The Cricket Thread

[TBoyleSuperstar]

I heard Brett Geeves on the radio re Henriques and he had some interesting things to say.

Says he thinks his value is as a bowling all-rounder but he simply doesn;t do enough out of the hand to be dangerous at test level. Also said he didn't think he had it in him to hold down number 6.

He does seem to be that few yards too slow for test cricket to be really damaging, though might be a bit more of a handful of the English seaming wickets. It's hard to judge him on the wickets he's had to bowl on over there. In saying that, unless he can hold down a top 6 position, then he shouldn't be in the team. The only time you have an allrounder int he side is when he can hold down a spot as a batsman or bowler, his second discipline is a bonus. Kallis, Vettori, Flintoff, Gilchrist, Flower, Cairns etc all held a spot in the side on one discipline, the other was a bonus. An allrounder that can't hold a spot as one or the other, is just taking the spot of a guy that can, thus weakening the side

 

[Henry Jr]

What do people believe an alrounder has to avg with both bat and ball inorder to indeed be an alrounder?

 

[TBoyleSuperstar]

What do people believe an alrounder has to avg with both bat and ball inorder to indeed be an alrounder?

I would think that both their averages with bat and ball should be about the same. Ideally, a bowling average of around 30 or under, and a batting average of at least mid 30s

 

[grizzlym]

He does seem to be that few yards too slow for test cricket to be really damaging, though might be a bit more of a handful of the English seaming wickets. It's hard to judge him on the wickets he's had to bowl on over there. In saying that, unless he can hold down a top 6 position, then he shouldn't be in the team. The only time you have an allrounder int he side is when he can hold down a spot as a batsman or bowler, his second discipline is a bonus. Kallis, Vettori, Flintoff, Gilchrist, Flower, Cairns etc all held a spot in the side on one discipline, the other was a bonus. An allrounder that can't hold a spot as one or the other, is just taking the spot of a guy that can, thus weakening the side

Agree with your criteria for an all-rounder.

 

[grizzlym]

I would think that both their averages with bat and ball should be about the same. Ideally, a bowling average of around 30 or under, and a batting average of at least mid 30s

I think a bowling allrounder, someone who can come in at 8, for example, can average under 30 with the ball and around 30 with the bat.

A batting allrounder i.e. someone who legitimately holds down number 6, needs to average in the low 40s, I would think. The caveat being a batting all-rounder is the rarest of rare breeds.

 

[eldorado]

Agree with your criteria for an all-rounder.

Agree.

And preferably their second skill would be at the level where they would be on the verge of selection for that skill alone as well.

 

[grizzlym]

To me, guys like Hadlee and, just going off his stats alone (but they are misleading because he basically switched to being a specilaised batsman in his latter career) Imran Khan are the apotheosis of the bowling allrounder. Averaging in the very low 20s with the ball, Hadlee hovering in the high twenties with the bat. Keith Miller too had a formidable record as an all-rounder, undoubtedly Australia's best. You can then throw in guys like Dev and Botham, who don't average as well with the ball but still bat well. Botham was a much better batsman than Dev though.

Then with the batting all-rounders, the list is much shorter with Kallis and Sobers leading the charge. These guys are genuine top 6 batsmen, with averages to match the very best, and are much more than just a handy change bowler.

 

[TBoyleSuperstar]

Agree Grizz. Very rare to have a really good batting allrounder. Kallis, Sobers, are the clear standouts, would have loved to have seen how Steve waugh would have turned out if he could have bowled the whole of his career.

Agree with your bowling allrounder comments too. It's funny when you look at a few 'allrounders', their averages are quite similar. Akram for example, averaged 20 with the bat, 22 with the ball, Vettori is 30ish with both, as was Chris Cairns.

Right now, what we need, is a guy like Mark Waugh, who is a top order bat, but can bowl enough overs when needed to give the guys a rest and do a job. Clarkey is this guy, but his back is gone.

 

[Simon_Nesbit]

A good all-rounder should have their batting average higher than their bowling. The bigger the gap, the better the player.

So you could have a 40/40 allrounder (top-order bat, 5th bowler), a 30/30 (#7/8 bat, 4th bowler), and a 20/20 (#8/9 bat, frontline bowler).

Also, Imran Khan batted in the top order for Pakistan for quite some time (perhaps after a back injury?) He ended his career as a quickish medium pacer, but was a tearaway quick to begin with. There seems to be a consistent development in all-rounders batting throughout their career, especially as their bowling begins to deteriorate.

 

[Messenger]

First class all rounder averages

Henriques Bat 31 Ball 28
S. Smith Bat 41 Ball 56
Maxwell Bat 39 Ball 33
Watson Bat 43 Ball 28 (Tests 36/30)
Hopes Bat 32 Ball 28
Hastings Bat 25 Ball 25

And finally

Faux all rounder Mitch Johnson Bat 22 Ball 30 (Tests 22/30 - 50 of his 91 first class matches are Tests)

 

[Messenger]

Also, Imran Khan batted in the top order for Pakistan for quite some time (perhaps after a back injury?) He ended his career as a quickish medium pacer, but was a tearaway quick to begin with. There seems to be a consistent development in all-rounders batting throughout their career, especially as their bowling begins to deteriorate.

