He has just become the first Englishman to score ten thousand test runs, but the affection many English cricket supporters feel for Alastair Cook can’t be measured by statistics alone. He’s a middle-class hero, the embodiment of all that is quintessentially English: tough but unassuming, resilient but always polite, handsome in squeaky-clean way, with an upper lip stiffer than Lord Melchett’s moustache. When his wife Alice took him home to meet her parents, they must have been doing cartwheels.
The narrative Cook’s fans propagate – one we’ve heard a lot recently – is that he’s an all time great and unquestionably England’s best batsman of the modern era. The statistics say it all: 10,000 runs at an average of 46 is better than any previous England opener. It doesn’t matter than he averages less than world greats like Tendulkar, Lara, Dravid and Ponting because Alastair is an opener. It’s tough at the top you know.
Unfortunately however, some supporters feel very differently about Cook. They’ve come to resent him: they believe he’s privileged, someone who’s benefited from favouritism, and they believe his behaviour during the Kevin Pietersen saga was spineless and backstabbing. To these people Cook has always been somewhat overrated, mollycoddled, put on a pedestal and indulged like no other player in English cricketing history.
Cook’s critics see his 10,000 test runs as a product of longevity rather than skill. When Cook has performed badly and should’ve been dropped, they believe excuses were found for him. Their narrative is thus: Cook has scored so many runs because he’s undroppable – a product of who is he and where he’s from, rather than what he is as a player. Cook, they argue, has always been given the luxury of time that other players (who perhaps aren’t cut from the same cloth) have been denied. See Carberry, Michael and most recently, Bell, Ian.
Where do I stand in this great debate? Actually I have sympathy for both views – which means I’m about to piss everyone off. But hear me out. I’ll take a deep breath and, like Alastair himself, ignore the criticism and soldier on heroically …
After years of swearing under my breath as the likes of Merv Hughes, Ricky Ponting and Ian Healy sledged us to oblivion, I’m kind of chuffed that a mild-mannered English chap has broken such an impressive record. What’s more, I can’t think of a single player who has badmouthed Cook over the years. The worst his so called ‘nemesis’ Kevin Pietersen could say is that Alastair is like Ned Flanders (it’s hardly x-rated stuff, is it). Consequently I genuinely believe that Chef’s troops both like and respect him.
What’s more, my hunch is that Cook actually had very little to do with Pietersen’s sacking. Not directly anyway. Some would have us believe that Cook made an ultimatum to the ECB that the rebel had to go. I don’t believe this for a second. Cook was lucky to keep his job after the Ashes whitewash, was in no position to make ultimatums, and was probably savvy enough to realise this and keep his head down.
Some might criticise him for failing to fight for Pietersen, who was probably still the team’s best batsman, but would you really put your career on the line for a batsman you’ve recently argued with? I wouldn’t. I believe the ECB made a decision to scapegoat Pietersen after the Ashes, and Cook simply went along with it. He probably thought he wouldn’t be able to change the ECB’s mind even if he’d wanted to.
On the other hand, as regular readers of this blog will know, I’ve always found the hyperbole surrounding Cook a little nauseating – he was anointed as the chosen one by some observers long before he’d even made his test debut. However, I’ve also come to realise that none of this is Cook’s fault. He doesn’t write the headlines; he can’t control what people say. Alastair usually shuns the limelight and, as I said beforehand, simply likes to keep his head down.
When Cook played well for England U19 a decade or so ago, then scored a daddy hundred for Essex against the Australians in 2005, the hyperbole reached fever pitch. When he scored a ton on his test debut (in India of course) all the prophecies seemed to be coming true. Everyone was getting rather excited about a player who I was initially quite lukewarm about.
Alastair clearly had a good head on his shoulders when he burst onto the scene, but being a purist I was nervous about his technique – an anxiety that increased when the Aussies dismantled him on his first Ashes tour. I still think Alastair has been fortunate to play in an era when great fast bowlers have been in short supply. His record against the very best is actually a little mixed. He averages less than 40 against our great rivals, Australia and South Africa, and has only been productive in one Ashes series out of six.
