Vijay Merchant

[G.I.Joe]

The forgotten man of World cricket. One of the unknown quantities at Test level, much like another opener, Barry Richards. How would you rate him?

His Test record:

10 matches, 18 innings, 859 runs @ 47.72, 3x100, 3x50.

All of his Test cricket was played against England, 5 tests in India and 5 tests in England, over the span of 18 years, from 1933 to 1951. He played his first test aged 22, and the last aged 40.

His First Class record:

150 matches, 234 innings, 13470 runs @ 71.64, 45x100, 52x50.

It is quite possible that most of his FC cricket being played in India in the 30s and 40s could be an obstacle towards giving his average of 71.64 (which I believe, is the second best FC average ever, after Bradman) the same weightage as one achieved by playing predominantly in England or Australia in the same period.

Sorting out the innings played against Indian bowling attacks leaves us with this FC record against purely English and Australian sides over 18 years:

57 matches, 86 innings, 5082 runs @ 59.09, 12x100, 30x50.



(1) Is he one of the best opening batsmen ever, in the sense Barry Richards is seen, or a man who would have been merely passable at Test level?

(2) Keeping in mind your answer to the first question, would you pair him alongside Sunil Gavaskar in India's all time Test team?

 

[fredfertang]

Interesting question – well I think it is anyway – a few points to throw in

1.Four of his ten tests were played against England sides that were some way off being full strength however that makes no significant difference to his average

2.He was never “not out” in his test career so no boost to his average that way

3.He never played on a winning side in a test – could be argued that makes his average more impressive

4.Having looked at accounts of his three test centuries nothing to state that he was ever dropped during those innings so if anyone could be arsed and/or it meant anything, on which I express no opinion at all, his first chance average wouldn’t be much different to his overall average

5. If there were such a thing as a lost chance average, which would of course be absolutely ridiculous, he might do well out of it as his century in the 1946 series was strangled when his partner drove a full length delivery towards short mid on who, sadly for Merchant, was Arsenal’s finest, Compo, who stuck out his foot and deflected it onto the stumps thus running Merchant out.

6.He averaged all but 50 on the 1936 tour of England and all but 75 in 1946 – that made him 3rd behind Hammond and Fishlock in 36 and 2nd behind Hammond in 46

He couldn’t tour Australia in 47/48 where India played five tests against a full strength Australia so overall I don’t think there’s enough evidence to fully assess his greatness but he must have been a very fine player indeed

 

[NUFAN]

The answer to number 2 is no, I wouldn't.

Sehwag to partner Gavaskar.

I'm of the believer that to judge a player on Test Cricket they have to play a decent number of Tests.

10 just doesn't cut it.

 

[krkode]

One of those forgotten giants along with Barry RIchards and Mike Proctor about whom we will always ask "what if?".

Sorting out the innings played against Indian bowling attacks leaves us with this FC record against purely English and Australian sides over 18 years:

I'm curious, how did you come up with these numbers? Were they like Bombay vs. English county teams? It doesn't look like he played for any team besides Bombay and India and Hindus. When did his path cross English and Aussie cricketers besides the 10 tests?

As for would I pick him as one of two openers in an all-time India XI? Hard to say... I'm far too fond of Sehwag and his modus operandi. And Gavaskar is just Gavaskar. So I would think probably not.

 

[Goughy]

I dont claim to have any inside knowledge on him. His domestic record is pretty amazing and its good outside as well.

His combined record for Bombay and Hindus in 54 games is 5920 runs at an average of 103.86.

 

[G.I.Joe]

One of those forgotten giants along with Barry RIchards and Mike Proctor about whom we will always ask "what if?".



I'm curious, how did you come up with these numbers? Were they like Bombay vs. English county teams? It doesn't look like he played for any team besides Bombay and India and Hindus. When did his path cross English and Aussie cricketers besides the 10 tests?

As for would I pick him as one of two openers in an all-time India XI? Hard to say... I'm far too fond of Sehwag and his modus operandi. And Gavaskar is just Gavaskar. So I would think probably not.

Here's the page that splits his record by opponent faced: Cricket Archive
Perhaps those familiar with the FC scene back then could analyse his performances based on the strengths of the English teams he faced.

The teams he played for are listed here: Cricket Archive

He doesn't seem to have faced any team more than a handful of times. Could be argued that scoring all those runs against all those unknown players would have made any sort of match preparation impossible, considering how reliant modern day players are on analysing the opposition beforehand. Of course, the same applies to the bowlers bowling to him too.

