Hashim Amla - 2016

I've read numerous articles highlighing Amla's demise in 2016.
Ok, he had a poor series against Oz.
Yet, he still averages over 50 with the bat this season.

HM Amla (SA)
8 13 0 661 201 50.84 1292 51.16 2 3 1 94 2
Click here to see his stats

I really believe that the press are trying to our opinions in this regard (much like they tried to do with Mr Trump).

Ive read reports about this being "the end of Hashim Amla" and "Is he still the same player he was"?
Come on!
How can 1 year or 1 series warrant this type of bullsh1t?

 Chippo
According to the stats Amla played in 8 tests.   I cannot recollect which other teams were involved in five of the tests.
He did come down in the averages from 55 to 50 - which is not a good sign and that could have impacted on the newspaper reports. 
The problem with cricket players is the well-known case of Graeme Smith.  Six poor innings in a row and then a wonderful knock in the seventh.  Incidentally that happened consistently with Smith before his ultimate retirement from test cricket and before he was sacked as a ODI player.  
If that kind of problem is encountered in the case of Amla - it is a bad sign.   However, I have not seen anything yet to suggest that Amla should be dropped from the test side or from the shorter versions of the game.      

 Ou Tokkie battling with the stats again. Amla has actually improved in 2016, compared to 2015.

His averages over the last five years were (counting back from 2016) 50.85, 22.82, 63.64, 57.55, 70.93. Judging by those figures he is on the up again.

He played in the following tests in 2016:
Three tests against England
Two tests against New Zealand
Three tests against Australia.
13 Innings in total.

His scores were, 201, 40, 5, 109, 96, 53, 58, 1, 0, 1, 47, 5, 45. That is five balls ups out of 13 innings a double century, a century, three half centuries and three 40s.  Not too shabby, in my books, for someone who is supposedly on his way to becoming a hasbeen.

By the way, his average for 2015 was 22.82 for almost the exact same amount of test cricket. Eight tests, like in 2016, and 12 innings compared with the 13 of 2016.

Remember when Tok wanted Amla to bat number 7 in our T20 team? What next from TokTok.

 Or when he argued that Amla's regular ODI spot was at no 3, was it?

 Dense Dunce
Can you read English stooge.   I said Amla should not be going at this stage - but when danger signs come up - like happened in the case of Smith - there could be a problem.   So what is wrong with that' statement?
But then my norm is performance - yours and your fellow-stooge Mozart does not rate performance in any sport - but stress only reputation.    

 Uhmmmmm. Have I said anywhere that you have said that? I was mainly trying to point at that you have the cat by the balls.......... again, when you say that his averages has come down from 55 to 50.

My hasbeen remark was also in reference to the stuff in the newspapers and by certain "knowledgeable " pundits.

 His norm is performance, but he constantly dings Graham Smith whose test average is 48. What next from Tok Tok.

 A test average over acareer of 207 innings one might add. A career facing the likes of Shane Warne, Glen McGrath, Murali, Bret Lee, Bravo, Zaheer Kahn, Anil Kumble, Daniel Vettori, etc. Not this wishy washy bunch that Aus has been dishing up lately.

 Mozart
Did I deal with test averages that was built up over years - not his performances in the last two years of his career?   I said he had strings of poor scores followed by one good score and that was repeated a number of times.  
By the name is Graeme not Graham or are we talking of different players.
I do think that Smiths main problem was his repetitiveness in batting.  The opposing team knew exactly where balls will be going and reduced his strike rate completely.  He had a serious batting deficiency - which he never really overcame.
For the record I am posting the data of Smith, Kallis, Amla and De Kock hereunder to remove any doubts at  all about the issue and to get some perspective on the discussion on this site:-
Graeme Smith
MatInnsNORunsHSAveBFSR100504s6sCtStTests11720513926527748.251552559.6727381165241690ODIs19719410698914137.98864880.811047788441050T20Is3333298289*31.67770127.530512326180
His strike rate as an opener is quite low and in tests and ODI's.   However, Smith started off very well and by the time his career ends he was not up to standard - hence his firing by SA Cricket in the case of ODI's.
Jacques Kallis
MatInnsNORunsHSAveBFSR100504s6sCtStTests166280401328922455.372890345.9745581488972000ODIs328314531157913944.361588572.8917869111371310T20Is252346667335.05558119.3505562070
Kallis main attribute was his long innings - but his strike rate was low in especially tests and ODI's
Hashim Amla
Tests97164137568311*50.111503650.33253194010850ODIs14013710651915951.33729889.32233066141690T20Is37375100897*31.50781129.060511321150
Quinton de Kock
MatInnsNORunsHSAveBFSR100504s6sCtStTests13203853129*50.17119871.20261059482ODIs69694285017843.84301494.5511832447924T20Is292947425229.68578128.37018823279
An attacking player with a high strike rate and a wide range of areas where he scores his runs.   He already has more ODI centuries than Smith scored in his whole career.      