Having said all that, Alastair’s prime attributes – his powers of concentration, his ability to cash in when conditions favour the batsmen, and his calm temperament – were always apparent. It’s no surprise that he’s maximised every inch of talent he possesses. Once again, it’s not Cook’s fault that the establishment saw him as the ideal pin-up boy for a toxic ECB brand that aspired to be like John Lewis. And it wasn’t Cook’s fault (although it was his good fortune) that Marcus Trescothick’s international career was cut cruelly short. After all, it’s Trescothick’s mental demons that enabled Cook to play for England at such a young age and therefore challenge Tendulkar’s record. It’s interesting to note that good old Banger scored almost 6000 runs in 76 tests. Had he played 130 tests like Cook, he too was on course to break the 10,000 run mark (do the Maths). How we miss him.
Where do I rate Cook in the pantheon of English batsmen and world batsmen? Once again I fall somewhere in the middle of the two warring camps. I think he’s a very good opening batsmen, one of the best we’ve had in recent times, but personally I’d place him behind Gooch, Trescothick, Michael Vaughan (when he was purely an opener) and probably Alec Stewart at his best too.
I appreciate this is a subjective judgement, but I don’t think Cook has it in him to play like Vaughan did against McGrath, Gillespie and Warne down under. Nor do I think Cook would’ve been good enough to score two sublime hundreds against Ambrose and Walsh at Barbados in 1994. Although rating Stewart above Cook is somewhat controversial, don’t forget that Alec scored 8,500 runs in his 133 tests (almost the same number as Cook), and he was batting down the order and keeping wicket in many of those games. Stewart actually averaged 45 as a pure opener against some of the most fearsome attacks in living memory. In many ways he was the antithesis of Cook: brilliant against pace but fragile against the spinners.
I do, however, believe that Cook is the best player England have produced in Asian conditions. His game is perfectly suited to the subcontinent. His technical foibles are rarely exposed on the dry pitches, and his prowess against spin, his superb powers of concentration and remarkable fitness come to the fore. He was an absolute giant when England won in India in 2012-13. I still rate that as one of the best captain’s performances I’ve witnessed. It was right up there with Graham Gooch carrying his bat at Headingley in 1991.
The following statistics, which compare Cook with other recent England openers, prove my point. Alastair is absolutely awesome in Asia – head and shoulders above the rest – but pretty much in the middle of the pack when it comes to performances in England. Indeed, his record at home isn’t actually that much better than Mark Butcher’s.
In Asia
Cook 2252 runs at 61
Trescothick 1306 at 41
Gooch 869 at 40
Vaughan 866 at 38
Atherton 533 at 36
Strauss 797 at 35
Butcher 446 at 30
Stewart 428 at 24
In England
Trescothick 3472 runs at 51
Gooch 5917 at 46
Vaughan 3217 at 46
Cook 4995 at 43
Stewart 4650 at 41
Butcher 2405 at 41
Strauss 4045 at 40
Atherton 4716 at 39
Although you can see that Cook’s career statistics stack up very well against his predecessors, the lads who played in the 90s had to face more penetrative bowling at a time when batting averages were generally lower. The benchmark for a world-class player used to be 40 when it’s now more like 50. The England set up is also a lot more professional these days. Who knows how successful talented misfits like Hick and Ramprakash could’ve been with central contracts and consistency of selection?
Even so, I still think that Cook should be classified as one of England’s all time greats – even though he’s never been higher than 9 in the world test rankings. He’s not quite on the same level as international superstars like Tendulkar, Lara, Ponting, AB de Villiers or Kumar Sangakkara (who average ten runs more than him in some cases) but he’s clearly on the next plateau.
What’s more, although many contemporary openers have averaged just as much or more than Cook – there’s David Warner (50), Graeme Smith (48), Matthew Hayden (51), Justin Langer (45) and even Simon Katich (50 as an opener) – only Smith had to carry the burden of captaincy that Cook endures.
In many ways I think Cook’s career has clear parallels with England’s other record breaker, Jimmy Anderson. Both got off to sensational starts, struggled somewhat as coaches messed with their method, then bounced back to become fixtures in the side. Both players have also had their critics: while it’s true that Jimmy isn’t quite as effective outside England when conditions are tough (just as Cook isn’t quite so prolific in England when opening the batting isn’t simple) both are very fine cricketers we should treasure.
While I don’t think that Cook will ever be my favourite player – I’m a sucker for style and although he cuts and pulls elegantly he’s not so attractive off the front foot – I can’t deny that England would be completely lost without him. Can you imagine Hales and Robson opening in the next Ashes? No thanks.
