Laxman's corrected average

It is convenient for everyone to overlook the contribution of Sehwag's 32 in 31b innings, i presume. Ofcourse a second innings Laxman is a class apart from the rest of the Indian crowd. He seems to find some spine when the rest seem to have lost whetever little they have. But to be noted is that Sehwag too did feature in some match winning second inning centuries last year. hello horace, not exctly newbie been here before.

JGK wrote:Conversely, if the other players in the top order as great as many say there are why is it always left to VVS to do the hard work when things get difficult?

So you think things weren't difficult at Centurion?

Had he done any better than recording 2 single digit scores in that test, and supported Tendulkar a bit better, India might actually be leading in this series.

He was an abject failure in SL series in '08 (as were Tendulkar, Ganguly and Dravid) against Murali & Mendis. Had he done well and supported Sehwag and Gambhir (India's leading bats in that series), India would've been come back with the series. Same happened during India's last series against SA in SA in '06.

Same thing has happened so many times during last decade or so.

I mean, rarely all India's bats excel together. Thats not possible either.

SG wrote:
I mean, rarely all India's bats excel together. Thats not possible either.

that's very true. It seems like all of them have found a niche.

Its like Tendulkar's failures are highlighted more than his successes and vice versa for VVS.

I think you can deduce whatever you want to from that.

JGK wrote:Conversely, if the other players in the top order as great as many say there are why is it always left to VVS to do the hard work when things get difficult?

things are obviously not difficult when the top order does well, innit?

lower order players get a chance to shine when the top order has failed, so obviously their important innings comes when the likes of sehwag or tendulkar have not managed to get a big score

if sehwag and sachin had not got those big hundreds in the last few years india would have lost a whole lot more matches. you only notice them when they fail

most indian batsmen have played big innings under pressure in the 3rd or 4th innings. sometimes it leads to a team win, sometimes it doesnt. but the end result is not always in relation to the quality of the innings itself

We all know a lot about Indian batsmen:

Sehwag is the world's worst ftb
Tendulkar has played maybe two match winning innings in his Test career (generous)
Dravid is brilliant, but quietly so
Gambhir is sh*te
Laxman is god

All this talk of him being suited to the lower order is rubbish. He has scored hundreds at 3 (four of them) and averages 47 there. He has been hidden away down the order to suit an agenda that gives the more popular players a greater chance to score all the runs. Laxman is the best though, by miles.

LOL this is funny.

let's put it this way:

SRT is God but it's Laxman who answers prayers.

so srt is ram and laxman is, well, laxman?

.......... and Laxman Sivaramakrishnan is Little Pebble.

JGK wrote:Laxman has played more match winning innings this year than SRT has played in his 21 years.

Sage

Laxman has never played for his average...if India are on top he does not give a rats...but when the heat is on in the kitchen against good teams that is when he is outstanding...

humble...funny and with practical concern about the state of his country he stands above all current players

As long as the team wins the fans should not really care on who scored and what not except if one is an an Indian fan. Then it become mandatory to get into protracted arguments to protect one's heroes.

Here comes Mr know all. Now he'll decide what one argue and what one can't.

great thread, conclusive proof that L > T

I was actually looking for a thread where somebody may have foolishly disputed that 'not outs reduce the average'; but I have failed.

Interesting dissertation on the subject:

http://www.espncricinfo.com/story/_/id/23618100/how-account-not-outs-more-accurately-assessing-batsmen

JGK wrote:Laxman has played more match winning innings this year than SRT has played in his 21 years.

Just went though VVS's 2010 record - I make it 3 match winning innings out of the 5 Tests that India won (that he played in). Of the other 2, he scored 143* in a runathon and 69* in helping set a matchwinning target.

What a player.

lardbucket wrote:I was actually looking for a thread where somebody may have foolishly disputed that 'not outs reduce the average'; but I have failed.

Interesting dissertation on the subject:

http://www.espncricinfo.com/story/_/id/23618100/how-account-not-outs-more-accurately-assessing-batsmen

Thanks for the link. It seems to put some real life numbers behind z-score's work from 2000.

yes

Nice work with the projected survival at each score!

I read the zeddy article and I have some problem with "projected" scores.

Though vvs>srt