What's new

Who is the best batter you have seen, who does not average 50 in Test cricket?

T

Ted123

Tape Ball Star
Joined
Sep 26, 2017
Runs
622
This thread is about batters who didn’t ended up with a test average of 50 or not likely to end with that average but are rated very highly.

Who is the best batsman you have seen that misses out on averaging 50 in Test cricket?

Some names on top of my head which I think of and it’s my personal choice are Martin Crowe, Virat Kohli, Hashim Amla, Kevin Pietersen etc.
 
My choice is Graeme Smith. He had the unenviable task of opening the batting in challenging conditions and also being captain for the vast majority of his career. He seemed to always score tough runs and was a real fighting cricketer.

I rate him amongst the ATGs. Not many can juggle all the things he juggled and still have amazing batting stats
 
Virender Sehwag, Saurav Ganguly, Inzamam Ul Haq, Mohd Yousuf, Mahela Jaywardene, V.V.S.Laxman, M.J.Clarke, and of course Graeme Smith.
 
gani999 said:
Virender Sehwag, Saurav Ganguly, Inzamam Ul Haq, Mohd Yousuf, Mahela Jaywardene, V.V.S.Laxman, M.J.Clarke, and of course Graeme Smith.
Click to expand...
I give Sehwag and Inzi a bit of leeway and consider them 50 averaging players.

Both averaged 50 for their countries ( Well Sehwag 49.4) but the one off ICC super test match pulls them down their average.
 
Kevin Pietersen easely and then Graeme Smith.

Kevin Pietersen is actually one of the most underrated batsman on this forum. This guy was a true match winner. He played some of the most amazing innings you will see in test cricket.
 
I know he isn't amongst the greats but Ian Bell is one my favorites especially his legendary run in 2010-11 especially in Tests vs India

Went to the test at Trent Bridge in 2011 and he scored a sublime 150 always thought he should of averaged higher.

Not an ATG but definitely an England legend
 
neonoir said:
I know he isn't amongst the greats but Ian Bell is one my favorites especially his legendary run in 2010-11 especially in Tests vs India

Went to the test at Trent Bridge in 2011 and he scored a sublime 150 always thought he should of averaged higher.

Not an ATG but definitely an England legend
Click to expand...
Also, so classy as a batsman
 
DeadlyVenom said:
My choice is Graeme Smith. He had the unenviable task of opening the batting in challenging conditions and also being captain for the vast majority of his career. He seemed to always score tough runs and was a real fighting cricketer.

I rate him amongst the ATGs. Not many can juggle all the things he juggled and still have amazing batting stats
Click to expand...
Was gonna say the same thing lol.

Graeme Smith is my pick as well.
 
neonoir said:
Chris Gayle has got to be up there 15 centuries 7k runs and would score big daddy hundreds, double centuries and has got a triple hundred
Click to expand...

Very good shout. He's got 2 x triple test hundreds.

He's for me the most underrated test batsman of all time because most people remember him for his big hitting in white ball cricket.
 
topspin said:
Very good shout. He's got 2 x triple test hundreds.

He's for me the most underrated test batsman of all time because most people remember him for his big hitting in white ball cricket.
Click to expand...
He's up there with the most underrated test batsmen ever especially considering how weak the Windies team was that he played in
 
Gilchrist and Sehwag come to mind. Because they both could have averaged 50 if they wanted to, but played their roles best for the team. Sehwag went out to dominate sides early on, and opened because there wasn't any space, he might have done even better middle order. I’m sure he could have slowed down a bit and got that 50 average.

Gilchrist often scored at a fast rate in order to get runs quickly for Australia to declare or have enough time to bowl out opposition. Also it’s likely he would have averaged more without keeping at the same time.

If I had to go with one as a batsman I’d go with Sehwag. Extremely unique player. I genuinely can’t think of a better batsman averaging under 50.
 
Abdullah Shafique... My boy is talented but just cannot score runs.
 
Averaging 50 is not everything.

There are average batters who may average 50 because they played a lot on flat roads. Similarly, there can be superior batters who may average less than 50 because they mostly batted on tough SENA pitches.

Anyway, Hashim Amla comes to mind. He finished his Test career with an average of 46.64.
 