To play for over a decade, and be as productive as Cook has been, is a brilliant achievement, and he deserves all the plaudits he gets. Perhaps the greatest praise I can give Alastair is this: would you be surprised if he goes on to score fifteen thousand test runs? I wouldn’t.
James Morgan
I know one thing that’s irrefutable, had he not stabbed a certain South African in the back he would not have been the first England player to reach 10,000 runs. I cheer when he does well but I’ve never warmed to him.
I,agree with most of what you – and Andy – write.
“but the affection many English cricket supporters feel for Alastair Cook can’t be measured… ”
Can’t argue with that.
:-)
A balanced assessment but very much ‘last 25 years’ assessment as far as England players are compared, which is a bit of an easy one when you include the disaster that was the 90s. If you look back over, say, 50 years (which seems fair as it covers the professional era and properly protected pitches) it becomes obvious that Cook is good, but not great. His average is a little below Boycott and the same as Amiss. And they were playing against a (much) stronger Windies and had no easy runs against new test countries. Go back even further and the comparison with Jack Hobbs makes it obvious who is the true great amongst England openers – an average of 57 at a time when pitches were worse and innings totals were generally lower. And Hobbs, Boycott and Amiss averages include the almost inevitable end of career decline yet to factor into Cook’s figures.
Cook is a high quality test opener but a great? No.
I should have added that I am a different Andy to the first poster. :)
I’m 40 and only started watching cricket in the late 80s. I can’t really comment on any players before then. ‘Write about what you know’!
I’m 61 and saw both Boycott and Amiss (Amiss was the better bat but Boycott had the better mindset for achieving averages) but I should stress that I did not see Hobbs! But Hobbs numbers overwhelm any issues of era.
Richie Benaud always used to rate Ken Barrington very highly too. I never got to see Amiss or Boycott but obviously I’ve heard good things about both.
Well done to him for his achievement. But, and it’s a big one for me, he’s a selfish, uninspiring man. Selfish I can live with provided there’s some substance. But there’s none. He’s the most boring man and cricketer on earth. Add that to the selfishness and I’m left cold. Perhaps that’s why the ECB like him – they can manipulate him for their own purposes – but to inspire my kids? Nope – never going to happen….and let’s not forget his job, at heart, is to entertain. Give me (or my and others kids) KP every time. So, well done Alastair, but please we need more.
Ps – I think the Asia stats are somewhat pumped by the fact he doesn’t sweat. Well done him on that note but, jeez, that would make a huge difference to many other players’ stats in Asia where v hot and v humid…but the boy is clearly blessed
A bit unkind and it could only have been written by one who either never saw Lord Geoffrey or has wiped the memory. Noone can possibly rival Boycott for selfishness and boring batting. Although I must admit he did have two redeeming features – the wonderful occasion when Botham called him for a single, leant on his bat and left him stranded mid wicket; and his amazing belief in his own opinion, even when faced with overwhelming evidence. Perhaps the best example came not that long ago when he claimed Woakes was so slow that his mother could play him. It may have seemed fair comment except that the Sky speed gun had just registered him at 88mph.
Oh Andy you’re too kind to Cook. Perhaps it’s your old age but I thank you for your condescension. At least GB stood up for what he believed, had an opinion and some substance. Cook is the essence of “path of least resistance”.
The problem was that Boycott only stood for one thing – Boycott. He was best summed up by Dennis Lillee when he said, “Geoff fell in love with himself at an early age and remained faithful”.
Alistair Cook is selected solely to help win cricket matches for England. A team needs balance and his role is to open the innings, take the shine off the new ball and to set a platform for others to build on. There are players lower down the order who are selected to hit out, move the score along and in so doing provide a different type of entertainment for the crowd. I find the test of all strengths that are shown in a test match to be both compelling and entertaining. If its pizazz that you are looking for, there is always T/20.
Well done James. A very fair and comprehensive review of Cook’s career so far. If you have managed to piss off anybody then it those who have the problem.
As you know I’m not one for stats but was very interested to see his averages alongside the others in Asia and in England. However, I have to say whether or not Cook is the greatest is immaterial to me. He has had a fine career and he’s been a great servant for English cricket. His ten thousand runs is a wonderful achievement. I’m not the least bit bothered about him being less than elegant off the front foot and I’m more than happy to watch him bat all day. :)
Thanks for an absorbing and in depth piece of writing giving tempered yet due credit to my favourite cricketer.
