30 Test hundreds

[indiaholic]

I am kinda surprised that the ball by ball data that he had was so limited. Just 40% of Warne's career?

 

[91Jmay]

If what you meant was that averaging 20 against Steyn, and averaging infinity against everyone else (which is what a few people seem to be saying) is good, then yes. That would be good.

Simply averaging 20 against a bowler, for a specialist batsman, is not good. It doesn't mean you're not a good batsman, because you might average 100 against everyone else, but it means that bowler has the wood over you comfortably.

It doesn't though really. On a per innings basis scoring 20 off a bowler is fine, you are going to be averaging 50 against that team in the vast majority of cases.

 

[indiaholic]

Even when you are scoring a century, you will be scoring around 20 against most bowlers. Check Ponting's innings in the first and third innings: 2nd Test: Australia v South Africa at Melbourne, Dec 26-30, 2008 | Cricket Player v player | ESPN Cricinfo

 

[TheJediBrah]

It doesn't though really. On a per innings basis scoring 20 off a bowler is fine, you are going to be averaging 50 against that team in the vast majority of cases.

Averages against a bowler aren't per innings though. It's per dismissal by that bowler.

that's where everyone keeps getting confused ITT I think

 

[indiaholic]

Averages against a bowler aren't per innings though. It's per dismissal by that bowler.

that's where everyone keeps getting confused ITT I think

Of course.. But what people are saying is that for example in the match I linked, if Ponting gets out to Morkel in both innings, he would average 22 against him but would have also scored 200 runs in the process.

 

[91Jmay]

Averages against a bowler aren't per innings though. It's per dismissal by that bowler.

that's where everyone keeps getting confused ITT I think

Yes. I'm well aware of that however no bowler bowls every ball at a batsmen so if x scores 20 runs per innings against y it is likely he has scored a similar amount off of at least one of the other bowlers as well. Of course you'd get some scenarios where a bat is camped down one end and faces a lot of one bowler but not in most cases.

Let's take an opening batsmen.

y opens the bowling and bowls 6 overs 0 - 19. 12 of those runs go to x. He comes out of the attack, to meet the 20 run threshold for that innings x is going to have to bat for at least another hour before y comes back on to bowl.

So x averaging 20 against one superb bowler, is no bad thing. It isn't great or amazing but it is no shameful number.

Averaging 20 against every bowler is of course a problem, but give me an average of 20-25 against Steyn for an individual batsmen and I'd take it. Steyn is top 5 all time without question for me.

 

[TheJediBrah]

Of course.. But what people are saying is that for example in the match I linked, if Ponting gets out to Morkel in both innings, he would average 22 against him but would have also scored 200 runs in the process.

I know and I'm not disagreeing with any of that. I'm responding directly to the posts I quoted.

Averaging 20 against a bowler is a completely different thing to averaging 20 in matches in which a certain bowler played

 

[91Jmay]

I know and I'm not disagreeing with any of that. I'm responding directly to the posts I quoted.

Averaging 20 against a bowler is a completely different thing to averaging 20 in matches in which a certain bowler played

Literally no one is disagreeing with that.

Basically average per bowler is nearly useless as it is almost completely situational (unless the average is 120 or like 2, then you can be definitive).

 

[TheJediBrah]

Yes. I'm well aware of that however no bowler bowls every ball at a batsmen so if x scores 20 runs per innings against y it is likely he has scored a similar amount off of at least one of the other bowlers as well. Of course you'd get some scenarios where a bat is camped down one end and faces a lot of one bowler but not in most cases.

Let's take an opening batsmen.

y opens the bowling and bowls 6 overs 0 - 19. 12 of those runs go to x. He comes out of the attack, to meet the 20 run threshold for that innings x is going to have to bat for at least another hour before y comes back on to bowl.

So x averaging 20 against one superb bowler, is no bad thing. It isn't great or amazing but it is no shameful number.

Averaging 20 against every bowler is of course a problem, but give me an average of 20-25 against Steyn for an individual batsmen and I'd take it. Steyn is top 5 all time without question for me.

Yeah definitely. An average of 20-25 against Steyn or a very good bowler would be ok, especially if you're averaging 50 against the others.

 

[TheJediBrah]

Literally no one is disagreeing with that.

Basically average per bowler is nearly useless as it is almost completely situational (unless the average is 120 or like 2, then you can be definitive).

Disagreeing with what?

 

[OverratedSanity]

That

 

[stephen]

Doesn't surprise me McGrath has the best average vs great batsmen. He was a beast and rarely cleaned up the tail.

 

[srbhkshk]

Yeah definitely. An average of 20-25 against Steyn or a very good bowler would be ok, especially if you're averaging 50 against the others.

If you are ok with averaging 40-42 as a batsmen then yeah, not otherwise.

 

[indiaholic]

Would have been a bad thing if he didn't clean up the tail, but:

9th position		41	8.36
10th position		34	7.08
11th position		24	3.37

 

[TheJediBrah]

If you are ok with averaging 40-42 as a batsmen then yeah, not otherwise.

well that's probably more than Ponting averaged during most of the period he played against Steyn tbh

Would have been a bad thing if he didn't clean up the tail, but:

9th position		41	8.36
10th position		34	7.08
11th position		24	3.37

not sure what you're saying but those stats seem to strongly support that he didn't clean up the tail

 

[indiaholic]

If you are ok with averaging 40-42 as a batsmen then yeah, not otherwise.

Nah. No batsman is going to face bowlers of that caliber very often..

 

[srbhkshk]

Nah. No batsman is going to face bowlers of that caliber very often..

In those particular matches I mean.

 

[TheJediBrah]

In those particular matches I mean.

Most batsmen would have been pretty happy with averaging 40 against the Australians with McGrath in the side

 

[stephen]

Would have been a bad thing if he didn't clean up the tail, but:

9th position		41	8.36
10th position		34	7.08
11th position		24	3.37

99 wickets out of a total of 500+ means he took the last 3 batsmen (27% of the team) less than 20% of the time. That is, he feasted on better batsmen.

 

[srbhkshk]

Most batsmen would have been pretty happy with averaging 40 against the Australians with McGrath in the side

Actually I thought we were talking about very good batsmen, now that I look back at the thread it seems like that is not the case. (The mention of Ponting gave me the illusion). For the likes of Lara, Sach and Punter accepting an average of 40 would be poor.