 

[G.I.Joe]

Interesting question – well I think it is anyway – a few points to throw in

1.Four of his ten tests were played against England sides that were some way off being full strength however that makes no significant difference to his average

2.He was never “not out” in his test career so no boost to his average that way

3.He never played on a winning side in a test – could be argued that makes his average more impressive

4.Having looked at accounts of his three test centuries nothing to state that he was ever dropped during those innings so if anyone could be arsed and/or it meant anything, on which I express no opinion at all, his first chance average wouldn’t be much different to his overall average

5. If there were such a thing as a lost chance average, which would of course be absolutely ridiculous, he might do well out of it as his century in the 1946 series was strangled when his partner drove a full length delivery towards short mid on who, sadly for Merchant, was Arsenal’s finest, Compo, who stuck out his foot and deflected it onto the stumps thus running Merchant out.

6.He averaged all but 50 on the 1936 tour of England and all but 75 in 1946 – that made him 3rd behind Hammond and Fishlock in 36 and 2nd behind Hammond in 46

He couldn’t tour Australia in 47/48 where India played five tests against a full strength Australia so overall I don’t think there’s enough evidence to fully assess his greatness but he must have been a very fine player indeed

That was an interesting read. Its a pity he couldn't ply his skills in county cricket more regularly. We could have formed a much clearer picture of the man.

 

[Jungle Jumbo]

It has to be remembered that runs in Indian cricket's golden age in the 1930s and 1940s were even more easy to come by than today. If you think the current state of the Ranji tournament, with its emphasis on racking up huge totals and grinding out a draw is bad, just take a look at Merchant and Hazare practically batting purely for records, especially in the Pentagular.

That said, his record is still very impressive.

 

[pskov]

I'm curious, how did you come up with these numbers? Were they like Bombay vs. English county teams? It doesn't look like he played for any team besides Bombay and India and Hindus. When did his path cross English and Aussie cricketers besides the 10 tests

Tour matches with India I would imagine. Remember that there used to be far more first class tour matches in that era and they were taken more seriously too, especially pre-WW2.

 

[zaremba]

2.He was never “not out” in his test career so no boost to his average that way

Fred a fine post as ever but I'm disappointed in you for falling into the "not outs boost the average" trap.

 

[fredfertang]

Well Mr Z you really do need to look at this issue in conjunction with my newly discovered "lost chance average" which after a day's reflection I feel may be the answer to all apparent statistical anomalies

So there!!!

BTW did you win?

 

[zaremba]

The lost chance average was indeed a masterstroke.

As for winning or losing, I have already paid up on the bet I had with my opponent as to who'd win.

 

[fredfertang]

Perhaps those familiar with the FC scene back then could analyse his performances based on the strengths of the English teams he faced.

In those days the counties always took games against the tourists seriously and they all played them (Yorks, Surrey and Lancs twice usually) - a quick glance through Wisden shows those Indian tours were no different so I reckon that properly puts Merchant right up there with Hammond, who never played in India, but then he did do rather well everywhere else, but he still didn't have a career average of 70+

 

[Matt79]

A year or two ago I'd have said pair him with Gavaskar without hesitation, but Sehwag has improved his standing in my eyes in that time, so its now a difficult choice.

Was certainly a pioneering great in Indian cricket, laying the foundations for all that's come since in the same way that people like Grace did in England and Trumper in Australia. His record is nothing to sneer at either.

 

[The Sean]

Well Mr Z you really do need to look at this issue in conjunction with my newly discovered "lost chance average" which after a day's reflection I feel may be the answer to all apparent statistical anomalies

Having heard at length about Rich's infamous patented FCA, I'd be interested to hear more about what the LCA entails...

 

[Precambrian]

Very good thread about a lost talent. I wonder why he played only 10 tests in 18 years despite having such an average in FC cricket.

 

[fredfertang]

Having heard at length about Rich's infamous patented FCA, I'd be interested to hear more about what the LCA entails...

I think Rich's FCA is interesting but, realistically, of no use to man nor beast - I was just being flippant with the LCA I'm afraid and it was just reading about Merchant's bizarre dismissal that made the idea pop into my head

 

[Matt79]

@ Precambrian - Don't know whether India played that many during his career, the war intervened, and I think he opted out of some tours later in his career. (I seen one or two uncharitable hints that he did so out of fear of failing/protecting his rep, but not sure whether there's any substance to this or not - doesn't gel with what I have read of him elsewhere).

 

[The Sean]

I think Rich's FCA is interesting but, realistically, of no use to man nor beast - I was just being flippant with the LCA I'm afraid and it was just reading about Merchant's bizarre dismissal that made the idea pop into my head

Fair enough mate - I was naive enough to think you'd followed Dicko's lead and put moutains of thought and analysis into a new theory!

 

[Matt79]

There is a Lost Chance theory already working in averages - that's why we divide runs scored by dismissals, not innings, to balance for the lost chance for the N.O. batsman to add to his tally.