We forget how good this guy was - 37 with the bat, 22 with the ball. Very consistent - only passed 50 in 24 of his 126 innings and averaged 37. And in the matches he was captain, he averaged 52 with the bat.

Simon, just one test at four, played four tests at five (including his highest test score). Mostly batted seven (48 tests) but was at his statistical best at six.

http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/player/40560.html?class=1;template=results;type=batting

 

[Langford4FBOTC]

First class all rounder averages

Henriques Bat 31 Ball 28
S. Smith Bat 41 Ball 56
Maxwell Bat 39 Ball 33
Watson Bat 43 Ball 28 (Tests 36/30)
Hopes Bat 32 Ball 28
Hastings Bat 25 Ball 25

And finally

Faux all rounder Mitch Johnson Bat 22 Ball 30 (Tests 22/30 - 50 of his 91 first class matches are Tests)

Based on the stats, you'd focus on Hastings with a view that he's the best bowler and has potential to develop his batting.
But what the stats really bare out is that we don't have test quality all rounder. They're all the 30/30 type which at test level is pretty useless.

I think we have a couple of front line bowlers in Pattinson and Stark who have the potential to develop their batting to a level where they could push their average up above their bowling average.

Of the developing batting talent around the country, I think Lyn is handy with the ball.

But with both the bats and bowlers, pick them on their main attribute, and the other side is just a bonus.

 

[Brishawk]

Has

Based on the stats, you'd focus on Hastings with a view that he's the best bowler and has potential to develop his batting.
But what the stats really bare out is that we don't have test quality all rounder. They're all the 30/30 type which at test level is pretty useless.

I think we have a couple of front line bowlers in Pattinson and Stark who have the potential to develop their batting to a level where they could push their average up above their bowling average.

Of the developing batting talent around the country, I think Lyn is handy with the ball.

But with both the bats and bowlers, pick them on their main attribute, and the other side is just a bonus.

hastings is not a good enough bowler at test level. Isn't quick enough.

Moises seems to me like a guy who will get better at batting more so than bowling and he should be looking to play has a batting all rounder. Too vanilla to be a 4th bowler.

 

[grizzlym]

Jo Burns put in a great performance today. He's the sort of guys I'd be backing.

 

[grizzlym]

Cool article on Cric Info:

Let's start with selections. I mean, I like Moises Henriques. But Moises Henriques? He played a couple of fine hands in the first Test, and took a couple of wickets. But he's scored one (1) first-class century. He's taken 79 first-class scalps at 28, which is okay. But how has it earned him the trip?

They call Glenn Maxwell "Big Show" and that's a cracking nickname. And he took four wickets when the deck was turning on the third day at Hyderabad. And good luck to him. But Maxwell a Test player? A slow-bowling allrounder batting at No. 8? This is Australia's other spinner? I hope he proves me wrong. But his apprenticeship has been short-form giggle cricket, not years of hard-boned sunstroke and slog.

Nathan Lyon has looked one-dimensional the last few months. And he took some tap from MS Dhoni. But everyone did. Now, fair enough you might replace him. But with Xavier Doherty? He has six wickets at 72, including three in Hyderabad. He was picked for this series on the back of two (2) Shield wickets at 80. He's 30-years-old. He's a good fellah, X-Man. But if he was gonna he'd have dunna.

And they took over Steven Smith. Where to start … I mean … why? For the love of dear sweet Mr Lillee why? Steven Smith? In the Test squad? You may want to give someone experience on Indian wickets but don't hand out Test caps to learn if they can cut it.

I don't get it. The keeper's batting at No. 6. There are bowling allrounders at No. 7 and No. 8. Then nine, ten, Jack. Good night, nurse. Remember six batters, keeper and four bowlers? That used to work, didn't it?

http://www.espncricinfo.com/blogs/content/story/623990.html

 

[Langford4FBOTC]

Has
hastings is not a good enough bowler at test level. Isn't quick enough.

Moises seems to me like a guy who will get better at batting more so than bowling and he should be looking to play has a batting all rounder. Too vanilla to be a 4th bowler.

Agree on Hastings. Lion hearted cricketer, but proved he was out of his depth.

Problem with Moises as a batting all rounder is that he ain't one of the top 10 bats in the country. I think you're right in that he's improving his batting and has the potential to continue to do so, but he's coming from a long way back on batting talent alone.

I think the selectors should rule a line through all of the guys on Mess' list.... Speaking of which, what are Mitch Marsh's stats Mess?

 

[Henry Jr]

I think the selectors should rule a line through all of the guys on Mess' list.... Speaking of which, what are Mitch Marsh's stats Mess?

Bat: 22.33 Bowling: 26.64

 

[Langford4FBOTC]

Bat: 22.33 Bowling: 26.64

If he can reverse those numbers over the next 12-18 months, we might have ourselves a decent bowling all rounder. Time will tell.

