What is a good ODI average?

[Collyisamackem]

After years of test cricket I've finally got the hang of what an average indicates, i.e. 40+ is good, 45+ is very good, 50+ is excellent and 55+ is very rare and outstanding.

As for ODIs, I'm not as sure, so I'm letting you guys decide. I'm angling for a threshold value, as I'm aware that an average over 40 is pretty damn good. I just want to know what divides the average from the good.

[Vrock]

I think in all fairness that it depends where you bat. If you are an opener your average may be lower as you tend to either give your wicket away to get the team off to a quick start, also that you may be out from early swing or seam movement, this would therefore mean your average would be lower in most cases.

As a middle order batsmen you may have more time to play yourself in and play a more steady innings, this would therefore increase your average. Although if a middle order batsmen had to come in very late on they would have to play their shots and this could result in them getting out cheaply and for few runs. So this would average out your average, excuse the cheesy writing there, although the latter I think doesn't happen so much as teams generally lose their first 2-3 wickets relatively early in the innings.

For an opener I would say 30-35 is a good average, middle order 35-40.

[Rob.]

For me:

Top 4 Batsman: Good average 36-40+
5 and 6 - Average of 32-36
7 and 8 - Average of 20-30

If you get them averages then you are a good ODI side.

[John]

Originally Posted by Rob.

For me:

Top 4 Batsman: Good average 36-40+
5 and 6 - Average of 32-36
7 and 8 - Average of 20-30

If you get them averages then you are a good ODI side.

Agree 100 %. Though qualifaction 50 games.

[arsalan660]

u already gave the answer of question 40+ is good then whats next

[greg]

All depends on what you want.If you average 50 in odi's it may look great but if you only have a scoring rate of about 55-60 runs per 100 balls then what is the point?

If you look at someone like Gilchrist he averages 36 which is good but others have a higher average but his strike rate is 95.7 per 100 balls which is amazing.

[Collyisamackem]

I suppose, though, that if one or two of numbers 1 to 5 can average 50 but score at 55/60 per 100, then that's good to lay a platform for other batsmen to hit off. I see Kallis as doing that job for SA, though I forget what his average is.

[Mongoose]

Originally Posted by Collyisamackem

I suppose, though, that if one or two of numbers 1 to 5 can average 50 but score at 55/60 per 100, then that's good to lay a platform for other batsmen to hit off. I see Kallis as doing that job for SA, though I forget what his average is.

As Greg says, it does depend on the scoring rate, but also one who else is in the betting line-up. Kallis has a good average but plays at his own pace. He needs to have other guys around him who score quickly.

If a batsman has a strike rate of around 80/100 (5-ish/over) then a ODI average of 35 is probably as good as a test average of 40.

[vvvrulz]

Adam Gilchrist, argubly one of the most feared ODI batsman, has an average in the mid thirties I beleive. So as many of you have said, it really depends on the nature of batsman and the position he comes in.

ODI average's can be misleading somewhat, you wouldn't look into Mike Hussey's average in the 120's compared with Cairns's average being something like 29, now would you?

[Collyisamackem]

Huseey has proven himself as almost impossible to get out in ODIs, batting at 7. Many other number sevens have far lower averages and are not as good at finishing the innings/marshalling the tail. Hussey has also played a reasonable number of ODIs now, so I'm quite impressed with his average.