The ATG Teams General arguing/discussing thread (white ball edition)

[jimmy101]

Keith Stackpole a T20 specialist?

 

[aussie tragic]

What should have been an awesome ODI XI

1. Michael Slater
2. Rick Mckosker
3. Ian Chappell
4. Kim Hughes
5. David Hookes
6. Doug Walters
7. Rod Marsh
8. Gary Gilmour
9. Dennis Lillee
10. Max Walker
11. Jeff Thomson

*Chappell and Walters may have struggled with their 10 overs but meh, worth it for their awesome batting

 

[TheJediBrah]

No way.

Conditions favour openers way more now than ever before and Finch and Warner while good are not as good as the guys that did what they did but in tougher circumstances.

Very good take from Stephen here. Back in the days of Gilchrist and M Waugh (and probably even more so in earlier years) opening the batting in ODIs was often a very tough job. These days it's almost universally the best place to bat in white-ball cricket.

 

[SillyCowCorner1]

I'm tempted to put Ricardo Powell into our 3rd eleven.

 

[honestbharani]

Very good take from Stephen here. Back in the days of Gilchrist and M Waugh (and probably even more so in earlier years) opening the batting in ODIs was often a very tough job. These days it's almost universally the best place to bat in white-ball cricket.

Yep 15 overs with just 2 men out. 2 guys within 15 yards irrespective of the variant of road you are playing on. Balls bouncing above shoulder high are deemed no-balls. And no DRS. Must have sucked to be an opening batsman indeed.

 

[Daemon]

I don’t know if opening in the past was the toughest place to bat, but it’s undeniably become the best position to be in these days.

 

[honestbharani]

It was the best position from 1996 to 2011 too. And my argument is that it has gotten at least slightly harder since then, relatively speaking.

 

[Spark]

ODI rules kept changing because the balance between bat and ball was increasingly less a balance and more a 1-ton anvil being dropped on the side of "bat", so the administrators desperately kept trying to tinker with the rules to make it less of a day-long T20, which it was rapidly at risk of becoming.

Which is to say the ODI rules changing in favour of the fielding team is evidence of bowlers becoming less effective in ODIs, not more.

 

[honestbharani]

ODI rules kept changing because the balance between bat and ball was increasingly less a balance and more a 1-ton anvil being dropped on the side of "bat", so the administrators desperately kept trying to tinker with the rules to make it less of a day-long T20, which it was rapidly at risk of becoming.

Which is to say the ODI rules changing in favour of the fielding team is evidence of bowlers becoming less effective in ODIs, not more.

Sure, but hat does not mean the measures themselves failed. I will say the bouncer rule is the best example. And while challenges for batsmen have increasingly decreased due to the two new balls, less reverse swing etc., for opening batsmen specifically I think today there is slightly more questions asked of them than what was the norm from 1996-2011.

 

[TheJediBrah]

It was the best position from 1996 to 2011 too. And my argument is that it has gotten at least slightly harder since then, relatively speaking.

lol it definitely hasn't gotten harder

 

[honestbharani]

lol it definitely hasn't gotten harder

Is that why #pinchhitters are still doing well all over the world?

 

[NotMcKenzie]

Put it this way via statsguru:

From 1996 to 2011, openers (positions 1 and 2) averaged over 35 in only two years ('01 and '09) while no other year did they average over 33.49 (and a low of 30.28 in 2004).
From 2012 to present, they are averaging over 36 in all years from 2015 onwards except 2018 (35.1), with a low of 33.29 in 2013.

So if opening has become harder in the latter period, it doesn't show in the stats

 

[honestbharani]

As I said, it is counteracted by the fact that there has been a rise in T20 and the overall ODI scores. Try looking at overall ODI scores and what percentage those averages were. Another case where stats do not tell you anything coz of the absolute lack of context.

 

[stephen]

Overall averages and strike rates for top 8 sides:

Batting records | One-Day Internationals | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPNcricinfo.com

Overall averages and strike rates for batting positions 1-7:

Batting records | One-Day Internationals | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPNcricinfo.com

Overall averages and strike rates for batting positions 1-2:

Batting records | One-Day Internationals | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPNcricinfo.com

In 1990 openers averaged 30 (SR 60), batsmen 1-7 averaged 30 (SR 67).

In 1995 openers averaged 31 (SR 66), batsmen 1-7 averaged 30 (SR 71).

In 2000 openers averaged 31 (SR 73), batsmen 1-7 averaged 29 (SR 71).

In 2005 openers averaged 30 (SR 78), batsmen 1-7 averaged 32 (SR 78).

In 2010 openers averaged 31 (SR 84), batsmen 1-7 averaged 34 (SR 83).

In 2015 openers averaged 38 (SR 94), batsmen 1-7 averaged 37 (SR 92).

In 2019 openers averaged 43 (SR 92), batsmen 1-7 averaged 40 (SR 92).

Make of that what you will. But I will say that the jump in averages has been far more pronounced for openers in the last 5 years than for all batsmen (who have progressed more or less linearly over time).

 

[NotMcKenzie]

As I said, it is counteracted by the fact that there has been a rise in T20 and the overall ODI scores. Try looking at overall ODI scores and what percentage those averages were. Another case where stats do not tell you anything coz of the absolute lack of context.

No it is not counteracted by that. If openers are scoring a smaller percentage a runs from a team's total while simultaneously averaging more, than batting has got easier both for openers and also for everyone else.

Furthermore, openers are not really affected by the ultimate team total: no matter what it is, they are the first to score, and will probably not have the responsibility of adding the last x percentage of runs score to make the total. They are affected by the conditions and the relative difficulty of facing the opposing bowlers, i.e., how easy is is to open.

 

[stephen]

Averages and strike rates for batsmen (minnows excl.) each year.



Averages for batsmen (minnows excl.) each year.

 

[stephen]

Before 1996, batsmen 3-7 struck substantially faster than the openers. Then Jayasuriya revolutionised the game and openers caught up to the lower order in strike rates.

Openers have averaged slightly more than 3-7 batsmen since the late 70s, though sometimes 3-7s average what the openers do.



Tendulkar vs the average openers.



Bevan vs the average 3-7.

 

[stephen]

Some more charts (just for fun):



Ponting vs Tendulkar



Ponting vs Gilchrist



Rohit vs Tendulkar

 

[Daemon]

It was the best position from 1996 to 2011 too. And my argument is that it has gotten at least slightly harder since then, relatively speaking.

Not sure if I get you - are you saying that (a) batting 1-2 relative to 3-6 has become slightly harder or (b) opening the batting now is harder than it was from '96-'11?

 

[honestbharani]

Not sure if I get you - are you saying that (a) batting 1-2 relative to 3-6 has become slightly harder or (b) opening the batting now is harder than it was from '96-'11?

Both cannot be true at the same time?