Top 30 batsmen of the modern era (1990s -Current)

[trundler]

No. 7

Younis Khan - 139.2

View attachment 28434

Points: 139.2
Span: 2004-15
Peak: 2004-07

Overall points: 142.2
Overseas points: 130.1
Best bowling attack points: 151.9
Peak points: 149.1

Runs: 10099
Average: 52.05

You moaning ****s made me miss this glorious post.

Pakistan's finest and a true champion. Well deserved

 

[venkyrenga]

Which year you took for
a) Dravid
b) Sangakkara
C) Younis khan

The best 12-year period
a) Dravid - 1996-07
b) Sangakkara - 2003-14
C) Younis khan - 2004-15

 

[Lillian Thomson]

You moaning ****s made me miss this glorious post.

No one is moaning. The OP states "Let me know what you guys think." So that's what we've done. I've only used the word "bonkers" three times, which I think is quite generous.

 

[Coronis]

No one is moaning. The OP states "Let me know what you guys think." So that's what we've done. I've only used the word "bonkers" three times, which I think is quite generous.

For some reason this post, unlike any of the others, now has that song stuck in my head.

6 seems about right for Ponting, was major fun to watch at his best though. Interested to see how the top 5 will turn out

 

[sunilz]

So how many Aussies consider Steve Waugh better than Ponting? ?

 

[ankitj]

So Kallis > Ponting again, just like in DoG's ranking. That's always been my view although on this forum for some reason popular opinion is that Ponting was in a class higher.

 

[sunilz]

So Kallis > Ponting again, just like in DoG's ranking. That's always been my view although on this forum for some reason popular opinion is that Ponting was in a class higher.

Because Ponting was aggressive batsman who are always rated higher if compared to similar average batsman.

 

[miscer]

I think the methodology and the logic behind it is not clear to some. So let me explain a bit. Lets consider the below example.

	Inn	No	Runs	Avg	SR
A	100​	0​	5000​	50​	60​
B	100​	20​	4000​	50​	60​

There is not one metric in which B is better than A. One might argue that B has been dismissed 20 times lesser but that is because he has faced less number of deliveries. Their balls faced per dismissal is the same. Whereas A has scored more runs than B hence deserving of more points. Whether A is really better than B is another matter but clearly he is deserving of more points because he has scored more runs.

Another way of wording 'batting avg. adjusted for not outs' would be 'runs per innings adjusted for not outs'. A batsman with an avg. of 50 means each time he ended up not out he would have scored 50 more runs. I am knocking off 25% of it because he did not actually score those runs.

I know that batting avg and not outs can be an endless debate. But I will get back to the countdown now.

Not sure I agree. You can't say a whole lot B could have still average 50 given it took bowlers 50 runs each to get him out the other 80 times... Why is A any better either?

 

[_00_deathscar]

It's not like you're going to have 2 #4 batsman and one of them will have double the not outs.

Isn’t that Lara vs every other #4 batsman?

 

[TheJediBrah]

So how many Aussies consider Steve Waugh better than Ponting? ?

I think it's pretty close. Waugh was crazy good against some of the best bowlers

So Kallis > Ponting again, just like in DoG's ranking. That's always been my view although on this forum for some reason popular opinion is that Ponting was in a class higher.

Ponting was in a class higher

 

[Victor Ian]

How long was Waugh's crazy good period? He was **** early, and I think trailed off late. Does he make 10 years crazy good, or just 5?

 

[Victor Ian]

Ok. ATG from 93 onwards for about 11 yearsish.

Batting records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPNcricinfo.com

stats.espncricinfo.com

 

[Chrish]

Am I the weird one for liking Chanderpaul’s batting? I found him fascinating to watch. I know he gets bad rep on this forum but I have a very fun memory watching his 100 from 67 balls and wi chased down 400+ total in 4th innings.

 

[anil1405]

Am I the weird one for liking Chanderpaul’s batting? I found him fascinating to watch. I know he gets bad rep on this forum but I have a very fun memory watching his 100 from 67 balls and wi chased down 400+ total in 4th innings.

You're not alone.

 

[Burgey]

So if they were so good, why they could not crack in to the team? The sentence itself is a contradiction. The players are not picked because the selectors believe they cannot replace the current players, despite being at the form of their life. If somebody was averaging 75+ in FCC, no matter how strong the team is, there is room for such players, unless they have glaring technical deficiencies / petty politics.

No, it's not that simple at all. The issue is whether, depsite piling on a stack of runs, there is a place available. When Martyn debuted the incumbent middle order was Boon, Border, Waugh, Waugh. He only got a game because S Waugh was injured. It doesn't mean the selectors thought he couldn't play or wasn't up to it, it's also a question of whether there is a spot available via either injury or poor form by an incumbent. In 1993/94 Boon was one of the best players in the world, Border was Border, M Waugh was coming off an excellent Ashes and s Waugh had just started his run of crazy 90s greatness. There just wasn't a spot for him, despite how well he was playing domestically.

 

[Burgey]

But if he did get out at 9:59, would it make his innings less worthy? That's what it would mean if you don't penalise not outs.

You are arguing the opposite of what you believe.

I think if Lara had have got out for 149 instead of being 153 not out i 99 against Australia, the innings would be remembered very differently.

 

[Burgey]

So how many Aussies consider Steve Waugh better than Ponting? ?

Ponting was certainly the best Australian batsman since Chappell and Border, and until Smith came along, arguably the best since Bradman.

 

[Flem274*]

hussey copping a longevity penalty for only playing 79 tests is a bit silly. that's a full career outside australia/england/india.

 

[Spark]

Am I the weird one for liking Chanderpaul’s batting? I found him fascinating to watch. I know he gets bad rep on this forum but I have a very fun memory watching his 100 from 67 balls and wi chased down 400+ total in 4th innings.

I don't actually think it was his style that got him such a mixed reputation here. Elsewhere, maybe, but here it was specifically about how he approached batting in the latter part of his career, especially when batting with the lower order.

 

[Migara]

No, it's not that simple at all. The issue is whether, depsite piling on a stack of runs, there is a place available. When Martyn debuted the incumbent middle order was Boon, Border, Waugh, Waugh. He only got a game because S Waugh was injured. It doesn't mean the selectors thought he couldn't play or wasn't up to it, it's also a question of whether there is a spot available via either injury or poor form by an incumbent. In 1993/94 Boon was one of the best players in the world, Border was Border, M Waugh was coming off an excellent Ashes and s Waugh had just started his run of crazy 90s greatness. There just wasn't a spot for him, despite how well he was playing domestically.

And as selectors predicted at that time Mark Waugh never became as gret as his brother, Boon or Border. Argument would have been true if Mark has retired with an average of 57.