What is the min acceptable batting avg for a top 5/6 test batsman for India ? KL Rahul averages a mere 36 after 42 test matches

[rangeelaraja]

IMO 45 avg for top 5/6 is needed if the aspiration is to be a dominant test side.

 

KL has had a very very long rope based on "talent".   He averages a mere 36 after a significant 42 test matches.  Cannot stand his cowardly meek approach to the game. 

 

I know he has just scored a century in a winning cause at Centurion. But this guy is mighty inconsistent. 

Edited January 3, 2022 by rangeelaraja

[Majestic]

Opener 1- 40( Away 30 minimum)

Opener 2 - 40( Away 30 minimum)

No.3 - 43 or above( Away 35)

No 4- 46 or above ( Away 38 or above)

No 5- 43 or above ( Away 35)

No 6( keeper)- 40( away 30 minimum)

 

Now, no 7 will depend on whether it is a bat A/R or Bowl A/R and accordingly.

 

If you don't maintain this, you don't qualify for a place in XI.

Edited January 3, 2022 by Majestic

[goose]

about the same as the the minimum acceptable IQ for this forum

[jusarrived]

47 minutes ago, rangeelaraja said:

IMO 45 avg for top 5/6 is needed if the aspiration is to be a dominant test side.

 

KL has had a very very long rope based on "talent".   He averages a mere 36 after a significant 42 test matches.  Cannot stand his cowardly meek approach to the game. 

 

I know he has just scored a century in a winning cause at Centurion. But this guy is mighty inconsistent. 

 

Hes an opener who's been in and out of the side and missed most of the home series.  I think this is his 28th test outside india of 43. That average will go up to mid 40s once he plays at least equal number of tests at home 

[sensible-indian]

KL will improve his stats.

 

Just a matter of time.

 

Will average 50 one day.

[vayuu1]

Openers 42-45 (away 35-38)

Middle order 46-50(away 42-46)

Lower middle order 43-48(away 37-42)

Lower order 8,9 25-35(away 23-32)

Tail 17-23(away-15-20)

[Prabhdeep Singh]

I think KL Rahul needs a few more matches at home:

 

42 Tests Played

14 Tests @ Home

28 Tests @ Away/Neutral

 

Comparing to Rohit who averages 46:

 

43 Tests Played

18 Tests @ Home

25 Tests @ Away/Neutral

 

 

 

 

 

[Vijy]

2 hours ago, jusarrived said:

 

Hes an opener who's been in and out of the side and missed most of the home series.  I think this is his 28th test outside india of 43. That average will go up to mid 40s once he plays at least equal number of tests at home 

his home test is not that good (he's not a SC expert like Rohit). Moreover, batting in India is not so easy on dustbowls.

[Vijy]

Given how much bowling friendly pitches are everywhere, I'd be okay if 2 of top 6 have avg of 45+, 2 have 42+, and 2 have avg of 38-39+

[Trichromatic]

4 hours ago, rangeelaraja said:

IMO 45 avg for top 5/6 is needed if the aspiration is to be a dominant test side.

 

KL has had a very very long rope based on "talent".   He averages a mere 36 after a significant 42 test matches.  Cannot stand his cowardly meek approach to the game. 

 

I know he has just scored a century in a winning cause at Centurion. But this guy is mighty inconsistent. 

 

9 openers have averaged over 45 in last 45 years (since 1975, 3000 runs).

 

KL Rahul averages 38.5 as opener and is improving his record.

 

Away average - 36 in 26 games.

Home average 43 in 13 games.

 

With more games at home he can average 40-42 as opener which is good enough in test cricket. He already better than Sehwag in SENA countries.

 

Past record/FC record + current form should be criteria for selection.

 

 

[Adamant]

5 hours ago, Majestic said:

Opener 1- 40( Away 30 minimum)

Opener 2 - 40( Away 30 minimum)

No.3 - 43 or above( Away 35)

No 4- 46 or above ( Away 38 or above)

No 5- 43 or above ( Away 35)

No 6( keeper)- 40( away 30 minimum)

 

Now, no 7 will depend on whether it is a bat A/R or Bowl A/R and accordingly.

 

If you don't maintain this, you don't qualify for a place in XI.

So according to your parameters Gundappa Vishwanath, Martin Crowe, Jonathon Trott, Ian Bell etc etc were lower than even the minimum acceptable quality for their respective positions? 

 

 

[Majestic]

2 minutes ago, Adamant said:

So according to your parameters Gundappa Vishwanath, Martin Crowe, Jonathon Trott, Ian Bell etc etc were lower than even the minimum acceptable quality for their respective positions? 

 

 

This is the standard I am setting for having the aspiration of a dominant test side. Read OP. 

 

India's No.4 have set high benchmark in last three decades so I have set similar standards for them. 

 

Ian Bell is just an okay batsman for me. Nothing special. Trott averages 44 and he batted at 3 so that's good enough.

[kubrickian]

I will take avg of 40 any day for an opener in SENA conditions, in fact worth his weight in gold. In SC conditions, opening batsmen should average 50.

