Batting average across Decades-Tests

[vijay50]

Saw this on padosi forum. Acknowledgement: Indian willow (see attachment). Here is his rant. This is a decade by decade analysis of batting averages. Only batsmen who batted at positions #1-#7 and those who scored over 500 runs for the corresponding decade have been considered. Difficult batting conditions have been marked with red and easy conditions with blue. This analysis is not going to examine the reasons for high and low batting averages, which is left to the reader. We are just pointing out the decades that were tough for the batsmen and those that were easy for the batsmen. The first column indicates the decade. The second column gives the number of players who were considered for analysis. Third column gives the number of batsmen who had batting average between 35-45. Fourth column gives the percentage of batsmen who averaged between 35 and 45 during that decade. Fifth column gives the number of batsmen who had batting average between 45-50. Sixth column gives the percentage of batsmen who averaged between 45 and 50 during that decade. Seventh column gives the number of batsmen who had batting average above 50. Eighth column gives the percentage of batsmen who averaged over 50 during that decade. These divisions are based on the rule of the thumb that 50+ = great batsman; 45-50 = very good batsman; 35-45 = good batsman. Now for some quick observations. The 30s and 40s were notoriously high average years. Half the batsmen who played in these two decades averaged 50+, so an average of 50-60 during these two decades must be taken with a grain of salt. The 50s saw a marked reduction in the percentage of batsmen averaging 50+ along with steep rise in the percentage of batsmen averaging 35-45. Yet 15% of batsmen made 50+ average, so batting during this period was one of the easier ones. The 60s saw further decrease in 50+ averages, in fact this decade was one of the toughest for batsmen. Only 9% of the batsmen averaged 50+ during this decade. The 70s were as tough or easy as the 60s, and there was a marginal increase in the percentage of batsmen averaging 50+. The 80s era were tougher than the 70s, with only 60% of the batsmen making an average of 35+. Only 10% of the batsmen managed a 50+ average. The 90s were the toughest era ever. Only 6% of the batsmen made 50+ average during this period. Only 54% of the batsmen crossed the average of 35. The noughties became easier on the batsmen again, with 15% of the batsmen reaching the 50 mark in tests. The 2010s has seen further rise in the percentage of batsmen reaching 50+ and in fact this has been the easiest batting era since the War period. One third of all batsmen playing this decade have average exceeding 45. Though the number of batsmen who get 50+ averages is on the rise, it is not clear why no one is able to maintain an average of 70+ in the present decade. The upper limit of batting average remains intact inspite of more and more batsmen hovering near the upper limits. ---------- Discuss?

[vijay50]

Just a quick look at cricinfo stats guru in 2000-2009 test batting, with 2000 runs cut off. Some players may have ended their careers mid of 2000's. 8 players averages 55+ Andy Flower-63.25,Mohammed Yousuf-58.53,Ponting-58.38, Kallis-58.70, Gambhir-56.73,Inzamam-55.57, Jayawardane-55.31, Sangakkara-55.10 11 Players averaged 50-55 Dravid-54.85,Lara-54.06, Steve Waugh-53.3,Tendulkar-53.2,Thorpe-53.3,Hayden-52.93,Sehwag-52.5, Chanderpaul-52.31,Mike Hussey-51.97,Samaraweera-51.14,Younus Khan-50.09. In the 2010s (with 2000 runs cut off) 5 Players with 60+ averages Amla-66.19, Chanderpaul-66.08, Sangakkara-65.54,De Villiers-63.93,Younis Khan-60.13 Looks like 60+ is the new 50+ average for this decade. Chanderpaul, Younis Khan and Sangakkara were able to maintain or improve their average from 2000's across decades. Tendulkar, Lara and Steve Waugh were able to maintain or do it across 90s and 2000s.

[thongale]

This is a decade by decade analysis of batting averages. Only batsmen who batted at positions #1-#7 and those who scored over 500 runs

This easily skews advantage twoards modern times. Better would be to consider batsmen who has played at least 25% of matches for the era on average for a team.

[Raghav_12]

Very good analysis.

[amiret]

Who were the 8 players who averaged 50+ in the 90's ?

[Raghav_12]

Who were the 8 players who averaged 50+ in the 90's ?

I'll guess. Sachin, Lara, Steve Waugh, Miandad, border

[gattaca]

what era did bradman play ? found his debut was in 1928. Hmm. So bradman played in one of the easiest era for batting and sachin in one of the toughtest.

[vijay50]

Who were the 8 players who averaged 50+ in the 90's ?

For cut off of 500 runs, 1990-1999 Imran Khan -60.55, Tendulkar-58,John Wright-55.4,Kambli-54.2,Steve Waugh-53.10,David Gower-53,Lara-51.6,Gooch-51.55 For cut off of 2000 runs,1990-1999 in tests, Tendulkar-58,Steve Waugh-53.1,Lara-51.6,Gooch-51.55

[thongale]

what era did bradman play ? found his debut was in 1928. Hmm. So bradman played in one of the easiest era for batting and sachin in one of the toughtest.