 Mozart
Did I deal with test averages that was built up over years - not his performances in the last two years of his career?   I said he had strings of poor scores followed by one good score and that was repeated a number of times.  
By the name is Graeme not Graham or are we talking of different players.
I do think that Smiths main problem was his repetitiveness in batting.  The opposing team knew exactly where balls will be going and reduced his strike rate completely.  He had a serious batting deficiency - which he never really overcame.
For the record I am posting the data of Smith, Kallis, Amla and De Kock hereunder to remove any doubts at  all about the issue and to get some perspective on the discussion on this site:-
Graeme Smith
MatInnsNORunsHSAveBFSR100504s6sCtStTests11720513926527748.251552559.6727381165241690ODIs19719410698914137.98864880.811047788441050T20Is3333298289*31.67770127.530512326180
His strike rate as an opener is quite low and in tests and ODI's.   However, Smith started off very well and by the time his career ends he was not up to standard - hence his firing by SA Cricket in the case of ODI's.
Jacques Kallis
MatInnsNORunsHSAveBFSR100504s6sCtStTests166280401328922455.372890345.9745581488972000ODIs328314531157913944.361588572.8917869111371310T20Is252346667335.05558119.3505562070
Kallis main attribute was his long innings - but his strike rate was low in especially tests and ODI's
Hashim Amla
Tests97164137568311*50.111503650.33253194010850ODIs14013710651915951.33729889.32233066141690T20Is37375100897*31.50781129.060511321150
Quinton de Kock
MatInnsNORunsHSAveBFSR100504s6sCtStTests13203853129*50.17119871.20261059482ODIs69694285017843.84301494.5511832447924T20Is292947425229.68578128.37018823279
An attacking player with a high strike rate and a wide range of areas where he scores his runs.   He already has more ODI centuries than Smith scored in his whole career.      

First of all, when you compare test players, you cannot compare Smith with Kallis, Amla, and/or Quinton de Kock. Smith is the only sp ecialist opening batsman of all of them.

I think that QDK has now firmly settled himself as a test no 7 batsman. Even though he has a batting average of 66 at no 1, he has only opened twice in his career of only 20 tests. Graeme Smith, on the other hand, has opened in 196/205 innings.

Jacques Kallis has never opened the batting. Yes, I know that he has often come in early but that was the exception, rather than the rule. He has come in at no 4 on 170/280 occasions. You cannot compare them.

Like QDK, Amla also has a high average as an opener but he has also only opened twice. He is a no 3 batsman and has come in at no3 on 130/164 occasions.

You cannot really compare the strike rates of QDK either beacuse a player's strike rate normally comes down over time and then settles at a number. QDK has only played 20 innings, so his SR is of no value when comparing him with GS, unless you are going to tell me that GS was a better batsman than Kallis.

Er 117, 166 and 97 tests vs 13. Call me again when Quinty passes 50 tests with an average north of 40.

 The story is just too much for Mozart to swallow.   Hi relentless attacks on De Kock is in shatters and now suddenly one must call him again after 50 tests by De Kock.  
He cannot accept that De Kock is top class and that his early performances shows class - so he goes on the rampage when he should rather shut up and accept that De Kock is a top class batsman.  
By the way after 12 tests Kallis average was 15 - so Mozart can stop his BS right there.