Weak Ends to A career

[TheJediBrah]

Can you at least put it into dot points

 

[Daemon]

I think it takes longer to determine if a batsman is past their prime too. It's not visually apparent if a batsman has lost his physical ability, unless they are facing pace bowling (then it's really clear they're past it - see Ponting and Dravid). The losses in reflexes/timing/coordination are all so subtle that it just looks like they're making small mistakes, and in between dismissals they usually continue play good shots, giving the impression of still being Test quality. It takes an extended sequence of low scores and small errors accumulating before we can conclusively say that a great batsman is now done. In some cases we see technical flaws creep in, as a result of their bodies being broken down and not being able to move the same way, but even that has to be going on for a good number of games before we know that it is a permanent problem, and not just a minor glitch that can be fixed in the nets. This can take 10-20 Tests, leading to the 'Weak ends'

With a bowler you're going to get to see them bowl for 20-50 overs in a Test, and that's plenty of data to determine if they're beyond their prime or not. A bowler who is past their prime is a lot more visually apparent - they're unable to touch the same speeds/revs they used to, they've lost some of their variations due to their body being unable to bowl them, their action looks labored or is falling apart. Even if they're able to still manage the workload, the moment they prove to be ineffective they get dropped. So we don't see these prolonged 'Weak ends' for a lot of bowlers, and the cases we do see it it's because that bowler brings in secondary skills to the table (batting/captaincy) or because the side in question just has no other alternatives.

So many words only to repeat this

Bowlers are just dropped sooner and aren't persisted with once they hit a really bad patch because of the perception that a physical decline affects them more.

 

[cnerd123]

I don't think he meant what I said, though I can see how you think that. Needed elaborating in any case.

 

[Starfighter]

Needed elaborating in any case.

Not to that extant.

 

[marc71178]

this implies he had a strong start to his career

I'm sure he made one non-**** post in May didn't he?

 

[quincywagstaff]

Steve Waugh went 12 months too long; had the chance to go out on the perfect personal note with his famous 2002/03 Ashes SCG century but went on for another 12 months which saw a largely underwhelming final home series against India.

 

[morgieb]

Steve Waugh went 12 months too long; had the chance to go out on the perfect personal note with his famous 2002/03 Ashes SCG century but went on for another 12 months which saw a largely underwhelming final home series against India.

Interestingly he averaged over 80 after that ton. Admittedly against weak opposition but still.....

 

[Bolo]

Actually universal figures are the most misleading metric of all. Which is why your conclusion on Ponting is erroneous. So for example Ponting's universal stat against India is an impressive 54. To leave it at that would suggest no difficulty with India's bowlers. But it disguises the facts that he averaged 86 at home and only 26 away. as the bowling personnel was much the same it suggests he had difficulty with Indian conditions.

You can meaningfully adjust for the quality of the opposition (Zim and BD for eg) and the proportion of matches a man plays against an opponent (Ponting in India for eg), but these adjustments would favour Ponting in comparison with Sanga. A point I alluded to when I speculated Sanga's overall record is misleadingly superior. Fact remains Sanga failed in three countries, Ponting really only one. Its only through a distortion of the universal home/away record that disguises Sanga's comparative inferiority. Ponting's fall in his away average is simply down to his last 2 years and not a feature of his whole career, which would be a necessary condition for your point to hold. It isn't so it doesn't. Because you have relied on the misleading universal stats.

If a player starting today plays 100 tests, they would only play 4 or 5 per country. Less so in some, because the distribution will be uneven. You can't judge on this type of number. You are happy to give Ponting a free pass for failing in Zim. Sanga only played more than 10 tests in two countries. Of course he will end up failing more.

 

[vcs]

Steve Waugh went 12 months too long; had the chance to go out on the perfect personal note with his famous 2002/03 Ashes SCG century but went on for another 12 months which saw a largely underwhelming final home series against India.

Fittingly, he saved Australia from losing that series though..

 

[TheJediBrah]

If a player starting today plays 100 tests, they would only play 4 or 5 per country. Less so in some, because the distribution will be uneven. You can't judge on this type of number. You are happy to give Ponting a free pass for failing in Zim. Sanga only played more than 10 tests in two countries. Of course he will end up failing more.

That makes no sense

And Ponting played literally 1 innings in Zimbabwe. It's not giving him a "free pass" lol it's just common sense

 

[Bolo]

That makes no sense

And Ponting played literally 1 innings in Zimbabwe. It's not giving him a "free pass" lol it's just common sense

It makes sense. Play 100 matches in 100 countries and Bradman will end up a failure in 30 of them.

It is giving him a free pass. It's one I'm happy to give as I argued before, but we also need to make provision in Sangas case- he played 4, 6, and 8 tests in the countries he failed to average 40 in.

10 would be a pretty reasonable cutoff for a bat IMO if we are going to nitpick by country. But most bats won't end up playing this many in most countries. There are too many countries playing now to nitpick records in this way.

 

[_00_deathscar]

Also the focus isn't 0-8, it's the 4 series and 12 matches he played after that searching for his 100 and the 200 Tests, where there were 100% better batsmen waiting for a chance.

Based on the current ongoing series right now, I think I'd take Sachin RIGHT NOW, nevermind back then.

 

[Daemon]

Based on the current ongoing series right now, I think I'd take Sachin RIGHT NOW, nevermind back then.

Ravi Shastri should shake the dust off his pads imo

No helmet or box though.

 

[trundler]

I'm sure he made one non-**** post in May didn't he?

Yes. An informative post about Dave Houghton IIRC.

 

[flibbertyjibber]

Cook may well be high on the list the way he is going. Looks shot but his partner is surely in more danger of being dropped than he is.

 

[Bijed]

this implies he had a strong start to his career

I think Captain Blackadder sums it up pretty well: https://mobile.twitter.com/blackadderqtes/status/783988698434113537?lang=en

 

[AndrewB]

Or Marvin in "The Restaurant at the End of the Universe".

 

[Logan]

Allan Donald

 

[vic_orthdox]

2nd Final (D/N), Benson & Hedges World Series at Melbourne, Jan 17 1995 | Match Summary | ESPNCricinfo

Greg Rowell, was a weak end to his A career.

 

[the big bambino]

If a player starting today plays 100 tests, they would only play 4 or 5 per country. Less so in some, because the distribution will be uneven. You can't judge on this type of number. You are happy to give Ponting a free pass for failing in Zim. Sanga only played more than 10 tests in two countries. Of course he will end up failing more.

Or not ... Sanga played in 9 foreign countries meeting that criteria and averaged btwn 60 to 140 in 6 of them. Coincidentally when his number of tests rises in foreign conditions his average tends to drops. Exactly the opposite to your contention. Besides I don't give Ponting a free pass based on his Zim record. Even with it included he is superior to Sanga. I just make an allowance on the very high likelihood he would have improved it immensely because of the quality of the opposition.

You base one part of your conclusion on a metric (overall away averages) which you then undermine by claiming its individual components are distortions. You think that amalgamating them smooths over the distortions but its simply covers them; as the example with Ponting v India shows. Only when you look beneath the headline average do you find he had difficulty in a specific set of conditions.

But that is your contradiction not mine. You can rely on data when comparing 2 players of the same era facing the same opponents in the same conditions and playing roughly the same number of matches. which shows Ponting succeeding in more conditions than Sanga. A fact not revealed when you look at the headline averages which in Ponting's case is overly impacted by the proportion of away matches he had in India.

The second basis for your point relies on Ponting's away record being lower than 50 for the extent of his career to sustain it.

It wasn't.

So you can't.