Mark ramprakash

Hello all,
Looks like we have another India versus Pakistan cricket match coming up, and this is, I believe, considered one of the classics of sport. So, this is supposed to be one of those super days for sport.
All the same, I couldn't but wonder if bullying based on religion is used in the realm of sport and, if so, what Muslims from the ABCDesis subreddit think about that.
Here is a relevant post on that topic:
https://www.reddit.com/exmuslim/comments/16ek2ff/pakistani_cricketer_told_sri_lankan_cricketer_to/
~
So this is very old story. During a cricket match in 2014, a Pakistani cricketer Ahmed Shehzad told Sri Lankan player Dilshan “if you are a non-Muslim and you turn Muslim, no matter whatever you do in your life, straight to heaven”.
Dilshan’s reply was inaudible, to which Ahmad says “Then be ready for the fire”.
Here is a news story on this. The team was known to bully non-muslim cricketers. One of the christian player Yousuf Youhana converted to Islam in 2005. Later some retired crickets revealed this on their news and on YouTube.
~
Why does the Pakistan Cricket Board not do something about stuff like this? I am posting this because someone on this forum said critiquing Islam reveals a lack of education on my part. So what education is it do Muslim Desis think I am lacking? I was even wondering if that person was trying to convince about the "truth" about Islam. I request commenters on reddit.com/abcdesis to not try to convert me, since they won't succeed any way.
Please note that I am trying to contribute here. I feel like I am already contributing more than my fair share to improving cricket around the world, despite not being much of a sports fan, especially if you consider just the last decade. Think about it - what has David Boon or Graham Gooch or Mike Gatting or Desmond Haynes or Mark Ramprakash contributed to cricket in comparison to this one single post is attempting to do, even if you consider, say, the past decade? But, really, this is the job of the ICC. Perhaps, Mustafa Kamal or Zaheer Abbas or Greg Barclay or Geoff Allardice should bring this up.
If we could just ban these types of bullying, the field of cricket would be a much safer place.

