Sports 🏏 Black Caps
- Thread starter jonesy101
- Start date
NZWarriors.com
PM to me by a poster:
1) Yes this is an acknowledged problem. It is not so much pitches that are variable, although they very much are, the bigger problem is the variability in the international bowling attacks from each era to era. Eg, the 1980s averages are often observed as being a bit lower as the West Indies fearsome attack was in its pomp. And also to your point it has been observed there were more green tops in the 1980s than now.
2) One person on the site I used to belong to made standardised test averages where they discounted or raised people's batting averages by up to 3 or 4 runs based on the decade they came from and he factored in everything into account such as the strength of the bowling oppositions. There was no real changing of the guard at the top of the all time great test batting averages and the only real adjustments were of interest to trainspotters such as perhaps, and I am making this up, Stephen Fleming might have had his batting average lifted from 40 to 43 and Crowe from 45 to 48. But really the pantheon and conclusions and pecking orders weren't greatly re-shuffled by his analysis so perhaps that is a partial answer to your question.
3) In general test match batting averages are regarded as being highly reflective how good someone is and the rankings are perceived as allowing comparisons between players from the 1960s to today on an apples to apples basis by most people. Many don't like going too much further back than that though in terms of giving credibility to older stats. While Bradman's 99.94 is reveered and everyone thinks he deserves it and was that good. Cricket from that era of the 1920s 19030s and earlier doesn't show well in some footage. The fast bowlers like Larwood were genuinely as good as anything today and the spinners were as good as Ashwin is today however there were a plethora of nuffy bowlers in the attacks who gave the good bowlers a rest and the likes of Hammond and even Bradman could fill their boots against bowlers about as good as Colin Munro's bowling if you remember him. So this allowed the top batsman respite before the fast bowler was reintroduced.
In general the point I am making here is that you most analysts readily compare across generations back about as far back as 1960 and then they start making caveats and being more careful.
In Summary - people tend to be aware each decade is easier to harder than the previous but they just compare the averages anyway and then if challenged concede that the person yes has an inflated average because of the era it is or a deflated average as the case maybe. Again because the variance would "only" be 3 or 4 runs if normalised then people don't get too concerned about this issue.
It does become heavily discussed when making a list of the greatest 50 players of all time in exact order but for all of us 50 runs is something of a gold standard for truly great batsman and has been for over 120 years. And low twenties is the target average for all bowlers and has been for over a century as well (exempting the 1800s when some demon bowlers averages 12 or 13 in a season of county cricket).
- Thread starter
- #1,863
Great to see they are considering Nathan Smith for the England tests. Has been bowling well domestically for the last couple of seasons and can hold a bat too. Sounds like they may also move Blundell down a spot to number 7.
Possible 11 for the first test?
1 Latham
2 Conway
3 Williamson
4 Ravindra
5 Mitchell
6 Phillips
7 Blundell
8 Smith
9 Henry
10 Southee
11 O'Rourke
12th Santner
Possible 11 for the first test?
1 Latham
2 Conway
3 Williamson
4 Ravindra
5 Mitchell
6 Phillips
7 Blundell
8 Smith
9 Henry
10 Southee
11 O'Rourke
12th Santner
NZWarriors.com
If you would like to remove these advertisements, please do so by registering a free account
How long until they switch from Blundell to Mitch Hay? I'm thinking it must be soonish. Possibly Blundell's last test summer?
NZWarriors.com
If you would like to remove these advertisements, please do so by registering a free account
Conway is not up to test standard, not even close.
- Thread starter
- #1,869
At 34 now that's a real possibility. He made a couple of errors with the glove work in the India series but by and large he did some great things behind the stumps. Was particularly gutsy in that searing heat in Mumbai when he got hit in the head twice by deliveries that spun viciously off the wicket and solidered on. Sadly though with averaging less than 20 with the bat in recent times this is simply not enough, particularly at 6.
NZWarriors.com
If you would like to remove these advertisements, please do so by registering a free account
Heck no he broke his thumb keeping at T20 last year, before that broke his hand punching his own bat, and see how nippy and jumpy he was batting on an uneven pitch in the 2nd test? Delicate hands
Southee chuffed about playing last Test series against England and McCullum https://www.espncricinfo.com/story/...-against-england-and-brendon-mccullum-1459745
Southee bows out: England tour to mark end of test career
Tim Southee will retire from test cricket after England tour, ending 18-year career.
NZWarriors.com
If you would like to remove these advertisements, please do so by registering a free account
They didn't give Wagner much of a send off but be highly unlikely he doesn't play given his long service, particularly as it's at home and he is likely to swing the ball and take wickets in our conditions. I'm sure his decision will have been discussed with Stead so probably not any presuming going on.
Last edited:
John Nick
Contributor
The point is simply its not his decision.
The right thing to do is just retire
NZWarriors.com
If you would like to remove these advertisements, please do so by registering a free account
Been frustrated with Southee at various times throughout his career (particulary his batting where he just didnt seem to want to show any application to becoming a genuine all rounder,,,,,he had the potential) but i dont think you can doubt he's given great service to NZ cricket.
His partnership with Boult was probably the main driving factor behind our most successful Test cricket era. While not quite Lillee/Thomson, Waqar/Wasim levels, along with Broad/Anderson was one of the best new ball bowling partnerships of their era.
Henry and ORourke should be our first 2 seamers picked now but back on NZ pitches Southee is likely to play all tests as well (still crazy tho Patel misses out this series despite winning them their last Test taking 11 wickets......we so need to develop more pitches that'll take turn)/
His partnership with Boult was probably the main driving factor behind our most successful Test cricket era. While not quite Lillee/Thomson, Waqar/Wasim levels, along with Broad/Anderson was one of the best new ball bowling partnerships of their era.
Henry and ORourke should be our first 2 seamers picked now but back on NZ pitches Southee is likely to play all tests as well (still crazy tho Patel misses out this series despite winning them their last Test taking 11 wickets......we so need to develop more pitches that'll take turn)/
NZWarriors.com
If you would like to remove these advertisements, please do so by registering a free account
- Thread starter
- #1,879
Regarding Southee's retirement he will definitely play in the first test, but the next two will depend on whether they will think the wicket will take turn. He will probably play all 3 though and it will be a great way to finish a brilliant career. And to all you selectors out there Sears and Jamieson are injured, Nathan Smith is going to debut and O'Rourke is still very new so Southee's experience will be valuable for the series.
