Statistics

Moderator: Assistant Moderator

Statistics

Joined: October 17th, 2013, 8:44 pm

May 11th, 2017, 11:46 am #1

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!
Bowlers win matches
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: May 11th, 2017, 3:19 pm

May 11th, 2017, 3:34 pm #2

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?
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: January 7th, 2017, 9:51 am

May 11th, 2017, 3:58 pm #3

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!
Sleights:

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.
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: November 6th, 2013, 9:50 am

May 11th, 2017, 4:09 pm #4

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!
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.
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: May 11th, 2017, 3:19 pm

May 11th, 2017, 4:10 pm #5

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!
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.
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: April 2nd, 2014, 9:31 am

May 11th, 2017, 4:12 pm #6

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!
Wasn't it always 1000 "first class" runs by the end of May though?
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: May 11th, 2017, 3:19 pm

May 11th, 2017, 4:29 pm #7

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!
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.
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: August 20th, 2013, 11:26 am

May 11th, 2017, 4:39 pm #8

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!
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".
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: August 21st, 2013, 7:47 pm

May 11th, 2017, 7:37 pm #9

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!
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.
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: November 16th, 2013, 7:06 am

May 12th, 2017, 6:57 am #10

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!
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…
Quote
Like
Share