Martin Crowe
Arvinda De Silva
Damien Martyn
Gordon Greenidge
Richie Richardson in his Pom
Saeed Anwer


When we talk about talent i would include Carl Hooper, Mansoor Akhtar, Imran Nazir and maybe even Saleem Malik
 
Mobashir said:
Kevin Pietersen easely and then Graeme Smith.

Kevin Pietersen is actually one of the most underrated batsman on this forum. This guy was a true match winner. He played some of the most amazing innings you will see in test cricket.
Click to expand...

On flat decks in 2000s era?
 
Ted123 said:
This thread is about batters who didn’t ended up with a test average of 50 or not likely to end with that average but are rated very highly.

Who is the best batsman you have seen that misses out on averaging 50 in Test cricket?

Some names on top of my head which I think of and it’s my personal choice are Martin Crowe, Virat Kohli, Hashim Amla, Kevin Pietersen etc.
Click to expand...
Very interesting thread. I vote pietersen. Without doubt. Surely he is the right choice. I don't see anyone else

Won a test series in India and Australia. 2 most difficult places to win.

And Martin crowed would be next I guess.
 
sweep_shot said:
Averaging 50 is not everything.

There are average batters who may average 50 because they played a lot on flat roads. Similarly, there can be superior batters who may average less than 50 because they mostly batted on tough SENA pitches.

Anyway, Hashim Amla comes to mind. He finished his Test career with an average of 46.64.
Click to expand...
Also crowe, pietersen.
 
BouncerGuy said:
Yep..Missed the mark by 0.4...
Click to expand...
Inzi was my grandpa's favourite batsman.

With the talent he had I honestly believe he under achieved.

He should have been 52 plus averaging batsman.

He still had a great career but he was the most talented batsman I have ever seen from Asia. Stylish as well. He could play well vs all.
 
Ted123 said:
On flat decks in 2000s era?
Click to expand...
All pitches in 00's were not flat. I guess you already knows it.
To be a special knock there has to be something in the pitch and/or something about the bowling attack you are scoring against.
 
Mobashir said:
All pitches in 00's were not flat. I guess you already knows it.
To be a special knock there has to be something in the pitch and/or something about the bowling attack you are scoring against.
Click to expand...

Yeah but there were like 10 batters averaging 50+ in that era. KP wasn’t one of those.
 
ads101 said:
Gilchrist and Sehwag come to mind. Because they both could have averaged 50 if they wanted to, but played their roles best for the team. Sehwag went out to dominate sides early on, and opened because there wasn't any space, he might have done even better middle order. I’m sure he could have slowed down a bit and got that 50 average.

Gilchrist often scored at a fast rate in order to get runs quickly for Australia to declare or have enough time to bowl out opposition. Also it’s likely he would have averaged more without keeping at the same time.

If I had to go with one as a batsman I’d go with Sehwag. Extremely unique player. I genuinely can’t think of a better batsman averaging under 50.
Click to expand...
Yeah people don't look at their SR when they are downplaying them.Scoring fastest century or fastest 200 isn't something everyone can do.If they played slow than their ave will increase
 
aboveandbeyond said:
Didn't realize inzis average fell below 50.

Therefore definitely would be in my list as well as Peak Kohli whom I forgot about
Click to expand...
Yep. we would have expected that he has a 50 average but he missed the mark at his retirement... But a GOAT batter for Pakistan..
 
Hashim Amla.

Graeme Smith is the most overrated Batsmen to walk planet Earth.
 
Martyn is my personal favorite in the 45-50 averaging bracket. Should have played 100 Tests but Clarke and Hussey cut his career short.

Quality batsman, far better in Test cricket than Kohli.
 
I watched lot of Micheal Atherton when cricket was free on BBC and ITV I think he's underrated
Cook was another decent batsmen.

Muhammed azurudeen was another one I liked watching
 
It’s none other than the great VVS Laxman.

The man who took apart McGrath and Warne in what was the most incredible test knock(281) that has been played in winning cause against the greatest all round attack of all time. He literally won India the game from a position from where no other batsman in the history of the game can won a match and series. With that knock, he literally banged the arrogance of wannabe Australian fans out there.
 
