why can't england produce a 50+ batsman?

[S.Kennedy]

Because the county championship is being increasingly marginalised to increase pyjama cricket. At one time teams used to play 32 games. Now they only play 14, at bookends of the season on absolute green-seamers. They don't become accustomed to long innings on July-August wickets, which would stand them in better stead overseas. It is obvious.

 

[S.Kennedy]

The last genuine ATG from England was Botham. Can't stand the bloke but he was capable of brilliance. The closest of recent times was KP, but he still falls short.

Producing ''All Time England XIs'' lists usually is three-staged and produces remarkably similar teams from participants,

1/ Set out the eight or so greats from the 1920s-1950s, your Hobbs, Huttons and Truemans etc.
2/ Add Botham and Knott
3/ Decide whether you'll include Pietersen (or rarer still, Swann), but decide against the decision and include Kenny Barrington instead.

 

[ImpatientLime]

Because the county championship is being increasingly marginalised to increase pyjama cricket. At one time teams used to play 32 games. Now they only play 14, at bookends of the season on absolute green-seamers. They don't become accustomed to long innings on July-August wickets, which would stand them in better stead overseas. It is obvious.

that's about three years worth of history in a 50 year drought.

 

[Larwood's_boots]

that's about three years worth of history in a 50 year drought.

70s, 80s and 90s in English cricket weren't exactly noted for their brilliant organization were they?

But definitely decline of the county game has a lot to with it. Has there been an overseas bowler who's averaged above 50 in england in the given time frame?

 

[Coronis]

70s, 80s and 90s in English cricket weren't exactly noted for their brilliant organization were they?

But definitely decline of the county game has a lot to with it. Has there been an overseas bowler who's averaged above 50 in england in the given time frame?

Overseas batsmen to average above 50 (min 1000 runs)

Allan Border 2082 @ 65.06
Viv Richards 2057 @ 64.28
Steve Waugh 1633 @ 74.22
Mark Taylor 1584 @ 52.80
Sachin Tendulkar 1575 @ 54.31
Gordon Greenidge 1570 @ 56.07
Shivnarine Chanderpaul 1399 @ 66.61
Rahul Dravid 1376 @ 68.80
Graeme Smith 1355 @ 67.75
Hashim Amla 1086 @ 60.33

(Abbas, Yousuf and Younis all also averaged 50+, with about 800 runs each)

Bowlers who averaged -25 (min 35 wickets)

Shane Warne 129 @ 21.94
Dennis Lillee 96 @ 20.56
Malcolm Marshall 94 @ 18.70
Curtly Ambrose 88 @ 20.77
Glenn McGrath 87 @ 19.34
Courtney Walsh 87 @ 24.44
Terry Alderman 83 @ 19.33
Richard Hadlee 70 @ 24.94
Michael Holding 63 @ 21.12
Joel Garner 55 @ 16.56
Muttiah Muralitharan 48 @ 19.20
Imran Khan 47 @ 24.63
Allan Donald 45 @ 23.62
Andy Roberts 39 @ 20.48

Conclusion: England sucks.

 

[tooextracool]

kenny barrington's last day of test match cricket was on the 30th july 1968. since that day not one english batsman has retired with an average of 50+.

now yes average aren't everything but i think it's a fairly damning stat. not one englishman since then would be in a serious conversation about a 1968 onwards xi for his batting alone. kevin pietersen and geoffrey boycott both averaged 47 when they retired. i can't see anyone else with a superior record.

some in recent years flirted with breaking the trend (trott, cook, bell, vaughan) but all fell away fairly drastically. this is a particularly odd trend amongst english batsman.
it would also take a brave man to think joe root will finish with a 50+ average given how flimsy his game is.

since barrington's retirement the following have retired with a 50+ average. (min 10 matches)

australia
adam voges
steve waugh
ricky ponting
mike hussey
matt hayden
greg chappell
alan border

west indies
brian lara
viv richards
charlie davis
shiv chanderpaul

india
vinod kambli
sunil gavaskar
sachin tendulkar
rahul dravid

pakistan
mohammad yousuf
javed minadad
younis khan

south africa
jacques kallis
ab de villiers

sri lanka
kumar sangakkara

zimbabwe
andy flower

only new zealand, england and the new nations to test cricket haven't had a player finish with that landmark.
then there are those who missed by a fraction. inzi, jayawardene, sehwag, michael clarke.

why is this the case? is england a uniquely difficult place to bat? is it the standard of coaching? do players get complacent and too sure of their spot?

like i said i get that a career average doesn't tell you much but i do find it odd that there are 22 names in that list and not one english.

