ICC Average career ratings

[quote author=TRINIDADDY link=topic=99749.msg652076#msg652076 date=1440183073]
Tendulkar, in tests, pretty much always averaged between 50 and 57, so it's surprising he isn't ranked higher. It's probably because he rarely dominated a full series, never got 500 runs in a series, and never achieved 900 or more ICC points. Lara in contrast oscillated between huge highs and very low lows. Meanwhile, someone like Viv Richards spent most of his career ranked 1 in the ICC rankings. And Sobers spent a decade averaging in the 60s or 70s. [/quote]

I believe that one the reasons why he isn't ranked higher is because Tendulkar played on more batting friendly wickets, and as such his ratings get dinged because of it. Six of the top 20 highest scoring grounds during Tendulkar's career were in India. 8 of the 14 grounds in India had an average of 35+, 12 an average of 30+.

Of the 200 Test matches Tendulkar played, 68 had a combined total runs of 1200+. By comparison, Lara appeared in just 29 matches with a combined total of 1200+ runs. Tendulkar also played in 67 Test matches that finished with an average over 40. Lara played in just 32.

As per the ICC ratings FAQ.

Quote:If both teams score 500 in each innings, the computer rates this as a high-scoring match in which run-making was relatively easy, and therefore downgrades the value of runs scored. If both teams score 150, this indicates that runs were at a premium and a player gets greater credit for scoring well in this game.

In doing some more research, I uncovered that against the 7 top leading pairs Lara faced a substantial number of times; he averaged above 47 against 5 of them. On the other hand, Sachin managed to average more than 47 against only one pair among the 9 he faced.

[quote author=dillinger10 link=topic=99749.msg652134#msg652134 date=1440263560]
In doing some more research, I uncovered that against the 7 top leading pairs Lara faced a substantial number of times; he averaged above 47 against 5 of them. On the other hand, Sachin managed to average more than 47 against only one pair among the 9 he faced.
[/quote]

AND what a pair that was 

Quote:AND what a pair that was   

If I remember correctly, that was based on a single tour of the West Indies in 97. It was a dull series, every game a draw except for one in which the WI won. The pitches were flat, yet everyone's strike rate was low. Tendulkar scored no centuries, but he patiently blocked out Walsh and Ambrose for quite a few good 60s-80sish scores, attacking when possible. He never looked bothered.

In the 94 WI vs Ind series, Ambrose didnt play, and I think Tendulkar dodged him again in a tour in the late 90s or early 00s, facing only Walsh.

Lara could not play Kumble at all. I never understood why such a great player of spin found Kumble so difficult. Lara also loved subcontinent pitches, yet couldnt get the ball away in India. He always looked suffocated when playing in India, in both ODIs and Tests. His strike rate drops tremendously there.

If not for Jimmy Adams and Shiv, our record vs India in the 90s would suck.

Niether Tendulkar or Lara could play Wasim or Waqar Younis. Lara has a couple great, aggressive ODI centuries vs them, but in general they murdered everyone during that era, except painters like Steve Waugh. Even a patient guy like Chanders only averages 31 against them. Generally, a set batsmen vs Wasim and Younis will get close to 100, but then get clean bowled in the 80s or 90s. It's like they eventually get fed up with you and decide to knock you down at will.

Instinctively, I always felt Tendulkar's technique was better than Lara's.  He seemed more compact to me, more secure and less likely to give chances. But as your stats show, he struggled against extreme pace and extreme swing, as I guess all great batsmen do.

I think a great Tendulkar innings had more shots than a great Lara innings; he only attacked what was there to hit but typically worked you all over the field for ones, twos and threes.

Lara in contrast, had more shots in general, was better at finding gaps, and was better at piercing the field and finding the boundary; he scored boundaries in clumps, always had a healthy strike rate and targeted specific bowlers for fast runs.

But in all his big innings, unlike most of Tendy's big innings, Lara slowly reduces things to a handful of shots. He cuts out sixes, keeps the ball down as much as possible, and goes for cuts, glances and exaggerrated off drives. When in the zone, Lara will simplify his game and kill you aggressive but low risk power-hitting. When in the zone, Tendulkar will drive you mad with variety. Kohli is the same way; excellent at picking up 1s, 2s and 3s.

