Those numbers were for the entire length of their test career, without taking into account their injury/ other breaks.Kapil really was a workhorse wasn't he?
Do those numbers just take their total balls bowled and divide by the length of their Test career, whether or not they were playing every year?
EDIT - yes, it appears that they do. In which case yeah, Imran is certainly hurt by the fact he didn't play any Test cricket in 1972, 1973 or 1975, and didn't bowl a ball in anger in 1984. Taking this into consideration, his average number would still be behind the others, but not by quite as much.
It's an indication of Botham's massive workload during his peak in the late '70s and early '80s that he didn't play any Test cricket in 1988 or 1990, and hardly bowled in his final couple of years after that either, and yet his average is still so high.
Yes.Donald is same age as Akram. Akram's peak started 4 years before Donald could debut. So we probably missed out on roughly4 years of Donald's peak probably.
D R O P P E DImran was a fairly fit bowler in normal circumstances, his shin injury was an unusually bad one that stopped him from bowling for two years.
I am genuinely curious how Imran missed out 28 tests in that period, even with his two year absence.
Not only that, I think some of the tests played during this "peak" period had Imran playing only as a batsman because his shin injury didn't allow him to bowl.He played 2/3rd of this allotted tests. Lillee played less than 60%. Wasim and Waqar played 75%-80%. The majority of ATG fast bowlers played 85%+ of tests in their peak decades which is 20%-30% more than Imran.
It's not useful to say Imran played as much as Hadlee because he missed a lot more. Absolute tests played cannot be used to absolve Imran as in absolute tests terms, McGrath played close to twice as many in a decade. The percentage of tests played is a more useful measure.
Flat/home track bully and easy batting era. Sachin had sadly already waned by that point and although he had a great second peak it wasn’t the same as the 90s Sachin.Jaywardene made more runs, though not more centuries (Bradman made more of both, but he doesn't count).
Speaking of Jayawardene, Sangakkara is another one I'm a little surprised isn't on that list.
Yeah, not trying to argue for Jayawardene over Tendulkar but any means - just noting your point about who had the most runs on that table.Flat/home track bully and easy batting era. Sachin had sadly already waned by that point and although he had a great second peak it wasn’t the same as the 90s Sachin.
Always crazy to think 2 of the best 4 openers of all time were actually partners.Hebert Sutcliffe's 33 test peak gave him 3319 runs @69.14.
Batting records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPNcricinfo.com
stats.espncricinfo.com
Jack Hobbs' 33 test peak saw him score 3261 runs @65.22. But this one is across 15 years !
Batting records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPNcricinfo.com
stats.espncricinfo.com
Without consideringAlways crazy to think 2 of the best 4 openers of all time were actually partners.
For this exercise, I took a peak as a minimum of 33 tests in a stretch but surely it can be more.Why is 33 the metric for batting peaks? Smith, ponting and tendulkar all had period's averaging 70+ over 50 test's if memory serves.
As mentioned, Imran also skipped entire home series in 87 and 88 for different reasons even after his injury.Not only that, I think some of the tests played during this "peak" period had Imran playing only as a batsman because his shin injury didn't allow him to bowl.
Yes, to me Tendulkar's consistency across countries and over time sets him apart from every other batsman.Yeah, not trying to argue for Jayawardene over Tendulkar but any means - just noting your point about who had the most runs on that table.
I've said it before but what really sets Tendulkar apart isn't a 20- or 33- or even 50-Test peak, it's the sheer sustained excellence over such an extraordinarily long time. Over a period of 155 Tests across 18 years, he averaged 59.
Yeah, tbf, I don't want to come across like I'm bashing Imran - he's one of my favourite cricketers of all time. He's still easily the cricketer of the 70s/80s and the third best cricketer of all time for me. However, there's a reason why that oft quoted stat about him averaging 19 with the ball and 50 with the bat over 10 years as an all rounder sounds a bit too good to be true. It's still mind-blowing but there are a few T & C associated with those numbers.Not only that, I think some of the tests played during this "peak" period had Imran playing only as a batsman because his shin injury didn't allow him to bowl.
View attachment 29641
33 test peaks since that list:
Player Team Start Date Runs Average 100s 50s Virat Kohli Ind 2016-11-01 3500 (exactly) 70 13 10 Steve Smith Aus 2014-12-01 3671 75.22 16 12 Kane Williamson NZ 2013-10-09 3422 65.8 12 17 Joe Root Eng 2014-06-14 3148 61.72 8 19
Kohli would squeak into that table while Smith would be second.
Yes, I was abiding by that 33 test rule. Kohli had a 34 test streak averaging 72 during his absolute peak with a double century on either end of it and I had to exclude one of them to make it 33 tests.Steve's Smith peak from 2014 to 2019 is 46 tests with an average of 77! I forgot to include him in my XI but I think he belongs there.
Bradman's was probably decent too.Will be interesting to see longer peak of 50 tests. I imagine Smith will dominate.