zen Posted March 20, 2010 Posted March 20, 2010 I don't know if this has been done before but I thought I had to write on this. Is Virender Sehwag redefining batting in tests in the modern era? Below is the list of how batsmen have fared in tests since 1 Jan 2008 till today. It includes those who have scored close to 2000 runs or more: Player Span Mat Inns NO Runs HS Ave BF SR 100 50 0 4s 6s V Sehwag (India) 2008-2010 24 43 2 2536 319 61.85 2788 90.96 7 9 1 336 36 MJ Clarke (Aus) 2008-2010 29 50 7 2448 166 56.93 4788 51.12 9 10 5 255 5 RT Ponting (Aus) 2008-2010 30 53 1 2385 209 45.86 3820 62.43 6 13 4 277 11 SM Katich (Aus) 2008-2010 26 46 2 2322 157 52.77 4591 50.57 7 13 1 261 6 HM Amla (SA) 2008-2010 25 41 4 2219 253* 59.97 4363 50.85 7 11 2 276 1 GC Smith (SA) 2008-2010 24 40 4 2217 232 61.58 3545 62.53 8 8 3 286 4 AJ Strauss (Eng) 2008-2010 28 49 3 2213 177 48.10 4556 48.57 8 7 4 269 2 G Gambhir (India) 2008-2010 17 32 2 2106 206 70.20 3947 53.35 8 8 0 244 6 SR Tendulkar (India) 2008-2010 23 40 5 2081 160 59.45 3605 57.72 10 6 1 237 12 AN Cook (Eng) 2008-2010 29 51 3 2072 173 43.16 4204 49.28 4 14 2 248 4 KP Pietersen (Eng) 2008-2010 26 43 1 1931 152 45.97 3244 59.52 6 7 2 225 13 If you see that list, most of them have scored those runs at pretty good averages. Of the 11 guys only Ponting, Strauss, Cook and Pietersen average below 50. The highest average is Gambhir's (70), while many of them average b/w 55 and 60. Sehwag has the second best average of 62 and it's in line with some of the others in the pack. So how is he redefining batting? The answer to that lines in the Strike Rate's (SR) column. The range excluding Sehwag's is 48-62. Which gives us an average of 55, with 62 being the SR of the next best guy(s). Sehwag's 91! So since 1 Jan 2008, he has scored 2536 runs (the most), with an average of 62 (2nd best) at a phenomenal SR of 91 (when the avg amongst others is 55). This is phenomenal batting! This is something unheard of i.e. getting so many runs with this type of average at such an unbelievable SR! If this is not redefining batting in the modern era then I don't know what it is. Viru has been simply superb after his come back!
zen Posted March 20, 2010 Author Posted March 20, 2010 If I am picking a batsman (irrespective of his country) to play a test now then Sehwag would be my first choice
SJS50 Posted March 31, 2010 Posted March 31, 2010 Thats an interesting thread title. I had written a two part feature in December with almost the same title. . . Bradman to Sehwag : Redefining Great Batsmanship by Defying Tradition (Part 1) Bradman to Sehwag : Redefining Great Batsmanship by Defying Tradition (Part 2) You might find it interesting. I must warn they are longish (as are many of my features) :-)
Roshanrocks Posted March 31, 2010 Posted March 31, 2010 Sehwag is awesome.... if only he could transfer his performance to ODI n T20
SJS50 Posted March 31, 2010 Posted March 31, 2010 Sehwag is awesome.... if only he could transfer his performance to ODI n T20 All he has to do is bat as he does in tests and he will be fine. He seems to think he has to do something dramatically different from his natural game (as he plays in tests) in the shorter version and thats causing him problems.
Roshanrocks Posted March 31, 2010 Posted March 31, 2010 after reading the whole article... i must say :adore: they way u displayed the "argument" between 2 spheres of your mind... the traditionalist and the realist.... awesome..
SJS50 Posted March 31, 2010 Posted March 31, 2010 after reading the whole article... i must say :adore: they way u displayed the "argument" between 2 spheres of your mind... the traditionalist and the realist.... awesome.. Wonderful article SJS. Love your signature too :--D Thanks. :)
zen Posted March 31, 2010 Author Posted March 31, 2010 Thats an interesting thread title. I had written a two part feature in December with almost the same title. . . Bradman to Sehwag : Redefining Great Batsmanship by Defying Tradition (Part 1) Bradman to Sehwag : Redefining Great Batsmanship by Defying Tradition (Part 2) You might find it interesting. I must warn they are longish (as are many of my features) :-) I have read those on cricketweb and must say they have tremendous repeat reading value. I recall, I had been pressing for Sehwag being an all-time Indian X1 player (a long time ago) when many though he wasn't in Gavaskar, Dravid and Tendulkar league then. BTW, you should give your 2 cents on Bradman vs modern era players too as if I recall you followed/read about that period a lot. I know there can be a lots of 'ifs' and 'buts' in such comparisions but just to get the perspective of someone who has actually followed that era very closing, along with the modern one
thevortex Posted March 31, 2010 Posted March 31, 2010 Swaranjeet - that was a nice piece of work. I think I read this quite a while back and have always been meaning to comment on them. The point you make about Sehwag's scoring rate not always bordering on the stratospheric needs a small note there. He did not always open. And that can have a direct effect on the numbers. Next Sehwag's bat comes down almost from 3rd slip or even 3rd man - depending on where he wants to hit the ball. I am certainly with you when it comes to the reasoning as to why Sehwag essentially is correct. In fact I would go so far as to say that Sehwag has correct technique. Technique is basically a mechanic to help a batsman get into position to play the ball and remain in balance afterwards as well. Defined that way, Sehwag has got good technique. Footwork is a means to an end. Sehwag dispenses with only the means. Not the thinking. Do keep on sharing such articles. Enjoyable read all through.
The Outsider Posted March 31, 2010 Posted March 31, 2010 Thats an interesting thread title. I had written a two part feature in December with almost the same title. . . Bradman to Sehwag : Redefining Great Batsmanship by Defying Tradition (Part 1) Bradman to Sehwag : Redefining Great Batsmanship by Defying Tradition (Part 2) You might find it interesting. I must warn they are longish (as are many of my features) :-) Those two article are mesmerizing stuff. I've always felt that Sehwag's greatest strength is the stillness of head he has while executing his strokes. The poise he displays while driving through the off stump is a rarity.
SJS50 Posted March 31, 2010 Posted March 31, 2010 Baah sarchy the article itself is sprinkled with stats ... I wonder why. Its fine to dislike stats but atleast be dilligent enough to live by that rule. IMHO people who have allergic reaction to stats are those who find their long held beliefs challenged by the heartless numbers. Classic cognitive dissonance. Its easy to answer that but I think I will let it go. :)
zubinpepsi Posted March 31, 2010 Posted March 31, 2010 No worries.Iam used to people being indifferent to numbers. But if it wasnt obvious .. me ' date=' varun , Doc(Dhondy) are[b'] the resident stats freaks armed with that lethal thingy called stats DB and a inquisitive mind to go with yrs of actual cricket following. :P maybe you dint read his intro..
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now