DoG's Top 100 Test Batsmen - The Top 25

[smash84]

Thanks, Sean, for pointing that out.

 

[Lostman]

15. Steve Waugh (Australia) (1985-2004)

Percentage of team's matches played: 89%

Most of the games he missed were at the start of his career? Did it significantly affect his rating?

 

[The Sean]

Most of the games he missed were at the start of his career? Did it significantly affect his rating?

DoG to confirm, but I think points are only docked if the matches played falls below 75%.

 

[chasingthedon]

No upper limit. I wanted the truly great batsmen to score over 900, though.

Is that so as to compare with the ICC ratings?

 

[Days of Grace]

Thanks.

Out of interest, how did Waugh's second innings at Old Trafford in '97 rate? I would have assumed that the two were pretty close together but apparently not.

11.01

DoG to confirm, but I think points are only docked if the matches played falls below 75%.

That is correct.

Is that so as to compare with the ICC ratings?

Kind of. But also because it looks good. As in 1000 signifies perfection.

 

[kyear2]

So who do you all think is going to be next guys?

 

[Days of Grace]

14. Herbert Sutcliffe (England) (1924-1935)

Career Length (Days): 4032
Percentage of team's matches played: 68%
Career Average: 60.73
Adjusted career average: 56.46 (rank 6)
Adjusted away average: 56.19 (rank 8)
Adjusted top-opposition average: 61.94 (rank 5)
Top Tier centuries: 5
Second tier centuries: 3
Third tier centuries: 5
Significant innings: 22
Significant innings per match: 0.41

Great innings: 0

Innings worth average: 3.74

25 Test peak adjusted average: 59.00 (1926-1932)
50 Test peak adjusted average: 58.31 (1924-1934)

Quality Points: 665
Career Points: 53
Peak Points: 141
TOTAL POINTS: 859

Herbert Sutcliffe has a very similar record to Ken Barrington: a very high set of averages, including an outstanding T/O ave., but no great innings. He does however have 3 innings rated above 10.00, the highest being his 194 in the first "Bodyline" test (11.80). This could be down to his slow-scoring. His 50+ scoring rate is only 40 runs per ball, the lowest in the top 25. But what I like about this formula is that it gives various types of batsmen who excel in different ways a chance to be rated highly. Sutcliffe deserves a place in the top 15. He is one of only 11 batsmen in the top 50 to have a higher T/O ave than career ave. In fact his average against top-tier opposition is a phenomenal 70.67 over 13 matches. He is very unlucky to miss out on an alltime England XI since, as you know, there are still two English opening batsmen to come.

 

[MW1304]

My guess would be Sutcliffe.

 

[Burgey]

I had always thought Sutcliffe's 2nd innings on a horrible sticky wicket in Melbourne in 28-29 when Australia was favoured to win the match easily was rated very highly. DOG, whereabouts does the innings rate, if you'd please?

3rd Test: Australia v England at Melbourne, Dec 29, 1928 - Jan 5, 1929 | Cricket Scorecard | ESPN Cricinfo

 

[Cabinet96]

Interesting to note the absence of great innings in both Sutcliffe and Barrington. Both have pretty much unrivalled averages, but are still subsequently rated below the likes of Hobbs and Compton. Guess it's a justification of why.

 

[kyear2]

No great innings for Sutcliffe or Barrington, I think the term used earlier was souless accumulators.

Ratings aside would much prefer a Pollock, Lara or Richards over a Barrington, Sutcliffe or Kallis in my team. Positive players who inspire and can take over a game.

 

[Delo12]

As a Sanga fan I just hope he doesnt't appear till the last 10..........nice read btw 'Days of Grace '

 

[kyear2]

Bradman
Sobers
Hobbs
Richards
Hutton
Headley
Tendulkar
Lara
Chappell
Hammond
Ponting
Kallis
Sangakkara

Decent guess I hope, obviously can be, and likely very wrong.

 

[Coronis]

Especially considering Border has already been done.

 

[centurymaker]

My predictions have been sooo off lol. Sangakkara has to be among the next 2/3 players surely, if not the next one

 

[morgieb]

Bradman
Sobers
Hobbs
Richards
Hutton
Headley
Lara
Chappell
Hammond
Ponting
Border
Kallis
Sangakkara

Decent guess I hope, obviously can be, and likely very wrong.

Tendulkar?

 

[bagapath]

be done with that ******** headley asap. the higher his ranking goes, my respect for DoG's hard work diminishes proportionally .

 

[centurymaker]

be done with that ******** Sangakkara asap. the higher his ranking goes, my respect for DoG's hard work diminishes proportionally

 

[NUFAN]

be done with that ******** Bradman asap. the higher his ranking goes, my respect for DoG's hard work diminishes proportionally

 

[The Sean]

I had always thought Sutcliffe's 2nd innings on a horrible sticky wicket in Melbourne in 28-29 when Australia was favoured to win the match easily was rated very highly. DOG, whereabouts does the innings rate, if you'd please?

3rd Test: Australia v England at Melbourne, Dec 29, 1928 - Jan 5, 1929 | Cricket Scorecard | ESPN Cricinfo

Yeah, agreed. Both that innings and his 161 at The Oval in 1926 were absolute masterpieces on what were considered virtually impossible batting wickets. I'm amazed neither of them fall into the Great Innings category.

I'm assuming that Sutcliffe's low match % is due to the fact that England generally sent under-strength teams to South Africa, India and the West Indies in those days so he (and most of England's very best players) subsequently missed quite a few Tests.