• Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

SENA

S

sumantra

U19 Cricketer
Only after re introduction of cricket in S.A. Only Sub-continent batters. Only ones finished their careers. Only more significant names, who played considerable amount in those countries.

Sachin - 51.30 (avg.)
Dravid - 48.54
Sanga - 45.92
Anwar - 43.35
Younis - 43.35
Yousuf - 42.01
Ganguly - 42.01
Laxman - 40.45
Inzi - 40.38
De Silva - 39.23
Sehwag - 33.41
Mahela - 30.76


Few observations
*Highest Avg in England - Dravid (68.80)
Highest Avg in Australia - Sanga (60.35)
Highest Avg in N. Z - Dravid (63.83)
Highest Avg in S.A - Sachin - (46.44)


* Sachin is the only batsman to have 45+ Avg in S. A. Laxman managed just 40, no one else among the rest has 40+ Avg in S. A.

*Sachin is also the only one who has 40+ Avg in all 4 countries, while Mahela is the only one who has 40- in all of them.

*Though it seems unanimous in CT that Sanga was a better batsman, Dravid though has a better record in Sena, also given the fact that batting in general was much more difficult during 1996-2000 than 2011-2015.

* Rest goes in expected lines for me, except that of De Silva. Expected his Avg. to be a bit higher, what might be reason?
 
Athlai

Athlai

Not Terrible
I generally don't think there is heaps to read into by seperating our this bloc. Australian conditions are nothing like those in NZ or England who admittedly have somewhat similar conditions (the Duke vs Kookaburra giving very different playing conditions though).

And then SA isn't really like them either..

I could see plenty of batsman really enjoying Australian conditions that just couldn't succeed vs NZ/Eng conditions and vice versa.
 
S

sumantra

U19 Cricketer
Athlai said:
I generally don't think there is heaps to read into by seperating our this bloc. Australian conditions are nothing like those in NZ or England who admittedly have somewhat similar conditions (the Duke vs Kookaburra giving very different playing conditions though).

And then SA isn't really like them either..

I could see plenty of batsman really enjoying Australian conditions that just couldn't succeed vs NZ/Eng conditions and vice versa.
Click to expand...
That's why it makes sense to include all 4 of them may be, the ranking seemed, to me, pretty fair to their overall ability barring one or two like De Silva...
 
Flem274*

Flem274*

123/5
Athlai said:
I generally don't think there is heaps to read into by seperating our this bloc. Australian conditions are nothing like those in NZ or England who admittedly have somewhat similar conditions (the Duke vs Kookaburra giving very different playing conditions though).

And then SA isn't really like them either..

I could see plenty of batsman really enjoying Australian conditions that just couldn't succeed vs NZ/Eng conditions and vice versa.
Click to expand...
pretty much

current indian side a classic example - they love pace on the ball and reasonable bounce (everyone hates steep bounce, so of course they hate jamieson) but they're almost allergic to movement, in part because they have plenty of relatively wide defenders.

australia is its own thing, england their own thing, nz and SA hybrids of the former two to different extents.

i'd say asia varies more than we give credit for too. sri lanka (at least when we tour) has plenty in the air for the quicks, india sharp fast turn and a little bit for the quicks, UAE turns but games seem more attritional but nothing for the quicks and bangladesh decks are literally dried mud.
 
Daemon

Daemon

Request Your Custom Title Now!
Athlai said:
I generally don't think there is heaps to read into by seperating our this bloc. Australian conditions are nothing like those in NZ or England who admittedly have somewhat similar conditions (the Duke vs Kookaburra giving very different playing conditions though).

And then SA isn't really like them either..

I could see plenty of batsman really enjoying Australian conditions that just couldn't succeed vs NZ/Eng conditions and vice versa.
Click to expand...
I think the main reasons for separating this block out are:

- Generally speaking the conditions are very different to those in the subcontinent
- These four teams generally have had pretty good bowlers for their home conditions at any given point in time

This carve out serves a very specific purpose and is largely only useful for subcontinent bats - it gives you a good idea of who can adapt best to alien conditions and challenging bowling, without having stats skewed by monster series against weaker opposition. You could argue that at various points the WI should be included, but they’ve been too inconsistent for that.

Of course the conditions in each of those countries are different, but imo that’s precisely the reason looking at these stats indicates adaptability.
 
Starfighter

Starfighter

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
SANE

Cricket is supposed to be played on grass. Yes that includes the pitch. If you're shaving it off, it's artificial, unless the outfield is bare as well.

honestbharani said:
ANUS
Click to expand...
Scotland has its own cricket team, as does Ireland. I suggest you keep your thoughts to yourself.
 
Salamuddin

Salamuddin

International Debutant
EASI - kiwis have it easy. They should thump India and South Africa and Australia away now they have a pace attack greater than the Windies in their heyday.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Top