Analysis was AIMED to show this beasically. :--D

[Muloghonto]

Surprised that Andy Flower did not average 50+ in the 90s. I always thought of him as one of the top 5 batsmen from the 90s. It is no secret that 90s was the toughest era for batsmen and that is largely because of the fact that the 90s saw more world class bowling attacks than any other decade: West Indies, South Africa, Pakistan & Australia could lay claim to being ATG attacks and attack #3 & 4 in the 90s was better than any other #3 or #4 attack of any other decade. To boot, India had an excellent bowling attack in home conditions- probably their best decade for home condition bowling attacks, along with the 70s, the English had an underrated but highly effective bowling attack on home conditions (it was always their batting that was poopy) and the Kiwis were very miserly at home too. Zimbabwe had an excellent attack- not many realize but an attack of Heath Streak, Paul Strang ,Pommie Bangwa and several strong support cast was a very competent attack as well.

[Raghav_12]

what era did bradman play ? found his debut was in 1928. Hmm. So bradman played in one of the easiest era for batting and sachin in one of the toughtest.

That has never been any secret that Bradman has played in the era where only batsmen ruled the cricket. Bowlers were there just to get the game going.

[Temujin Khaghan]

sehwag you moron for missing out on the 50 by a whisker :((

[vijay50]

sehwag you moron for missing out on the 50 by a whisker :((

Sehwag was still good in 2000-2009, when he averaged 52, if you see my earlier post. Its just that when conditions/batsman got much better in 2010s, he did not step up. I hope Kohli and Rahane push their test average above 50 by end of the decade , when lots of them are averaging 65+.

[Marut]

sehwag you moron for missing out on the 50 by a whisker :((

Blame the last two years of his career. Sehwag was doing well on around 53 before his steep decline. One good reason to think batsmen should not be rated until they retire.

[govinda]

good

[sensible-indian]

Is Indian Willow member of this forum? Does he go by any other name?

[vijay50]

Surprised that Andy Flower did not average 50+ in the 90s. I always thought of him as one of the top 5 batsmen from the 90s. It is no secret that 90s was the toughest era for batsmen and that is largely because of the fact that the 90s saw more world class bowling attacks than any other decade: West Indies, South Africa, Pakistan & Australia could lay claim to being ATG attacks and attack #3 & 4 in the 90s was better than any other #3 or #4 attack of any other decade. To boot, India had an excellent bowling attack in home conditions- probably their best decade for home condition bowling attacks, along with the 70s, the English had an underrated but highly effective bowling attack on home conditions (it was always their batting that was poopy) and the Kiwis were very miserly at home too. Zimbabwe had an excellent attack- not many realize but an attack of Heath Streak, Paul Strang ,Pommie Bangwa and several strong support cast was a very competent attack as well.

If you look at the previous posts,Andy Flower scored big time in 2000-2009 and was no.1 player with 63.25 average. Chanderpaul also had a low average in 90s, became good in 2000s and great in 2010s.Dont know whats he upto now.

[vijay50]

Surprised that Andy Flower did not average 50+ in the 90s. I always thought of him as one of the top 5 batsmen from the 90s. It is no secret that 90s was the toughest era for batsmen and that is largely because of the fact that the 90s saw more world class bowling attacks than any other decade: West Indies, South Africa, Pakistan & Australia could lay claim to being ATG attacks and attack #3 & 4 in the 90s was better than any other #3 or #4 attack of any other decade. To boot, India had an excellent bowling attack in home conditions- probably their best decade for home condition bowling attacks, along with the 70s, the English had an underrated but highly effective bowling attack on home conditions (it was always their batting that was poopy) and the Kiwis were very miserly at home too. Zimbabwe had an excellent attack- not many realize but an attack of Heath Streak, Paul Strang ,Pommie Bangwa and several strong support cast was a very competent attack as well.

Lets see, i did not look cricinfo, but 90s had WI-Ambrose,Walsh,Bishop,Patterson. Pak-Wasim,Waqar,Imran Khan (end). South Africa-Allan Donald, Shaun Pollock Australia-Craig Mc Dermott, Glenn Mc Grath, Jason Gillespie. Sri Lanka-Vaas. England-Darren Gough, Andrew Caddick, Angus Fraser. New Zealand-Danny Morrison, Simon Doull, Dion Nash Zimbabwe-Heath Streak. Overall lots of good bowlers from each country with sub 30 averages. No wonder, it was one of the toughest eras to bat.

[vijay50]

what era did bradman play ? found his debut was in 1928. Hmm. So bradman played in one of the easiest era for batting and sachin in one of the toughtest.

Doesnt matter which era Bradman played. He was outstanding with 99+ average. In other eras inspite of easier conditions, batsmen barely crossed 70s . We are seeing few players with around 65 average in 2010s. Hopefully Kohli , Rahane and Pujara step up their averages.

[Gollum]

Shows the greatness of Sachin, averaged 58 in the toughest decade of test batting, 58 !!!! Lara, Kallis, Ponting, Sangakkara are clearly a level below the 90s Sachin. One would have hoped for Sachin to finish his career with a 65-70 batting average, he wasn't that good in the 00s and beyond pathetic after 2011 WC.