StatisticsMay 11 2017 at 12:46 PM
Dave Morton (Login DaveMorton)
We all do it; I'm as guilty as anyone, perhaps more so. We have an opinion and we attempt to back it up with figures.
In recent threads there have been attempts to compare Bairstow with his England ODI rivals. There are comparisons between Moeen Ali and Adil Rashid, and someone has just started looking at Azeem Rafiq's figures.
I just want to make the point how CRUDE the average is as a measure of performance, especially in the one-day versions. Bairstow has played almost all his games, Yorkshire and England, batting at 5, 6 or 7. Every time he goes in, he's either trying to accelerate the scoring against wide-spread fields, or he's repairing the damage of an early collapse.
Okay, so he doesn't face the new ball, but he is quite happy to sacrifice his wicket in the closing-overs slog. And he's done this in FC and Test cricket too.
Likewise Rashid. I have never, EVER seen him play for himself as a batsman. Even in this latest game, he was run out off the final ball of the innings, which partly explains his List A average of about 21. I have seen him do this in FC cricket, too, quite frequently I think, though I can't back up that opinion with 'facts'.
Rafiq, this season, has bowled against desperate batsmen who are having a slog with the game already lost. So he's gone for loads of runs, and taken loads of wickets. Has he bowled well or badly? You would have to be there to know, and to understand what's going on. I thought he bowled well against Lancashire, which is the only RL50 I have attended, to date.
Coming from an averages-driven culture, where the scorer was charged with preparing up-to-date averages before every selection meeting, I can only applaud the modern professional game - and I suspect club selection is more enlightened than in my time.
I certainly hope so!
|May 11 2017, 4:34 PM |
In yesteryear a phrase was used to describe a batter having a brilliant start to the season. It was "a thousand runs in May", which really meant a thousand before the end of May. If I recall correctly, Compton and Bill Edrich did this in the late 40s. Geoffrey certainly dint do it. I think that young lad Hick did it int late 80s. Have other Yorks supporters spotted that one of aaaaah orn is in the verge of achieving this feat in 2017? G.Ballance has so far scored well over 800 runs int championship and the 1 day cup. I know cricket starts earlier in April these days but there's far less innings fot batters than int old days. If Ballance scores 1000 before end o May I think it's reight up theer wi batters achievements frumt past. What do fellow Yorkies think?
|May 11 2017, 4:58 PM |
Bradman did it twice; in 1930 and again in 1938. Compton never did it and Edrich, like Bradman did it in 1938.
Glen Turner did it in 1973, being the only player besides G Hick (1988) to achieve the feat since World War 2; interestingly both were Worcestershire batsman so, perhaps, the New Road track had a hand in the record. Of course, Hick's performance was aided by 405 not out against Somerset at Taunton.
The others are Grace in 1895, Hayward in 1900, Hammond in 1927 and Hallows in 1928.
|May 11 2017, 5:09 PM |
I believe Adam Lyth came close three years ago. If memory serves me correctly, only the luck of the toss denied him the opportunity at Southampton.
|May 11 2017, 5:10 PM |
Great historical information. Thanks for that. My point is, if GB reaches the thousand by May 31, it's as big an achievement as the others who achieved this feat and tfirst un fora long time.
|May 11 2017, 5:12 PM |
Wasn't it always 1000 "first class" runs by the end of May though?
First class matches
|May 11 2017, 5:29 PM |
Yep. I'm sure that in years gone by the 1000 in May did just apply to first class runs but int 40s there weren't many list A matches! By the end of May Edrich, Bradman, Turner, Hick, etc wuda played a ruddy sight more first class games than GB in 2017 so surely it's more than reasonable to lump his scores from the two tournaments together.
|May 11 2017, 5:39 PM |
He will sail well past it. He already has 934 (this mornings YP), with potentially 5 more innings to come (two 1 day matches, 2 innings v Lancashire in the CC, and the 50 over match Yorkshire v SA "a".
|This message has been edited by StuartRA on May 11, 2017 5:52 PM|
|May 11 2017, 8:37 PM |
One thing I do respect about the current England set up is that they identity talent and go with it rather than seemingly basing selection on the averages. The 80s and 90s national team was to heavily influenced by the averages - 'form is temporary class permanent' - I agree with that.
|May 12 2017, 7:57 AM |
So do I - but a third element comes into it - temperament. Test cricket is littered with players of class who have failed on the big stage. Don Kenyon was the prime example from my youth…
|May 12 2017, 8:21 AM |
Neither Trescothick or Vaughan had great county records before their England call ups but succeeded at the top level.