You’re welcome Jenny. Thanks for reading.
A ver good and fair piece, James – thanks ?
James,
Thanks for this – a very fair and balanced piece. And I mean that genuinely – not in the Fox News sense :)
I totally agree with your assessment of Cook as just short of the very highest class but on the next level down – and that’s perfectly fine with me.
That said, I’m not one to pick at certain parts of someone’s career and say that those stats “prove” something. Does anyone belittle Shane Warne because the best players of spin (India) smashed him all over the park? (average 47.18) Is Jacques Kallis any less one of the greatest all rounders the game has ever produced because he only averaged in the low forties against England and Australia? No – we judge players by their whole career – the swings and roundabouts, the peaks and troughs. And that’s as it should be. Every player has strengths and weaknesses.
And judged in the whole, Cook’s average of 46 puts him smack bang in the same territory as KP, Gower and Boycott – all of whom were/are greats of their era, but who wouldn’t quite make an all-time England XI. And that’s precisely where Cook belongs – a great of his era, but not an all time great.
I accept that today’s bowling attacks are of slightly lesser quality – but it should also be said that the quality of catching and fielding has never been better than in this era. So it may be easier to play the bowlers – but mistakes are more likely to be terminal, and you’re going to have to work harder to beat the field and score your runs. So I’m inclined to think that those factors almost even each other out when comparing across eras.
As for those who hate Cook because he did/didn’t stab KP in the back/happens to be middle class/gets bigged up by some journos – tell someone who cares. I’m also in agreement with you on his likely role in KP’s demise – ie not much. I’m pretty sure that was mostly Flower’s work, although I don’t doubt that when asked, Cook supported the decision. He was lucky to get through the summer of 2014 without being dropped – but that’s hardly his fault. Blame the selectors for that, not him. And as you say, he doesn’t write his own press.
10,000 runs is a fantastic achievement from a player who has squeezed every ounce of performance out of the ability he was given. That’s an admirable trait in any walk of life – and may he continue to do so for years to come.
Thanks Kev. That’s a brilliant point re: fielding standards. I think you’re on to something.
Thanks James and Kev, perfectly summarising my thoughts much more eloquently than I.
Thanks James.
It’s a hard one to quantify but I’ve always thought it unfair that people discount the averages of modern players quoting poorer bowlers and bigger bats without taking the improved fielding and catching into account. Matthew Hayden, of all people, made the same point in an interview I watched this week – although I take Simon’s point down thread that the standard of wicket keeping has dropped, if anything.
It all goes to prove that comparing across eras is tough. Career average is my preferred method, and if you look at cricket since I started watching (1979) it’s a fairly good measure. Anyone over 50 is the very highest class, mid-40’s is the next level down, and late thirties to low forties is a solid, but not spectacular, test career.
Good to see you on TFT again Kev! A great post and an excellent point about the fielding. I agree with every word you have written.
Mike Atherton has a good piece in today’s Times which highlights one strength you didn’t – “his ability to play the ball that bounces between waist and head height…” He concludes that this, and his powers of concentration over extended periods of time, are what makes the difference – “as for the rest, not much sets him truly apart”.
“A great of his era, but not an all time great” sounds about right to me.
Athers is right. He plays anything short remarkably well. Even the stuff outside off stump that might get him into trouble if it was pitched further up.
It was a good piece. My critical faculties only cut in when he claimed Cook habitually runs 5k at 20k/hour pace after cricket. This is 15 minute 5k pace, after a hard day , day after day, and without a race environment. National standard (top 100 in the UK) is 14:33 and this suggests Cook would be well inside this time in a race if prepared and tapered. He would probably be capable of the top 10 target of 13:40. Pull the other one Athers!
Fine work, can’t see much to disagree with. However, one fine player that you missed out from analysing is Graham Thorpe. A test match average of 44.66 was pretty decent for the time that he played in.
I wondered about his record in Asia as he was a class act against spin and he played a fair bit against a range of top class spinners in his time. It comes out as 47. He would have played against the younger Murali and the likes of Saqlain. In the period he played in that was pretty decent although somewhat short of the 61 Cook averages in Asia. That said Thorpe didn’t really belt the Banglas black and blue as he ‘only’ averaged 45 against them on their patch.