Batsman with average between 45 and 50 with more than 50000 runs


PlayerSpanMatRunsAvg
DPMD Jayawardene (SL)1997-2014
Inzamam-ul-Haq (ICC/PAK)1992-2007
V Sehwag (ICC/IND)2001-2013
MJ Clarke (AUS)2004-2015
TT Samaraweera (SL)2001-2013
RN Harvey (AUS)1948-1963
KD Walters (AUS)1965-1981
GC Smith (ICC/SA)2002-2014
G Boycott (ENG)1964-1982
AC Gilchrist (AUS)1999-2008
RB Kanhai (WI)1957-1974
KP Pietersen (ENG)2005-2014
WM Lawry (AUS)1961-1971
V Kohli (IND)2011-2025
CH Lloyd (WI)1966-1985
HM Amla (SA)2004-2019
Misbah-ul-Haq (PAK)2001-2017
VVS Laxman (IND)1996-2012
MD Crowe (NZ)1982-1995
AN Cook (ENG)2006-2018
G Kirsten (SA)1993-2004
JL Langer (AUS)1993-2007
M Azharuddin (IND)1984-2000

​
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I'm going to go with Angelo Matthews. I can see he's not very rated on this forum. One of my favourite players and was a treat to watch. Just nearly 45 average with 8K+ runs. Many centuries to his name and pretty decent away stats
 
It was very hard to achieve 50 plus average 25-30 years ago. Bowling was of very high standard, lively wickets , no DRS . No wonders players like Majid, Zaheer, Gooch, Saeed Anwar, Martin Crow, David Gower, Gordon Greenidge, Desmond Haaynes, Kallicharan and many great players never achieved 50 plus average.
 
I know he averaged 40, but I've always felt Faf Du Plessis was worth his weight in gold for South Africa. He significantly underachieved in test cricket due to a variety of reasons.

He should have averaged closed to 50.
 
moghul said:
It was very hard to achieve 50 plus average 25-30 years ago.
Click to expand...
Only period when it was easy for batsmen to avg 50 was flat track era in middle. It's not the last 10 years.

Home and away combined: 50 plus avg with 5K runs

  • 90s: 3 batsmen
  • 00s: 13 batsmen
  • Last 10 years: 3 batsmen


Away 50 plus Avg with 3K runs

  • 90s: 2 batsmen
  • 00s: 7 batsmen
  • Last 10 years: 1 batsman
That's why all the flat tracks average of 00s should be seen in context and all averages are not equal. it's not been easy to average 50 plus for batsmen in the last 10 years.
 
hafizexpress said:
I'm going to go with Angelo Matthews. I can see he's not very rated on this forum. One of my favourite players and was a treat to watch. Just nearly 45 average with 8K+ runs. Many centuries to his name and pretty decent away stats
Click to expand...
he is a good player but specifically in ODI cricket
 
Buffet said:
Only period when it was easy for batsmen to avg 50 was flat track era in middle. It's not the last 10 years.

Home and away combined: 50 plus avg with 5K runs

  • 90s: 3 batsmen
  • 00s: 13 batsmen
  • Last 10 years: 3 batsmen


Away 50 plus Avg with 3K runs

  • 90s: 2 batsmen
  • 00s: 7 batsmen
  • Last 10 years: 1 batsman
That's why all the flat tracks average of 00s should be seen in context and all averages are not equal. it's not been easy to average 50 plus for batsmen in the last 10 years.
Click to expand...
I am asking this more so to gain knowledge than anything, but don't you also think the quality of batsmen in the 00s is largely superior to those from last 10 years, where we've had an influx of hacks and also a lot less test cricket? The 00s had proper bats who knew how to hold a bat. Was it really a flat track era like people make it out to be or is it the case of a better crop of REALLY good players and the rest were tiers below? Right now, we don't have as many good batsmen like that to have tiers. And test cricket is also played a lot less so you won't have that many batsmen averaging 50.

