Placing our bets on "Test Cricket's Young Fab Four"

[Daemon]

KW being rated so highly on this forum was always kind of spurious IMO. Aesthetics over output.

Errr what?

 

[Cabinet96]

Not trying to argue that he didn't deserve it but think CW is the sort of place that will try to prop up a guy like Williamson a little bit more just because he's always struggling to get mainstream attention compared to the stars of the big 3 teams. I imagine at the time the media attention was mostly on Root and Kohli (Smith hadn't had his first Bradman series yet) and it's classic CW to try and correctly predict that Williamson is in fact better. Plus you have the New Zealand contingent who have every right to give their support to one of their own who is comparable to the best Australian and Indian batsman around, as it's not been a particularly common thing for them.

Again this isn't to devalue KW's legitimacy at the time, because in the 18 months up until the poll there really was no better performing young batsman Batting records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPN Cricinfo

 

[Spark]

Right, that's my point. He's obviously top four in the world, but look at the poll results.

 

[Cabinet96]

In fact even since the poll was made, which was just after Kohli's horror England tour and just before his true breakout in Australia, Williamson is averaging just as much. Batting records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPN Cricinfo

 

[Flem274*]

Right, that's my point. He's obviously top four in the world, but look at the poll results.

it doesn't read that way tbf. aesthetics over output sounded a lot like you were calling him a world class ian bell, where he looks great but only good for like a 70 or something.

edit - looking at the poll, i'm surprised so few people have voted. kohli seems to have pulled the most global voting base

 

[OverratedSanity]

There are a lot of Root 50s which look fine for the average, but the team isn't actually that much better off than when he got in. Because he scores his 50s really fast, and usually is the dominant figure in the partnership, there are a lot of times where he's gotten out and left the side 3/80. 4/120, 5/150 etc which still has the team in trouble.

Yep, this is exactly the problem. Imo, if Root got his 70s-80s in 230 balls instead of 130, it'd be a more valuable contribution in general. Sort of like what Malan did in this innings.The extra time you spend in the middle possibly contributes to a longer partnership, and makes the lineup look more stable. It's exacerbated by how prone England's lineup is to a collapse.

 

[Black_Warrior]

Root's frustrating as hell in tests these days (and has been underwhelming generally in the Ashes this time), but I don't think Williamson is definitively a tier above - I think you could argue either way (I'd personally still have Root slightly ahead - I think people on here often undervalue his consistency). Don't think Azhar should be up there with the others either, would normally quibble over Warner too but tbf his last couple of series have been excellent.

Yeah expected raised eyebrows about Azhar..mainly because most of his performances knocks go under the radar and no one's really watching the series he is involved in.

Since 2014, Away



Since 2015, these are the away records

Smith; 63.93
Williamson; 63.67
Azhar; 53.63
Kohli; 53.25
Root; 50.91


Since 2014, Home



His record is very much in the same conversation and same league except for Smith who averages 88 at home in that period.

And the reason I included Warner in this conversation because he is now part of the new Fab 5 or Big 5

Big four? What about Warner? - ESPNcricinfo

 

[TheJediBrah]

Warner needs a few more big away performances. The Bangladesh series was a good start, but he needs to step up next Ashes in England in particular.

 

[Black_Warrior]

Wrt the poll, Riggins and Spikey were on the money. ***** the most wrong as per uz.

I missed voting in this poll. It was created on the 30th August 2014. If I were to vote then, I would have voted for Kohli who also has the highest number of votes. Smith in comparison has 9 votes which makes me wonder how much of our assessment of batsmen and the way we view them is shaped by what we have been told repeatedly what 'correct' batting is.
Kohli just looks the most 'correct'. He seems to follow all the rules, and looks compact and aesthetic. This is how you are meant to play a shot right? This is what I have been hearing from commentators, players, analysts, coaches etc.

Watching Smith's hundred at Brisbane on Day 3, when he batted for 2 hours to score 20 odd runs, I was thinking to myself that maybe, just maybe now C9 lot would perhaps re examine what they have been feeding us about how to play here. Here was a guy who hardly goes on the front foot, doesn't take that big stride, stays in his crease to most deliveries. And C9 lot love him, they hail him, celebrate him and I'm hoping maybe they'll start appreciating different ways of approaching the game, how there's no one way. But then I remembered that Australia's greatest fast bowler took 560 wickets bowling at 125 kph and they celebrate him and then turn around the next minute and say you're not a real bowler unless you bowl 150 kph in Australia.