He only played 6 times in Australia and 16 tests overall and comes out with an overall record of 45 against what was always a high level attack. I think he’s a player that is seriously underrated in terms of his achievements.
Hi PKTroll. If I was to broaden the debate beyond openers I’d certainly talk about Thorpe. What you say is dead right. He’s my favourite England batsman of the last 3 decades. Excellent against pace and spin, and tough as nails. His battles with Murali (who rated him highly) and the Aussies were memorable. I still can’t believe how cruelly we dropped him in 2005 after he’d just had an injection to get through the summer. Fletcher made it a KP or Thorpe debate when really it should have been a matter of choosing 2 from KP, Thorpe and Bell. The latter should’ve been left out as he was a bit wet behind the ears back then and struggled mightily in the series.
Thanks James. I saw the comparison with openers per se but many of those also played at first drop so the cross referencing has a certain amount of a flaw. If you wish to talk about specialist batsmen I was always a believer that Stewart was also underrated too as he was a high class batsman without the gloves.
It is another hobby horse of mine that opening can sometimes be a bit overrated in terms of it’s difficulty. Although we do have some tests where the ball hoops around in England, it is not like batsmen routinely struggle here as your stats above suggest. Sometimes overseas, and especially in Asia it may be the best time to be a batsman as the hard ball comes on more nicely to the bat and deflections can get you off to a brisk start.
Re the 2005 debate, agree entirely but I can think of a couple of Bell fans who get mightily irritated by that suggestion!
Totally agree. I’m an opener myself and find it much easier to open the innings than bat down the order. It’s because I have a decent technique, so I can keep most bowling out, but I usually need time to get my eye in before accelerating. If I’m asked to score quickly straight away, especially against spin, I find it hard. Openers get more time to play themselves in (which can be seen as “seeing off the new ball”) and many enjoy the harder ball and the bigger gaps in the field. Alec Stewart said he loved opening because there were always more opportunities to score when there were loads of slips in.
I think GT had a few personal issues. I remember being gutted in ’05 he was my favourite player, pure class.
Thorpe’s autobiography is quite sobering in the parts when he discusses his personal issues. Of course, cynics might suggest he was dropped prematurely because he was never much of an establishment man and was considered slightly awkward by some peers. I remember Bumble described him as ‘surly’ when he was England coach.
I have to say the “England in the 90s doc” made me think what an utter tool Lloyd was. I do not think he would get close to a coaching job today. I mean some of his ideas re sending Nasser in as an ODI opener and then sending Headley out to face Donald as nwm after asking him to pepper said paceman were idiotic in my opinion.
Can’t agree with this assessment of Thorpe more. Absolutely my favourite player of that era, and as you say dropped ridiculously when it should have been Bell to make way for KP.
Also, a great article re Cook in general.
Along with the others commenting, I agree that it should have been two from KP, Thorpe and Bell, and with hindsight it definitely came too soon for IB… But if I remember correctly (from very vague recollections), he had played pretty well in his first few Tests, albeit against less challenging opponents. Didn’t he make some decent scores against the Windies and Bangladesh in the lead up? Probably would have been harsh to jettison a good young player at that stage when he had done all that could be expected to stay in the side. But as you say, Thorpe had the pedigree and should have been given a shot. Think I remember Vaughan and Fletcher saying they favoured new players for that series as they wouldn’t have any mental scars from losing for the last decade +… but Thorpe had a very good Ashes record and was arguably temperamentally tougher than Belly, certainly at that stage. So it is curious. Wonder if Thorpe’s lack of mobility in the field after his back problems were a factor in their thinking? Anyway, great article on Cook, very balanced and fair! ?
An excellent piece James, as other say. Very fair.
I’d like to focus the last paragraph, What next for Cook? How long will he mentally be strong enough to open the innings, when does the captaincy become too much?
Starting with the test vs Amir (a previous tormentor) in July, we have a very intense 18 months of test cricket. I wonder if that just may see him off?
George Dobell often hints that Cook might give up the captaincy sooner than we might think. Personally I think he’ll want one more crack at the Aussies down under. He’s a stubborn man so he’ll want to set the record straight. Big ask though! Does he have kids yet? I don’t think so (but not sure). Maybe Mrs Cook will put the pressure on to retire when the time is right? I can see him disappearing into family life and doing an ECB ambassador job that will probably be created for him :-) Can’t see him working in the media.