 

[Henry Jr]

Having just read the book Moneyball, why in cricket aren't we playing the best statistical players instead of players that the selectors think are the solution?

djboonie give us the top avg's for batting and bowling at shield level this year.

 

[Simon_Nesbit]

The capability is there, we've seen it used in some of the broadcasts - to produce a "average vs" by player, country, ground, etc, etc. The statistics kept are detailed enough that those decisions can be made.

There's probably enough ODI and 20/20 cricket played that you could use some of those figures, but unfortunately there just isn't enough real cricket played for it to be of use. In baseball, they might be pulling data from 100s, if not 1000s of at-bats. In cricket we are trying to do the same from only a handful of innings.

An example I use often was George Bailey. Came into my team as an extremely highly rated junior, failed four times (0,0,4,0 IIRC) and was promoted to A-grade, where he averaged 30-odd and scored a ton. Next year he made his Tassie debut. In a Stats example, we would have sent him back to a lower grade, or held onto him for a lot longer.

The same is true (on a much grander scale) at State>International. The SS competition is no longer a great breeding ground as there are too many good-honest players around. Batsman who might struggle against the best bowlers can still average ~40 by beating up on lesser quality bowlers, or taking advantage of flat tracks that are now so common. Bowlers might lack penetration to be successful at test level, but pick up heaps of wickets by being consistent line and length, doing just enough to trouble lesser players.

In England, the theory used to be +-10 per level. A county batting average of ~50 would equate to a test average of ~40, whilst a bowling average in the teens would result in a <30 test average. Around the same time, Australian players were almost par with their domestic results. It's one reason why Mike Hussey's (and many others) FC stats look enormous, as he spent so long in England during our winter.

At the moment, we are probably back at the +-10 level, if not even further. There's quite a few <30 bowlers around who do 'nothing' at test level.

In that environment, it's more about talent identification than simply promotion on performance. Chances need to be taken, and you just hope that the kids have the mental aptitude and maturity to take the (expected) drubbing whilst they adjust to a higher class.

 

[TBoyleSuperstar]

Having just read the book Moneyball, why in cricket aren't we playing the best statistical players instead of players that the selectors think are the solution?

djboonie give us the top avg's for batting and bowling at shield level this year.

Not a bad idea HJ, by rights it should be that easy, however unlike baseball, pitches can play an issue in a batsmans ability to make runs, unlike baseball they can face 4-5 different types of bowlers in a session let alone a day or match. Phil Hughes careved up the runs in the early summer, however largely batted on the batsman friendly wickets of Adelaide. A ton in adelaide could well be equal to a 50 or 70 on the green tops in Hobart or the Gabba, a 2nd innings ton on a spin friendly SCG could be worth more than a batsman friendly MCG wicket on the 3rd or 4th day. Vice Versa with bowling. A lot more variables in cricket than baseball too, weather alone on can make a huge difference. An overfast day at the gabba compared to a clear day at the gabba can make a huge difference in swing etc. for both a batsman and a bowler.

We need someone at each and ever shield and OD games, plus have each coach put in a report on each player for that game, taking into account bowling & batting attacks, pitch and conditions and base things from that.

For example, an 80 on a green top in Hobart against a NSW attack of Bollinger, Copeland Hazelwood, Henriques would be seen more highly more highly than a 120 on a 2nd day pitch in Adelaide against an attack of Puntland, Sayers etc.

 

[Henry Jr]

Oh FFS...

Australia wicketkeeper Matthew Wade is in doubt for the third Test after hurting his ankle while playing basketball in Chandigarh on Saturday. Brad Haddin has been placed on standby for Wade and is a strong chance to fly to India, pending the result of scans on Sunday morning, four days before the start of the Test.

http://www.espncricinfo.com/india-v-australia-2013/content/current/story/624302.html

 

[Messenger]

Moneyball and advanced stats in basketball are about acts that are more likely to contribute to victories. In baseball they've gone from RBI's being a major driver of contract prices to OBP as a key indicator. In basketball it's about usage rates, shooting selection, win shares and five man +/-.

So what are the best indicators of victory? First innings runs? Top 6 wickets? Runs away from home?

 

[grizzlym]

I think one of the biggest issues - as has already bee mentioned many times - is the lack of play in the domestic 4-day competition. and that's coupled with the lack of quality. Ponting had 10 centuries to his name before he was called up to the Australian side; he was ready, honed on Shield cricket. That doesn't happen anymore. And we're much poorer for it as a cricketing nation.

I imagine the composition of the Indian touring party would have been different if we'd played the bulk of our Shield season before they had left.

 

[Henry Jr]

In the shield this year, only four batsman have scored 2 centuries.

Pointing
Haddin
Burns
Rogers

3 of those would be deemed to be too old. I don't know why you can pick a batsman to play in a one off series... eg. Haddin in India or Rogers in England.

The selectors have been rolling out the same bullshit lines for years. We must rebuild blah blah blah. No point rebuilding with guys that are averaging 35 at shield level.

The sooner Free Agency comes into Test Cricket the better!