Wow that does surprise me, I mostly know him for piling on runs for Glamorgan so assumed his non-Test average would be higher but guess at 26 he'd have been playing a fair bit of FC cricket before that Glamorgan stintBig Marnie was averaging like mid-30's when he got a Test callup, and even today his Test record is miles ahead of his FC one (non-Tests = 41.18, Tests = 60.80)
Yesssssssssssyeah, the most objectively threatening thing about Feldman is his political viewpoint.
Reckon a few of these are the result of sample size statistics, and the Test stats would have normalized over a longer time.Eddie Paynter is a prime example for this thread.
Good first-class average of 42.26 but at Test level averaged 59.23. Played 20 tests, should have played more.
Sangakaara averages 46.5 in FCC (drops to 39 if his County figures are reduced) and averages 57.4 in tests. That is a very good indicator of **** pitches FCC played on in SL.Think Kenny Barrington must be close to having the biggest difference over a longish period.
45.63 in FC games isn't shabby at all, but pales next to 58.67 from 82 tests.
Obviously the difference would be even more marked if the tests were removed from his FC figure.
From his debut in 1931 through to 1937 Paynter played 9 tests for 405 runs @ 36.81. Fortunately he played his other 11 tests in what appears to be a wonderful purple patch before WWII with 1135 runs @ 75.66Reckon a few of these are the result of sample size statistics, and the Test stats would have normalized over a longer time.
For thread: Adam Voges
Mike Hussey after 20 Tests would have been a great example too. Pretty sure he was averaging nearly 80 after 20 Tests
I actually think there'd be a decent number, most NZers don't play much domestic cricket once they become a regular in the national side so their domestic record doesn't reflect their improvement over the yearsDon't imagine there'll be many NZers who apply for this thread.