Compare 5fer v. 100

[SUMO]

4 fer equals 100 

[goose]

i would say the risk of one of the 4 wickets being a cheap tail-ender outweighs the risk that 100 runs have have been easy.

 

i'm sticking to 5 wickets = 100 runs if i had to pick a one size fits all rule that averaged out over time. 

Edited January 3, 2018 by goose

[zen]

Interestingly, McGrath after 100 tests had 451 wkts. While Lara had 8,916 runs .... 9000/450=20 

Edited January 3, 2018 by zen

[SUMO]

17 hours ago, zen said:

Interestingly, McGrath after 100 tests had 451 wkts. While Lara had 8,916 runs .... 9000/450=20 

interesting comparison 

Wonder what would be batting equivalent of murli then...

133 test 16000 runs 67 hundreds ...woahh

[zen]

39 minutes ago, SUMO said:

interesting comparison 

Wonder what would be batting equivalent of murli then...

133 test 16000 runs 67 hundreds ...woahh

As mentioned in one of my posts, guys like Bradman, Hadlee, Murali, etc. are outliers .... May be someone like Sobers if he had played more tests in his prime may have come close to the numbers you suggested 

 

 

[vvvslaxman]

That all depends on cost of runs for each wicket.

[jf1gp_1]

all we need to look at is which of the two is difficult to come by and we have the answer

[adi B]

22 hours ago, speedheat said:

Why?? Sometimes tailenders are better bat than top 6, example bhuvi better batsman than Dhoni, kuldeep shielding dhoni from lakmal and Pradeep in first odi vs srilanka.

[adi B]

22 hours ago, Laaloo said:

What was more difficult?

 

Ishant Sharma 5-fer or Rohit Sharma 100 

In the probability zone of witnessing the Bailey's comet pass 

[Vijy]

a 5-fer is harder statistically than a 100, I feel.