I think if one looks at England’s schedule, the captaincy changeover has to be at the end of this summer – or not for some time.
A new captain at the end of this summer gets the Bangladesh series to ease himself in and then the series in India. Strauss has said it is better to begin captaincy abroad where there is less media pressure. After that, England have a home series against SA and the away Ashes, neither of which would be exactly the easiest of introductions.
It might also not be unimportant that if England win 7-0 this summer, Cook will have more Test wins than any other England captain (27 to Vaughan’s 26).
My suspicion is that he may leave the captaincy after the next tour to Australia. I agree that a strong Pakistan pace attack, backed up by Yasir should prove a tough proposition for England’s batsmen but I don’t see the Pakistani batting faring well. Unfortunately due to the chronic spinner situation, I can’t see a successful trip to India this time, but I still think Cook may prosper with the bat.
The lack of spinner resources shouldn’t be held against Cook though I wasn’t impressed with the way he managed Mo in the last test. It was nigh on a throwback to the earlier part of the 2014. Like a few others I would have happily got rid of Cook as captain after his dreadful show as skipper in 2013/14, but can’t see him standing down until after the next Australia tour where it may be a tour too far for him to do both opening and captaining.
As openers go, Gooch, Atherton and Cook are all about par.
For those interested, here’s a link to the 20 highest test averages (minimum 2000 test runs): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cricket_batting_averages#Career_Test_average_leaders
On that ranking, Herbert Sutcliffe, rather than Hobbs, comes out as the best England opener. Modern bat technology and flatter pitches mean that I’d expect to see more modern players move up the lists, but most of the modern greats (Tendulkar, Lara, Dravid, Yousef, Ponting) are towards the bottom of it. The main exception is Sanga, whose average nestles between Hobbs and Sobers (good place to nestle).
Turning to Cook, I think I’m with you: a very good player (particularly in Asia), but not a great one. I think he would have struggled against a true high class pace attack (eg West Indies in the 1980’s), but he’s not alone in that. I think Cook shares a number of Boycott’s qualities (stubbornness, determination to keep his wicket intact), though he doesn’t have Sir Geoff’s rough edges.
Sorry: it’s been expanded to a top 25
I actually think Boycott’s character is more akin to Pietersen in some respects. Neither are deeply analytical, but both have an instinctive insight into the game, and very strong opinions.
(Interestingly, both have the reputation of being generous with advice to young players, even if they didn’t always get on with the whole team.)
If Cook has strong opinions about anything in particular, he’s kept them fairly quiet.
On the subject of the strength of bowling that Cook has faced, I’ve tried to quantify it by looking at the number of times he faced great attacks compared to some other England openers. I’ve defined “great attack” by one with two bowlers who took over 100 Test wickets at under 25 (or under 28 for spinners).
Cook: 8 Tests (6% of his career)
Boycott: 9 Tests (8%)
Trescothick 19 Tests (25%)
Gooch: 30 Tests (25%)
Atherton 66 Tests (57%)
The relevant bowlers:
Cook – McGrath, Warne, Steyn, Philander.
Boycott – Holding, Garner, Croft, Marshall.
Trescothick – Ambrose, Walsh, Wasim, Waqar, McGrath, Warne.
Gooch – Holding, Garner, Croft, Marshall, Bishop, Ambrose, Walsh, Wasim Waqar, McGrath, Warne.
Atherton – Ambrose, Marshall, Walsh, Bishop, McGrath, Warne, Donald, Pollock, Wasim, Waqar)
I didn’t work out Alec Stewart’s figures but they would be similar to Atherton’s.
It isn’t of course Cook’s fault that he has lived in an era of weaker international bowling and I think he still would have had a long and successful international career in the 1980s and 1990s. I suspect his average would have been more around the figures those players above achieved – but of course we’ll never know. My main point is to act as a reminder of what players like Gooch and Atherton had to go through.
I’ve read the claim that a decline in bowling has been off-set by an improvement in fielding. I’d like to see some attempt to prove this. The standards of wicket-keeping don’t seem to me to have improved (post-Gilchrist, if anything, they seem to have declined as sides accept more dropped catches for a greater run output from their keeper) and the great sides of the past were also great catching sides (the Windies in the 1980s, the Aussies in the 1990s). The overall standards of outfielding have improved but this would slow down run rates rather than particularly effect batting averages (and be more than off-set by ‘big’ bats).