 

[Black_Warrior]

Not trying to argue that he didn't deserve it but think CW is the sort of place that will try to prop up a guy like Williamson a little bit more just because he's always struggling to get mainstream attention compared to the stars of the big 3 teams. I imagine at the time the media attention was mostly on Root and Kohli (Smith hadn't had his first Bradman series yet) and it's classic CW to try and correctly predict that Williamson is in fact better. Plus you have the New Zealand contingent who have every right to give their support to one of their own who is comparable to the best Australian and Indian batsman around, as it's not been a particularly common thing for them.

Again this isn't to devalue KW's legitimacy at the time, because in the 18 months up until the poll there really was no better performing young batsman Batting records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPN Cricinfo

The only thing going in KW's favour here is that there is a considerable New Zealand fan base on this forum. Otherwise, you generally go unnoticed unless you belong in the Big 3 teams or play against them. This is not CW's fault, it's more which series gets what kind of coverage. Azhar has brilliant numbers in the last 3-4 years, but no one here rates him because the series he features in barely make the news.

 

[Spark]

Azhar Ali isn't really of the same generation as the big 4 though, is he? He's 32-33 already IIRC, and it took him a while to really hit this level in Tests.

 

[Daemon]

Yep. We were talking about the fab 4 even when YK, Misbah, Amla, AB etc were all scoring runs.

It's true that Ali does fly under the radar though.

 

[oblongballs]

Yeah expected raised eyebrows about Azhar..mainly because most of his performances knocks go under the radar and no one's really watching the series he is involved in.

Since 2014, Away



Since 2015, these are the away records

Smith; 63.93
Williamson; 63.67
Azhar; 53.63
Kohli; 53.25
Root; 50.91


Since 2014, Home



His record is very much in the same conversation and same league except for Smith who averages 88 at home in that period.

And the reason I included Warner in this conversation because he is now part of the new Fab 5 or Big 5

Big four? What about Warner? - ESPNcricinfo

It's a crime that Azhar Ali is oft omitted from these discussions but I guess a lot of that is because the so called fab four all came about in the test/ODI/T20 arena in and around each other. I know Kohli came about earlier but his test debut and number of matches match the others.

Also, there is another issue, Ali is a very good test bat and has shown to be a serviceable ODI bat, when talking about the truly top players, all formats are considered and the fab four are ahead of Ali in that regard.

Personally, I think Kohli is the best when taking into account all formats, followed by Root, then Kane and then Warner, with Smith not quite making into a cross format top 4 imo.

 

[vcs]

If you are including Ali, you might as well also bring in Pujara (I know he doesn't make runs away from Asia but Ali doesn't dominate as much as him at home either), and then Warner, Elgar, Ross Taylor (and probably a few others I'm forgetting) would also have to be part of the conversation.

 

[Coronis]

Fun fact: Root has the worst conversion rate of any batsman to average over 50, aside from Jack Ryder.

 

[Furball]

I'm a big fan of the cheer system devised a few pages ago

If Root still averages about the same as the others I don't care if he doesn't make as many 100s. It just means he fails less as well.

He'll be contributing to less wins though.

 

[vic_orthdox]

It's become such a massive monkey on Joe Roots back that the longer it goes on the harder it seems to it's going to be for him to break free from it.

I think Bijed is right that the answer probably lies in the management. Anyone that thinks it's a case of Joe Root not giving a **** is way off the money......look at his reaction yesterday when he went out. You'd have to be a hard hearted **** not to feel for him in some small way......the bloke clearly cares so much.

But the reason I think it's management and not just on the player is look at our feckin scorecards......the whole side bar the odd exception is the same, Root gets 70, 80's whereas the other blokes are getting 20's and 30's because he is better. But the core problem is still there amongst them all. They can keep talking about 50's needing to be 150's to win games but in 5 tests (bar Cook's outing in Melb) the story has been the same throughout.

All that said, it would be wrong to look at these conversion failures amongst all our batsmen without paying credit to the Aussie bowlers. They never let up and keep coming at you for the whole day, it only takes 1 ball when you're not 100% switched on and they'll get you.

Similar thing happened with Stephen Fleming for a while, without the audacious start.

 

[Slifer]

Fun fact: Root has the worst conversion rate of any batsman to average over 50, aside from Jack Ryder.

Worst than Chanderpaul??

 

[Coronis]

Worst than Chanderpaul??

Yup, 26.53% to 31.25%.

 

[TheJediBrah]

He'll be contributing to less wins though.

Nah I don't buy that.

A 50 can contribute to a win, even if not as much as a hundred