But in more recent times we have seen England pick the form county players and they have generally struggled. Lyth, Carberry, Vince, Robson good examples
|May 12 2017, 9:06 AM |
Trescothick is a good example but I thought Vaughan was scoring shed loads before he was selected.
|May 12 2017, 11:59 AM |
Memory (rather than research) tells me that Vaughan was averaging in the low 30s for Yorkshire when England picked him. He had a habit of playing brief cameos at Headingley - in the days when a broken finger always beckoned, and he suffered that, too.
He did make a magnificent big hundred at Scarborough, an innings which was described in The Times as "....containing not a single memorable stroke." CMJ suffered some abuse when he arrived the following morning, and rightly so. He can't possibly have been watching. Vaughan was never my favourite player, but his strokeplay was magnificent, on its day.
The overweight young Trescothick I remember batting at 6 or 7 for Somerset before he saw the light, got fit and became one of England's best opening bats.
Duncan Fletcher was credited with seeing the inherent talent in both players, transcending their ordinary stats. Later, Fletcher too became conservative, and it became hard for anyone new to break into his cosy little team.
Perhaps someone like Stoneman might have had the same chance with selectors less mindful of stats, and more aware of the big runs he always got against the best opposition, i.e. Yorkshire. Or perhaps they were right, and he wasn't (isn't) good enough. We will never know.
|May 12 2017, 12:40 PM |
Of course Stoneman is mentioned in dispatches because he has kicked on in the last couple of seasons - average overall career stats but excellent more recently.
If stats aren't a precise guide then performance is - batting against good opposition, scoring runs when they matter. I actually think that with the very sophisticated data analysis available now that can consider these things, stats offer a bigger clue than they did in the past. But it can only take you so far.
|This message has been edited by Martinh00 on May 12, 2017 12:47 PM|
|May 12 2017, 1:59 PM |
I think that about 50% of all stats are bogus.
|May 12 2017, 10:05 PM |
Dave provoked some interesting research this evening regarding Michael Vaughan.
When Michael played his first Test Match in November 1999 his record for Yorkshire after playing for 6 years was:
108 Matches, 197 Innings, 10 Not Outs, 6630 runs at an average of 35.45, with 15 centuries.
Ten years later, when he played his last match for Yorkshire this had progressed to:
151 Matches, 267 Innings, 14 Not Outs, 9160 runs at an average of 36.20, with 20 centuries.
His Test Match career stretched over 9 years (1999-2008) and his record was:
82 Matches, 147 Innings, 9 Not Outs, 5719 runs at an average of 41.44, with 18 centuries.
Clearly, he was an example of a player who rose to the occasion in Test Cricket. However, although his Test Match record was prolific, this was not really reflected in his performances in County Cricket which, with only marginal improvement over the same period, remained more or less what they had been before is call up in Test Cricket.
|May 12 2017, 11:18 PM |
Nobody has made better use of statistics than Duckworth and Lewis. Today's match at Blackpool was a triumph for their method.
Derbyshire were 132 for 2 off 21.3 of 36 overs, a terrific platform for a really big score. After a long rain delay, Lancs were left with 18 overs, and D/L came up with 161 as the target, which they achieved with 7 down and one ball to spare.
Under the previous system (back in the John Player and Gillette days), the Lancs target would have been a pathetic 110.
|May 13 2017, 8:06 AM |
The Vaughan stats show the limitations of statistics. His career first class average is nothing to write home about. But even a test average of a bit more than 40 is good but not outstanding. What it doesn't show is when he made his runs and how he contributed to victories and of course his ashes exploits.
|May 13 2017, 8:27 AM |
Statistics also don't show what a massive irritation and bore he is in his media work now a days.
|May 13 2017, 11:01 AM |