 

[Majestic]

27 minutes ago, Adamant said:

So according to your parameters Gundappa Vishwanath, Martin Crowe, Jonathon Trott, Ian Bell etc etc were lower than even the minimum acceptable quality for their respective positions? 

 

 

Also, adding further to my post, Crowe and Vishy were as good as any 45-46 averaging middle order batsman. Their stats didn't do justice to them.

 

Kane averages 53 but many still rate Crowe as highly or even better than Kane. So,stats are ultimately just reference. 

 

 

[Trichromatic]

14 minutes ago, kubrickian said:

I will take avg of 40 any day for an opener in SENA conditions, in fact worth his weight in gold. In SC conditions, opening batsmen should average 50.

 

 

Are you looking for acceptable criteria or ATG criteria?

[Vijy]

3 minutes ago, Majestic said:

Also, adding further to my post, Crowe and Vishy were as good as any 45-46 averaging middle order batsman. Their stats didn't do justice to them.

 

Kane averages 53 but many still rate Crowe as highly or even better than Kane. So,stats are ultimately just reference. 

 

 

crowe was better than kane as a complete batter, although I'd say Kane has a marginally tighter technique. there were 3 factors that affected crowe: (1) home pitches in NZ were not as flat as they are now (India seem to get spicier pitches), (2) lots of injuries, and (3) lack of ruthlessness in scoring big knocks.

[Majestic]

7 minutes ago, Vijy said:

crowe was better than kane as a complete batter, although I'd say Kane has a marginally tighter technique. there were 3 factors that affected crowe: (1) home pitches in NZ were not as flat as they are now (India seem to get spicier pitches), (2) lots of injuries, and (3) lack of ruthlessness in scoring big knocks.

Agreed.

 

At the moment, I would still rate Crowe slightly higher than Kane as test batter. Kane needs to get that average over 40 in atleast one more top country apart from Australia. 

 

Vishy also is rated higher than likes of Vengsarkar, Pujara or Azharuddin even though his average is 42 only. So, while the average standard I have set in my first post should work in most cases, there will be few where leniency has to be given.

[Vijy]

Just now, Majestic said:

Agreed.

 

At the moment, I would still rate Crowe slightly higher than Kane as test batter. Kane needs to get that average over 40 in atleast one more top country apart from Australia. 

 

Vishy also is rated higher than likes of Vengsarkar, Pujara or Azharuddin even though his average is 42 only. So, while the average standard I have set in my first post should work in most cases, there will be few where leniency has to be given.

Vishy's case is different in my opinion, although I would certainly rate him higher over Azhar. He was, like Sehwag, a HTB who played some clutch knocks overseas but his overall away record wasn't that impressive. I rate Amarnath higher than most of them for this reason. Did superbly against ATG WI at their peak, did superbly against strong Pak attack with highly biased umpiring, etc.

[Majestic]

10 minutes ago, Vijy said:

Vishy's case is different in my opinion, although I would certainly rate him higher over Azhar. He was, like Sehwag, a HTB who played some clutch knocks overseas but his overall away record wasn't that impressive. I rate Amarnath higher than most of them for this reason. Did superbly against ATG WI at their peak, did superbly against strong Pak attack with highly biased umpiring, etc.

Amarnath was amazing for around 24 months or something where he batted like the best batsman of the generation against two extremely strong attacks but his career was quite short and he was probably not good enough to sustain his place for long enough. 

 

He debuted in 1969 but was not even the integral part of the team in 70s. Vishy on other hand was an integral part of the team in 70s and there are memories of him among the cricket fans that he was able to stood up against the Windies or Australian attack without helmet and played clutch knocks in the same vein as VVS. 

 

Amarnath case is a bit like how Rahane was so amazing between 2014-16 overseas but with more sample, his batting ( playing lazy shots and having lapse of concentration) got exposed more. Obviously, what Amarnath did was much more amazing during that 24 months but still longevity matters. 

Edited January 3, 2022 by Majestic

[Vijy]

3 minutes ago, Majestic said:

Amarnath was amazing for around 24 months or something where he batted like the best batsman of the generation against two extremely strong attacks but his career was quite short and he was probably not good enough to sustain his place for long enough. 

 

He debuted in 1969 but was not even the integral part of the team in 70s. Vishy on other hand was an integral part of the team in 70s and there are memories of him among the cricket fans that he was able to stood up against the Windies or Australian attack without helmet and played clutch knocks in the same vein as VVS. 

 

Amarnath case is a bit like how Rahane was so amazing between 2014-16 overseas but with more sample, his batting ( playing lazy shots and having lapse of concentration) got exposed more. Obviously, what Amarnath did was much more amazing during that 24 months but still longevity matters. 

Although I said that I rate Amarnath higher than Vishy, I don't mean to downplay achievements of the latter. I've seen enough content from both to know that they were quality in their own distinct ways. Amarnath's main issue was that he was not given a proper long run: for instance, he did "reasonably" in 1979 but was discarded till '82 and even in '82, he was not given enough chances. I believe that his best yrs in domestics and overseas would have been in the period of '79 to '86. He ended up doing well in Tests from '82 to '86, but was stymied by both a lack of tests and oddly not being selected in some cases; I think there may have been some injuries as well.