All in all what I'm trying to say is that in hindsight, these stats don't seem holistic in supporting the notion that the era before was flatter. But I could be missing something thus my questions
 
Impossible to choose. Too many variables. It is going to be subjective mostly. Cook, Pietersen, Gilly way too many. All these guys most likely to have some minor flaws.
 
jeetu said:
Batsman with average between 45 and 50 with more than 50000 runs


PlayerSpanMatRunsAvg
DPMD Jayawardene (SL)1997-2014
Inzamam-ul-Haq (ICC/PAK)1992-2007
V Sehwag (ICC/IND)2001-2013
MJ Clarke (AUS)2004-2015
TT Samaraweera (SL)2001-2013
RN Harvey (AUS)1948-1963
KD Walters (AUS)1965-1981
GC Smith (ICC/SA)2002-2014
G Boycott (ENG)1964-1982
AC Gilchrist (AUS)1999-2008
RB Kanhai (WI)1957-1974
KP Pietersen (ENG)2005-2014
WM Lawry (AUS)1961-1971
V Kohli (IND)2011-2025
CH Lloyd (WI)1966-1985
HM Amla (SA)2004-2019
Misbah-ul-Haq (PAK)2001-2017
VVS Laxman (IND)1996-2012
MD Crowe (NZ)1982-1995
AN Cook (ENG)2006-2018
G Kirsten (SA)1993-2004
JL Langer (AUS)1993-2007
M Azharuddin (IND)1984-2000

​
Click to expand...

Really helpful list -- thanks.
There are some good players on that list

I am remember a comment by Boycott, who once said that all openers should have "5" added to their average, as they have to face the new ball with the fastest bowlers and you were always at risk of an absolute pearl.
Inevitably, somewhat self-serving, but I think it does have merit for batsmen from Eng, Aus and SA if they played 50% of their Tests at home. batting in the middle order is a lot tougher than going out to face the new ball
 
best batter , Michael clarke, graeme smith, KP
most stylish vvs laxman
honourable mention Virat kohli..at his prime he was destructive
 
It would be interesting to know if people who are mentioning Martyn do rate him way higher than Mark Waugh also?

Mark Waugh’s average was even lower and the reason Martyn sat out of the team was because Jnr Waugh did a pretty good job for Aussies back then.
 
There was a poll on an Aussie forum about Laxman vs Martyn in test cricket and Laxman won by a landslide.

Neither of them is the best to average below 50, but if the choice is between these two I know who I will choose.


I will pick Kohli here, as he is the only one to have 30+ centuries amongst all players averaging less than 50.
 
Ab Fan said:
It would be interesting to know if people who are mentioning Martyn do rate him way higher than Mark Waugh also?

Mark Waugh’s average was even lower and the reason Martyn sat out of the team was because Jnr Waugh did a pretty good job for Aussies back then.
Click to expand...
No one rates Martyn so high on other forums, he batted in the era of absolute roads, he was good but not great and shouldn’t be anywhere in this debate.

Waugh was definitely better.
 
Laxman is highly overrated and a classic example of how much influence India has on shaping narratives.

He was lucky to play in an era of flat tracks home and away and still only managed to scored 17 hundreds and less than 9k runs in spite of playing 134 Test matches.

He played only 4-5 great innings in his career but was mediocre 90% of the time but got romanticized as a man of crisis, conveniently forgetting that he himself was one of the main reasons why India would find itself in a crisis in the first place.

His fake reputation ruined the careers of quite a few Indian batsmen in domestic cricket who would have performed more consistently if given the opportunity.

He was lucky to retire in 2012 as it was around 2013 that India pivoted towards extremely spin-friendly pitches. Had he played for India in late 2010s and early 2020s, he would have been a failure like Rahane.
 
Mamoon said:
Laxman is highly overrated and a classic example of how much influence India has on shaping narratives.

He was lucky to play in an era of flat tracks home and away and still only managed to scored 17 hundreds and less than 9k runs in spite of playing 134 Test matches.

He played only 4-5 great innings in his career but was mediocre 90% of the time but got romanticized as a man of crisis, conveniently forgetting that he himself was one of the main reasons why India would find itself in a crisis in the first place.

His fake reputation ruined the careers of quite a few Indian batsmen in domestic cricket who would have performed more consistently if given the opportunity.

He was lucky to retire in 2012 as it was around 2013 that India pivoted towards extremely spin-friendly pitches. Had he played for India in late 2010s and early 2020s, he would have been a failure like Rahane.
Click to expand...