New Zealand’s Tom Latham is a very good Test cricketer. Making his debut in 2014, the left-hander has been an ever-present feature of the Kiwis top order for almost ten years. In a decade dominated by seam bowling, Tom’s textbook technique and patient approach have served him well, averaging a sturdy 41.91 in his 70 tests – not remarkable, but notably impressive considering the roll call of openers that England have deployed in the same period.
Imagine, if you would, that an English bat averaged north of 40 having played for nine years. Praise would be heavy, and perhaps, deserving. Sir Andrew Strauss is considered a three lions great for his eight years of service despite averaging exactly one run less than Tom Latham.
His finest hour came in 2018. Batting for a remarkable 694 minutes, Latham demolished a tired Sri Lankan attack on his way to a maiden double ton. 246 runs off 489 balls, including a handful of forceful drives off both the front and back foot. He also has silverware to his name, helping New Zealand win the inaugural World Test Championship crown with victory over India at the Rose bowl nineteen months ago.
Yet, all’s not quite as it seems. As Tom Latham, Kiwi stalwart, and season international pro, is something of a statistical anomaly. For all his runs and appearances, the 30-year-old’s record against the ‘top’ Test nations is frankly abysmal. From his 35 Tests against England, India, Australia and South Africa, Tom Latham has scored 1,665 runs at an average of 28.85. I repeat, 28.85! Almost two less than England reject Rory Burns and only marginally better than the part-time biffing of Ravichandran Ashwin.
Comparatively, his record against the other five Test playing nations (excluding Ireland and Afghanistan) is phenomenal. Twelve of Tom’s thirteen Test tons have come against Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, Pakistan, Zimbabwe, and the West Indies. Against this ‘other five’, he averages a staggering 58.89, having again played 35 Tests.
In summary, Tom Latham is a woeful bat against the top test sides but a consistent run-machine against the rest.
The obvious question is why? What makes the Kiwi so fallible to the bowling of top Test teams, yet so dominant against the rest? Perhaps Latham is of a similar vein to former England bat, Mark Ramprakash. ‘Ramps’ scored almost 36,000 runs at 53.14 in his 25 years of first-class cricket, but only managed a sombre 2,350 runs at 27.32 in his Test career. A world-beater against mediocre bowling, Ramprakash’s best attribute was his ability to cash in against weaker opposition. This, too, seems to be the case for Tom Latham, taking his chances when the going’s easy, but finding things a little trickier against the big boys.
Throughout Tom’s Test career, England, India, South Africa, and Australia have all been blessed with a consistently brilliant array of bowlers. In his 35 Tests against them, these teams have rarely fielded a side without at least two bowlers who average under 30: Woakes, Broad and Anderson for England; Ashwin, Jadeja, Shami and Bumrah for India; Rabada, Steyn, Morkel and now Nortje for South Africa; Johnson, Cummins, Starc and Hazelwood for Australia.
Comparatively, the other five nations have rarely fielded an XI with one bowler who averages under 30, let alone two or even three. Neither Zimbabwe nor Bangladesh have produced a single bowler with an average consistently under 30 in the last decade. Rangana Hearth was the only Sri Lankan to do so since the retirement of Muttiah Muralitharan.
Pakistan and the West Indies are the only teams to buck the trend. Mohammed Abbas, Hasan Ali and young Shaheen Afridi all average in the mid 20s. Yet, docile pitches in Pakistan and the UAE have all but nullified their threat at home.
The West Indian attack boasts the potent seam bowling of Jason Holder and Kemar Roach, who both average under thirty. Unsurprisingly, the Windies are the only team in the ‘other five’ that Tom is yet to ton-up against.
So, as did Mark Ramprakash at the first-class level, Tom Latham has repeatedly taken his chances against poor bowling. Cashing in on the sub-par seam and ropey spin of the bottom five Test nations.
One should also consider pitches. Kiwi tracks have been notoriously placid over the last decade, infamously flat without any chance to break up in the second innings. A batting paradise for Latham, who’s repeatedly dined out on said flat tracks to average 47.03 at home, while struggling overseas.
So, is Tom Latham actually any good? Or does our deeper dive into the statistics expose an overrated bat who’s built his career on scoring the ‘easy runs’ when conditions are in his favour?
The obvious answer is yes, he’s very overrated. One ton and an average of 28.85 in his 35 games against top opposition are the stats of a sub-par batter – a fallible opening stick, incapable of putting up a fight when his country needs him most.
However, the runs that Latham has scored shouldn’t be overlooked, regardless of who they were scored against. I’m sure that the 30-year-old would rather his runs come against better opposition, yet his consistency against the weaker sides is no mean feat. Facing the same opposition which the Kiwi averages almost 60 against, England’s Joe Root can boast an average of only 51.58 from his 41 matches. Certainly still impressive, but the eight-or-so more runs that Latham averages reflects just how dominant Latham is against poor bowling.
However, weaker opposition shouldn’t diminish the importance of the games that Latham’s performed in. The introduction of the World Test Championship has given all series importance, with every result counting towards the competition’s table. The Black Caps won the last edition, but certainly wouldn’t have qualified for the final without Latham’s steady hand against the minor teams. Take his dominant 154 against Sri Lanka in 2019, for example. The mammoth knock, full of imperious straight and cover drives, laid the foundations to ensure a crushing Kiwi victory. Or take his third innings 53 against Pakistan two years ago – a characteristically gritty half-century which allowed the Black Caps to push for a declaration. The match, which may have otherwise been a draw, ended in a New Zealand victory.
Without these knocks, and the countless other contributions that Latham made against the minor teams over the last WTC cycle, New Zealand would not have qualified for, and later won the World Test Championship final.
So, is Latham any good? Well, yes. He’s good – good in an equally abysmal and brilliant way. He certainly isn’t great – his woeful record against quality bowling attacks proves as much – but to label Latham as overrated doesn’t give the full picture, either. After all, his mountains of runs against the minor nations have been imperative to New Zealand’s success, particularly in the World Test Championship.
Perhaps what Latham’s record proves most is the deceptive nature of statistics. His batting average of 41.91 is in no way representative of the equally terrific and terrible player that he truly is – a case study in why one should never judge a batter by their average alone.
For Tom Latham, the numbers lie.
BY-Will Symonds link

Merry Christmas Everyone!
 
I have been recently looking at KL Rahul and Aaron Finch, and thinking about how some players keep getting multiple chances after poor performances. Now, chances are afforded to many players based on potential (Rohit Sharma - 2012), past performances (Finch and Morgan - 2021/22), lack of depth (Many WI players currently in the setup) or just plain old favoritism.
Hence, I decided to dig up the list of the poorest batsmen in Test Cricket who managed to rack up a substantial number of appearances. The only filter I have used is that the player should have played at least 50 test matches batting from No.1 to No.6 in the order. Hence there are multiple allrounders within the list as well who were deservingly part of the 11 due to their overall contribution to the team.
 