Tendulkar, like a lot of Indian batsmen bar Laxman and Dravid, also lost focus after he hit 100. Kohli, again, is the same way. He doesn't push on to big scores and seems exhausted when he hits 100. Lara was the opposite and liked to go big.

Tendulkar's record vs Steyn is superb, especially since those knocks came when he was well past his prime. I think he entirely cut out his leg-side game for 2 of those centuries, feeling that this aspect of his game was suspect (or was it off drives he cut out?). Lara's equivalent would be his 202 vs South Africa in Johannesburg in 2005. No Steyn, but hostile fast bowling, sledging and bounce. I rank it as his best double century. In it, Lara gets totally molested for about 2 hours then slowly starts fighting back.

Tendy's stats vs Murali are surprising. I thought they'd be much higher. He seemed to have no trouble with Murali in the 90s, yet struggled when Murali hit his stride in the late 90s, 00s.

Tendy's stats vs Donald and Akram might be brought down by some early games as a teenager. That guy was in diapers when he was facing some of these legends, yet out performing everyone in his team.

Those worm graphs are interesting.

Tendulkar's worm goes gently up and up and up, then slowly goes down into a slump. Tendulkar's worm then goes back up and up and up, and then slowly slumps once again.

Lara's the opposite, continually fluctuating between highs and lows.

It would be interesting to know how much a batsman personality and habits influence this. Kevin Pietersen follows the Lara pattern, while someone like Shiv follows the Tendy pattern.

Some stats from the Pakpassion cricket forum:

Quote:From 1990 to 1998, Lara had the highest ODI average in the world of anyone with over 4000 ODI runs. He averaged 47. Next best was 41.

From 1990 to 2001, Lara had the highest average in the world of anyone with over 4000 ODI runs batting outside the subcontinent vs non minnows. He averaged 42 with 11 centuries. Tendulkar averaged 33 with 3 centuries using the same criteria.

From 1990 to 1999, vs non minnows, on ALL GROUNDS and in ALL CONTINENTS in the world (a criteria which typically benefits Asian batsmen), Lara had the highest ODI average in the world of anyone with over 4000 ODI runs, with an average of 42. Tendulkar averaged 40.

From 1990 to 2001, vs the top four ODI teams on all grounds, Lara averaged 43 and Tendulkar 39.

From 1990 to 2001, vs AUSTRALIA IN AUSTRALIA, Lara averages the highest of all international batsmen with over 500 runs, with an average of 42.8. Tendulkar averages 23.

Across their entire careers, vs all non minnows in Australia, Lara averages 40, Tendulkar 35.

Between 1990 and 2007 (Lara's entire career), vs the best bowlers (Ambrose, Steyn, Walsh, Murali, Warne, Pollock, Donald, McGrath, Lee, Younis, Akram, Bishop, Akhtar, Vaas), on all grounds, the following batsmen average:

Lara: 43
Tendulkar: 39
Ponting: 38


Versus these same bowlers outside the subcontinent, Lara averages 43, Tendulkar 34, Ponting 36.

Versus these same bowlers outside the subcontinent and outside the West Indies, Lara averages 40, Tendulkar 34, Ponting 38.

Quote:Here are the ICC rankings from the 90s. He really dominated the ODI scene for a long time. In fact he really dominated for as long as he batted at top 3.

Here are the rankings:

As of 31-Dec-1993:
1st rank - 863 ICC pts - B.C. Lara

As of 31-Dec-1994:
1st rank - 826 ICC pts - B.C. Lara

As of 31-Dec-1995:
1st rank - 880 ICC pts - B.C. Lara

As of 31-Dec-1996:
1st rank - 891 ICC pts - B.C. Lara

As of 31-Dec-1997:
1st rank - 883 ICC pts B.C. Lara

Only in 1998 did Lara drop in rankings

As of 31-Dec-1998:

2nd rank - 886 ICC pts - B.C. Lara

And surprise, 1998 is the same year when Lara started to bat at no. 4 or below. 

I cannot remember half of those matches !

sometimes it is a good memory boost !  8)

I was digging around the historical ICC rankings this morning and came across this. On this day 29 years ago, West Indies had four (Richards, Haynes, Greenidge and Richardson) of the top six ranked batsman in the world and three (Marshall, Garner, Holding) of the top six bowlers.