I rarely defend Sir Geoffrey, as would be obvious from my other posts, but I do think your list of great attacks does him a slight injustice. He also faced Andy Roberts who, although taking wickets at 25, was renowned as the enforcer used to soften up batsmen for the other Windies bowlers. Additionally he faced Imran and Hadlee, who get missed due to the ‘2 bowlers’ rule. Hadlee, particularly, is without comparison in recent times – bar McGrath – and could demolish a side without support.
Andy Roberts was of course a superb bowler (I’m a Hampshire fan!) but he would make no difference to Boycott’s percentage. Boycott never faced Imran in Tests. Hadlee was an all-time great bowler, agreed without any doubt, and Boycott faced him in six Tests. He did lack support though and I wanted it to be tough to qualify as a “great attack”. It’s one of my pet peeves that “great” is too often used to mean “very good”!
Boycott’s low figure was something of a surprise to me. He faced Hall, Griffith and Gibbs who all averaged 25-30. He faced Dennis Lillee in over a dozen Tests but Lillee never had a bowler who averaged under 25 at the other end (Thomson, Walker, Alderman, Hogg and Lawson all averaged 25-30 and Dymock, Pascoe and Massie didn’t take enough wickets). Boycott also faced a Saffer attack of Peter Pollock and Trevor Goddard which just missed out because Goddard averaged 26.
It’s a long time since I’ve heard the name of Trevor Goddard. He was also a very fine opening bat. An excellent all rounder.
Thanks for the Imran info. I had assumed Boycott played against him in 71 or 74. I remember those tours simply because I was at KE Birmingham in 1972 when Imran went to the Royal Grammar School Worcester and it was a mix of fear and anticipation that we might come up against him in a school game.
It’s odd that they missed each other. Imran played one Test in 1971 which was the one Test of that series Boycott missed. Imran played all the 1974 series but Boycott had gone into self-imposed exile the series before against India. In 1977/78 Imran wasn’t playing because of Packer.
It might also be interesting to compare Gooch and Boycott batting in the same tests – though Boycott was into his forties when facing the fearsome quicks in the WI.
Similarly Gooch and Atherton overlap at the opposite ends of their careers.
Great work Simon. Very interesting. I did a similar thing a while ago (albeit probably not as useful as your analysis) where I compared Cook, Pietersen, Bell and Trott’s test centuries and worked out how many of them were made against quality attacks. I defined this as attacks that possessed two bowlers with test averages under 30.
The results were quite interesting. Only Pietersen seemed to raise his game against better bowlers. Only a small fraction of Cook and Bell’s centuries were made against quality bowlers. The figures are a little out of date now but it’s still interesting to look back https://www.thefulltoss.com/england-cricket-blog/whos-the-greatest-cook-trott-pietersen-or-bell/
I think it’s much more difficult for a modern day bowler to average under 25 than it was, say, 30 years ago (this is the flip side of “50 is the new 40” for batsmen). You can’t terrify tailenders the same way (because of protection), bats are bigger and boundaries are smaller, so mishits can fly for 6, and pitches are slower and flatter (watch the 1984/5 Aus v WI series if you want to know what the old WACA and GABBA were like).
And yet Dale Steyn can still average 22.5 which puts him right in there with the great bowlers (and I wouldn’t rate Steyn better than Malcolm Marshall or even, say, Dennis Lillee).
Ferriday & Wilson in ‘Masterly Batting’ studied every Test since 1876. They found that the ratio of runs to wickets has remained remarkably stable since 1918. Changes that help batsmen (‘big’ bats, covered pitches etc) seem to have been equaled in changes that help bowlers (like DRS). The one thing that has changed dramatically is Strike Rates but not the actual amount of runs being scored.
It is tough to take 100 wickets at under 25. Only 43 bowlers have ever managed it, seven of whom were pre-WW1, plus there are six spinners in the 25-28 bracket. But then it should be tough to qualify as a great!
Another very interesting statistical net for assessing openers – runs per test:
http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/content/story/1020119.html
The results (and those for consistency) are interesting, to say the least.
Cook and Pietersen are almost tied over their test careers on RPT – though Pietersen achieved 95, and Cook hasn’t (and almost certainly can’t).