket

stephen

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Ya, fair play.

The question for me is do we regard 19 (lara) or 21 (ponting) as fundamentally different to 33 fot jimmy?

It is not a question of comparing actual quality. They are atgs in my book, and jimmy is not. But we do need to apply the same principle to both., even if the magnitude differs.
I think you'll find that many bowlers and batsmen have substantial differences between home and away records - even those widely considered the best. Murali averages 20 at home and 28 away. Bedser has virtually identical stats to Anderson. Kumble averages 25 at home and 35 away. And on the batting side, the aforementioned Warner probably has the largest home/ away split of them all.

Home/ away differentials tend to be influenced by many factors. Pace bowlers don't seem to get as large home/ away gaps as spinners. Subcontinental batsmen struggle to adjust to South African and Australian pace and bounce, while the reverse also tends to be true for Aus/SA batsmen facing spin in the subcontinent.

Of course the opposite is sometimes true as well. Both Border and Waugh had better overseas records than home records. Barrington was monstrous overseas and less so at home. Graham Smith was far better in foreign conditions than at home. It is typical for a dodgy finger spinner to find fame in a test series in India only to be dropped forever more afterwards.

Perhaps we should be rating these players more highly for their overseas efforts but the other side of the coin is that home conditions tend to be more important because winning at home is important for the health of the sport in that country. So I guess there's pros and cons to consider.

Personally I tend to rate overseas performances more highly than home performances, which is why I rate Border in the West Indies so highly and Smith's 2017 India tour as being one of the finest performances of all time. But it would be foolish to call a player like Warner or Anderson bad because they are only amazing at home. Flawed, perhaps, but not bad, but also not great outside their home niche.
 

h_hurricane

International Vice-Captain
I think average of home and away averages is a better metric than mere overall average. This will take care of lopsided proportion of home-away matches played by Anderson, Ashwin, Jadeja etc.

So, for Anderson it is 28.6. If you give some weight-age his neutral test matches, it should be a bit above 28. He belongs to the company of very good bowlers, considering his insane longevity. Not anywhere close to being an ATG though.
 

Coronis

Cricketer Of The Year
I think average of home and away averages is a better metric than mere overall average. This will take care of lopsided proportion of home-away matches played by Anderson, Ashwin, Jadeja etc.

So, for Anderson it is 28.6. If you give some weight-age his neutral test matches, it should be a bit above 28. He belongs to the company of very good bowlers, considering his insane longevity. Not anywhere close to being an ATG though.
FINALLY. Bradman goes to 100.53 :wub:
 

Top