The 20 Worst batsmen as per average using that criteria are:
 

Rank	Batsman	Tests	Average	100s	Notes
1	Mohammad Ashraful (BAN)	61	23.99	6	Part Time Spin
2	Ken Rutherford (NZ)	55	27.16	3	Captain
3	SE Gregory (AUS)	52	27.18	4	Pre-WW1 Player
4	Alistair Campbell (ZIM)	60	27.31	2	Captain
5	Mark Ramprakash (ENG)	50	27.97	2	114 First Class 100s
6	Roshan Mahanama (SL)	51	29.27	4	Part of an emerging SL team
7	Grant Flower (ZIM)	67	29.79	6	Part Time Spin
8	Habibul Bashar (BAN)	50	30.87	3	Captain and part of BD's new test team
9	Marlon Samuels (WI)	67	31.57	6	Part Time Spin
10	Mark Burgess (NZ)	50	31.73	5	Captain for a short period
11	Ramiz Raja (PAK)	57	31.76	2	Good ODI Career for 80s
12	Bevan Congdon (NZ)	61	32.03	7	Part Time Medium Pace
13	Greame Wood (AUS)	59	32.18	9	Kerry Packer Beneficiary
14	Sherwin Campbell (WI)	52	32.38	4	WI Opener
15	Andrew Flintoff (ENG)	51	32.98	3	Legendary Allrounder
16	Geoff Marsh (AUS)	50	33.18	4	Better ODI Career
17	Ian Botham (ENG)	77	33.18	8	Legendary Allrounder
18	Greame Hick (ENG)	60	33.24	6	136 First Class 100s
19	Temba Bavuma (SA)	51	34.06	1	Only Current Player
20	John Reid (NZ)	57	34.03	6	Captain and All rounder

 
Few Inferences and Observations:
 

1. Country Wise Split: ENG (4), NZ (4), AUS (3), WI (2), BAN (2), ZIM (2), SL (1), SA (1), PAK (1). India only test nation to have played 50 test and have no player in the top 20. The first India entry is Ravi Shastri (35.22) at #24.
   
2. A total of 179 players have played 50 tests batting in positions 1-6.
   
3. Temba Bavuma is the only player to have played more than 50 tests in the top 6 and scored only 1 century. Everyone else has at least 2.
   
4. Temba Bavuma is also the only current player on this list.
   
5. All players in the top 20, except Flintoff and Botham can be classified as Batsmen or Batting Allrounders.
   
6. If the cutoff is increased to 100 tests, the worst two batsmen are Carl Hooper (36.99) and Michael Atherton (37.71)
   

Let’s start this by stating what should be the obvious: this is not Zak Crawleys fault. He is out of form, he may, quite simply, just not be good enough but either way, it is not his fault and he has endured and absolute torrent of abuse over the past few months which he is completely undeserving of.(not necessarily here because I think the majority of us are better than that..)
Now, I’ve never played international cricket or cricket at any level where you could ever pretend there was pressure but I assume the position Zak Crawley is in right now must feel horrible.
The runs aren’t coming for England, they’re not coming for Kent. Watching him bat recently you feel he could go back and play some pub cricket and the runs still wouldn’t come. So why is he still being picked?
With every innings the runs don’t come, the pressure ramps up on him, with every innings the runs don’t come, the further away the next runs feel, all those feelings and doubts magnify in your mind, the calls to be dropped get louder and more unavoidable.
By continuing to pick him, however much they may feel they’re being positive and backing him and filling him full of confidence, the England selectors, the coach and the captain are failing Zak Crawley. They’re opening him up to more abuse, to more pressure, to more of everything that comes with top level cricket. He needs to be taken out of the firing line for his own good and the good of his career long term.
I relate it slightly to Haseeb Hameed. He went to India, scored some runs and became the messiah, the next decade of English cricket was suddenly on his shoulders, then he broke his thumb and his form collapsed. The pressure coming back that he’d just slot back in and everything would be brilliant ramped up, England sent Mark Ramprakash up to net with him on a weekly basis, singling him out as ‘the chosen one’ and in the end, it took him years and a move to a new county to recover.
They risk this happening to Zak Crawley. There is no doubt the kid has talent but you can’t just keep throwing him out there, telling him to go hard at the ball and be positive and then saying everything will be fine, he’s the future, he’s going to be a big player for us etc etc when it goes wrong and expect everything to just work out.