At this point, I think it's easier for you to list out who in Indian cricket isn't overrated. Far less time-consuming.
 
Mamoon said:
Laxman is highly overrated and a classic example of how much influence India has on shaping narratives.

He was lucky to play in an era of flat tracks home and away and still only managed to scored 17 hundreds and less than 9k runs in spite of playing 134 Test matches.

He played only 4-5 great innings in his career but was mediocre 90% of the time but got romanticized as a man of crisis, conveniently forgetting that he himself was one of the main reasons why India would find itself in a crisis in the first place.

His fake reputation ruined the careers of quite a few Indian batsmen in domestic cricket who would have performed more consistently if given the opportunity.

He was lucky to retire in 2012 as it was around 2013 that India pivoted towards extremely spin-friendly pitches. Had he played for India in late 2010s and early 2020s, he would have been a failure like Rahane.
Click to expand...
@jnaveen1980 take note and learn
 
Mamoon said:
Laxman is highly overrated and a classic example of how much influence India has on shaping narratives.

He was lucky to play in an era of flat tracks home and away and still only managed to scored 17 hundreds and less than 9k runs in spite of playing 134 Test matches.

He played only 4-5 great innings in his career but was mediocre 90% of the time but got romanticized as a man of crisis, conveniently forgetting that he himself was one of the main reasons why India would find itself in a crisis in the first place.

His fake reputation ruined the careers of quite a few Indian batsmen in domestic cricket who would have performed more consistently if given the opportunity.

He was lucky to retire in 2012 as it was around 2013 that India pivoted towards extremely spin-friendly pitches. Had he played for India in late 2010s and early 2020s, he would have been a failure like Rahane.
Click to expand...
He is overrated by Indians only. The rest of the world views him appropriately - good with the occasional flash of greatness.
 
RexRex said:
At this point, I think it's easier for you to list out who in Indian cricket isn't overrated. Far less time-consuming.
Click to expand...
India has produced plenty of great players, but they have always produced the most number of overrated players as well because of the influence and impact of their fanbases. A lot of decent crickets have attained legendary status in the game simply because they are Indian.
 
DeadlyVenom said:
He is overrated by Indians only. The rest of the world views him appropriately - good with the occasional flash of greatness.
Click to expand...
It seems like his Wikipedia page is run by Indian techies as well.

“A right-handed batsman known for his elegant stroke play, Laxman played as a middle-order batsman in Test cricket and is widely regarded as one of the greatest batsmen in the history of test cricket.”

What a load of nonsense.
 
DeadlyVenom said:
He is overrated by Indians only. The rest of the world views him appropriately - good with the occasional flash of greatness.
Click to expand...

He isn't overrated by Indians either. He has played a couple of good knocks against Aus including one legendary innings .. that's it.
 
Mamoon said:
It seems like his Wikipedia page is run by Indian techies as well.

“A right-handed batsman known for his elegant stroke play, Laxman played as a middle-order batsman in Test cricket and is widely regarded as one of the greatest batsmen in the history of test cricket.”

What a load of nonsense.
Click to expand...
The world is paying the price for overzealous Indian Techies!

Laxman bong called "The greatest batsman in the history of test cricket..."

What a bunch of crap!
 
Definitely one of the best batter in pressure situations no matter whatever certain deluded sections of fans claim about him.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

atreus
  • Poll Poll
Ricky Ponting vs Hashim Amla – Who was the superior Test batter?
Replies
39
Views
687
atreus
atreus
T
Imran Khan vs Curtly Ambrose vs Dale Steyn vs Wasim Akram – Who is the better Test bowler?
Replies
19
Views
435
Justcrazy
Justcrazy
Buffet
Joe Root versus Hashim Amla in the Test format
2
Replies
158
Views
3K
atreus
atreus
BouncerGuy
[PICTURE] Kamindu Mendis named as ICC Men’s Emerging Cricketer of the Year (2024) [Saim Ayub misses out]
Replies
5
Views
145
FearlessRoar
FearlessRoar
MenInG
Beyond the Boundary: In a year of surprises, can Pakistan produce one more Test shock in South Africa?
Replies
37
Views
1K
The Bald Eagle
The Bald Eagle
Back
Top