No, "And it also occured to me, if Ponting and Tendulkar have roughly the same average and amount of runs etc., then if Ponting is following up a big first innings score with a substantial second innings one much more often - something must compensate. He would have to average less when these peformances are excluded."
200 runs or more in a match:
There ya go, I new there was something going on200 runs or more in a match:
Ponting: 8.11%
Tendulkar: 5.92%
In other words.. indeed. Now we're getting into stuff that might mean something.
This is starting to get pretty confusing, but isn't there a problem with the above? You have to see how much of the time Tendulkar/Ponting score 140 runs or more only in games where they play two innings. I assume the above analysis is taking into account games where only 1 innings was played as well?
There'd be just as big a problem with that as it'd ignore matches where they scored more than 140 in the first innings and would've only needed a duck to have it count but didn't bat (this happened to both batsmen several times). This is why we generally use innings averages, tbh.
Hmm, but nevertheless, it makes it compatible with the results I showed before. So Ponting follows up first innings 100's with 40+ second innings scores much more of the time, yet Tendulkar still has roughly the same percentage of 'two innings' games where he scores above 140 runs (21.23%). That must confirm, then, that Tendulkar plays many matches where both his scores are moderate like 70 and 70 or 50 and 90 . As you said before though, if the match total is the same (i.e. 140) it is rather irrelevant how the scores are distributed over the innings. The '200 runs or more' result though seems to be significant.There'd be just as big a problem with that as it'd ignore matches where they scored more than 140 in the first innings and would've only needed a duck to have it count but didn't bat (this happened to both batsmen several times). This is why we generally use innings averages, tbh.
I'll give it to you anyway though:
Ponting: 21.35 %
Tendulkar: 21.23 %
Nothing in it.
When Ponting scores a 100 for his THE GREAT AUSTRALIAN team, he doesn't need to back it up.
That was pretty meaningless coz teh team was on top as they decided against enforcing teh follow on. Adds to what i was saying.
How ridiculous
Quite.
Williamson's idol is Sachin, hence he'd probably rate him above Bradman.
Will add him to the list of daft cricketers making daft statements: HAdell, Abbas, Hussain, Sunil
Maybe nothing numerically between those two, but it does signal that if one of those players doesn't make runs in the first innings, he is far less capable in the second to put something up.
