For me,
Batting : Average
Bowling : Strike Rate
Would like know how you guys think about.
For a clubbie batsman who plays 40 over limited ("win/lose") games, here are my thoughts:
- These indicators are somewhat useful individually but don't provide a good enough picture and require a lot of discernment from captain and fellow batsmen.
- No accounting for dot balls/boundaries/sixes in the average and strike rate. Is the batsman a big hitter with a solid defense or someone who regularly rotates strike? I can't tell that by looking at just strike rate or average.
- They don't factor in opposition bowling standards and relative ranking (percentile) in the division/league tables.
- They don't factor in the batting position. An opener averaging 25 with a strike of 95 v/s a low middle order batsman average 40 with a strike rate of 45 doesn't look very good but maybe a far superior batsmen seeing off quicks and a moving new ball.
- They don't factor in pitch and outfield conditions. Some of our league grounds have very high grass and ground shots are pretty useless. Scoring grinds to a halt for both sides. No relative/comparative assessment of a players performance is available.
These indicators are relics of simpler days when "all else being equal" was the mantra and scoring/accounting was done by part-timers or retired people.
We need today are performance factors based on:
- Dot ball count and frequency of 1s, 2s, 3s, 4s, and 6s.
- batting order position
- quality of bowling and bowlers faced
- pitch and ground conditions
- comparative rating to other batsmen for that position against same bowling attack and conditions.