why can't england produce a 50+ batsman?

[StephenZA]

It's not but someone earlier made the point about English conditions not being like any other. I don't think it's a coincidence that South Africa and Australia have excellent away records against each other.

I agree that the late swing, in particular, you get in England all the time is very different. I think the common attribute that Aus and SA have is bounce. But I do think SA has a greater variation in pitches and that includes early swing and reverse swing. I do think again that if you played the Duke ball in SA at places like Newlands I would not want to be opening.

 

[Singh767]

Well Cook has just passed Sangakkara to become the 5th leading run-scorer of all-time and leading left hander, averaging over 45. Which is more valuable to a country than averaging over 50 as a middle order player

 

[Starfighter]

Why are runs more valuable scored in one position than more or less the same quantity scored in another position?

 

[OverratedSanity]

Why are runs more valuable scored in one position than more or less the same quantity scored in another position?

Because runs higher up the order set up games and are more often than not more difficult to get?

 

[Starfighter]

I think the ongoing test series is an effective rebuttal to that. We could argue all day about psychological effects but I think that the total innings size is perhaps just a little bit more important than who scored them.

 

[ImpatientLime]

how many does cook need in this innings to average 50?

 

[_00_deathscar]

how many does cook need in this innings to average 50?

15,000 or something.

 

[Top_Cat]

By my calculations, a red inks 1373. With 230-odd overs remaining in the game, to get there by close of play on day 5, he'd have to score over 5/over himself. Unleash the beast, Chef!

 

[Furball]

Why are runs more valuable scored in one position than more or less the same quantity scored in another position?

Because the value of Cook, particularly at his peak, wasn't just the runs he was scoring, it was the time it was taking bowlers to get him out.

If your opener has batted all day for 150, not only has he stuck up loads of runs on the board, he's also worn down the bowlers at the other end. If you're a number 5 batsman, do you want to be facing a buoyed up Steyn on the first morning having already knocked over 3 poles, or do you want him in his 4th spell of the day having already bowled 20 overs?

 

[_00_deathscar]

Because the value of Cook, particularly at his peak, wasn't just the runs he was scoring, it was the time it was taking bowlers to get him out.

If your opener has batted all day for 150, not only has he stuck up loads of runs on the board, he's also worn down the bowlers at the other end. If you're a number 5 batsman, do you want to be facing a buoyed up Steyn on the first morning having already knocked over 3 poles, or do you want him in his 4th spell of the day having already bowled 20 overs?

It's all about context - it really depends on who is coming in between the opener and #5, and assuming number of runs scored both types of openers is equal (or close to equal). A Sehwag hitting 150 off 160 balls in the first two sessions is equally as damaging, if not more, than Cook holding out for 150 for a whole day.

 

[GIMH]

It’s when runs are hardest to get and it’s hardest to stay in. Especially in England.

If you don’t believe me, how often do we see the lower middle order look fun for 20 overs from 60-80 and then second new ball, all over.

When you’ve got a Pietersen coming in at 10-2 it limits him. 100-2 he can play comfortably. 200-2 and it’s on.

See also: 2010-11 Ashes