I think your question is a little deceptive. If i break your question into two parts - between the 32 year period from 1968 and 2000 there were a total of 7 players (Waugh, Border, Chappell, Richards, Tendulkar, Gavaskar, Miandad) who played more than 20 test matches and averaged 50+. Miandad is a lucky boy to make this list because Pakistani pitches in the 1980s were not only some of the flattest roads ever but also considering that Pakistan (and Miandad in particular) were serious beneficiaries of the era before neutral umpires. But I will keep him in there for now. We did not have a player of the caliber of those listed above in the 32 years noted, quite frankly because most of those players are amongst the greatest to ever grace the game - it just does not happen very often. Not to mention that we had players of the caliber of Boycott and Amiss who came pretty close.

In the 18 year period since 2000, there are 12 retired international batsmen with 50+ averages (ignoring Voges, Kambli and Davis). So why has there not been an England player since to average 50+? One key factor that hasn't been noted is the quality of the opposition. A simple exclusion of Zimbabwe and Bangladesh knocks out a third of your list (Hayden, Chanderpaul, Yousuf, Dravid). I should add that England have not played a test series against Zimbabwe since 2003 and have only a handful of games against Bangladesh compared to the likes of Chanderpaul, Yousuf or Dravid). Additionally, because of the fact that England routinely play 4/5 tests against SA and Aus (the two best teams of this era), it seems that the stats disproportionately favor other international players over English players. It certainly seems plausible that KP and Cook may have averaged 50+ had they played more games against Bangladesh, Zimbabwe and less against SA and Aus. Alternatively, it seems possible that players like Sangakkara may have averaged a lot less if they played more games against Australia or SA.

 

[mr_mister]

^damn that's a lot of excuses in one post

 

[Slifer]

Agree with mr mister.

 

[cnerd123]

English cricket is such a grind - such a heavy schedule, such terrible media, so much control on their off field lives - that I think it breaks players tbh.

 

[Dan]

Yeah England play a lot of Tests

 

[TheJediBrah]

^damn that's a lot of excuses in one post

This is true, but he is correct about England not playing as much against the weaker teams. Australia are the same. Especially compared to guys like Sangakkara who played a lot against minnows.

 

[Slifer]

Again if batting is so tough in England then they should have a plethora of sub 25 bowlers since 1968 but they don't.

SL
Murali

Pak
Akram
Waqar
Imran

Oz

McGrath
Lillee

Wi
Ambrose
Walsh
Bishop
Etc

Nz
Hadlee

Rsa

Donald
Philander
Pollock


Ind

Ashwin
Jadeja

Eng

????

 

[Slifer]

This is true, but he is correct about England not playing as much against the weaker teams. Australia are the same. Especially compared to guys like Sangakkara who played a lot against minnows.

Post 2000, wi have been as bad as any other minnow and England regularly contest the wisden trophy vs the wi. So many grasping at straws excuses imo. It'll be a hell of a long time b4 the wi ever produces another 50+ or sub 25 player. We just aren't good enough anymore.

 

[Borges]

It is probably fair to speculate that if KP or Cook had played for Australia or India, they may have ended up with an average of fifty or so.

 

[S.Kennedy]

that's about three years worth of history in a 50 year drought.

Well one-day cricket arrived in the English domestic game in 1962-3, and by 1972 there were three List A competitions in operation per season, alongside the county championship, Twenty20 replacing one of them for 2003 (there are now two but the Twenty20 has proliferated to the detriment to not only the county championship but the last remaining List A). It has some longevity here, limited overs cricket.

 

[Coronis]

It is probably fair to speculate that if KP or Cook had played for Australia or India, they may have ended up with an average of fifty or so.

It is probably fair to speculate that if X did Y, Z would happen.

 

[bagapath]

England is a mid-range team, like India and New Zealand.
India never ever produced a world class bowler for non Indian conditions.
New Zealand hasn't had a true match winner since Hadlee's retirement.
England hasn't produced a word beating batsman in 50 years.
Lets just accept it.

 

[bagapath]

It is probably fair to speculate that if KP or Cook had played for Australia or India, they may have ended up with an average of fifty or so.

Its probably fair to speculate that if KP and Cook had tried to play for India they may never have got a chance

 

[Fuller Pilch]

England is a mid-range team, like India and New Zealand.
India never ever produced a world class bowler for non Indian conditions.
New Zealand hasn't had a true match winner since Hadlee's retirement.
England hasn't produced a word beating batsman in 50 years.
Lets just accept it.

Bond

 

[Fuller Pilch]

Again if batting is so tough in England then they should have a plethora of sub 25 bowlers since 1968 but they don't.

SL
Murali

Pak
Akram
Waqar
Imran

Oz

McGrath
Lillee

Wi
Ambrose
Walsh
Bishop
Etc

Nz
Hadlee

Rsa

Donald
Philander
Pollock


Ind

Ashwin
Jadeja

Eng

????

Heaps more than that:

Steyn, Rabada, Fanie De Villiers, Abbott

Asif, Bond, Bruce Reid, Stu Clark, Ryan Harris, plus the etcs from the Windies