Who have been the most valuable batters for each Test team?

Recently I read an article in which someone claimed that the Fab Four of Indian Test batters were Sachin Tendulkar, Sunil Gavaskar, Rahul Dravid and Virat Kohli. That looked good, until I started asking myself: "This is the Test format. How does Kohli feature here?" and "Who could be the fourth batter in this list, if not Kohli, and who might be a fifth? Virender Sehwag? VVS Laxman?" I also started wondering who would fill these positions for the other teams. For Australia, the bankers were Don Bradman, Ricky Ponting and Steven Smith. For England, one has to start with Joe Root and Alastair Cook. After them are a couple of world-class batters with names starting with "H", and also the likes of Ken Barrington, Geoff Boycott and Graham Gooch.

I realised that there was material here for a simple article: who are the five batters (and, to follow logically, the five bowlers) who have mattered the most for each team? I knew this was not an article about picking the best Test batter. It had to be a far simpler one. And I have kept it that way.

During the first quarter of 2026 I intend to publish a significant pair of articles determining the best Test batters and best Test bowlers across teams. In these analyses, context will be all-important. In addition to the normal factors such as runs scored, average and runs per Test, I will be using criteria such as match status, bowling attack, pitch, partnerships, runs added with the lower order, and more.

But in this article, I have used simple and direct measures, so that it's easy for anyone to work out their own tables. I have made sure that all the data used will be available on any public database. I started with my own WBA (Weighted Batting Average), which is a much better measure than the batting average but then I realised that if I persisted with WBA, I would be forcing readers to use my database, which is not fair. So I reverted to the batting average. The bottom line is that this has to be, and is, a back-of-envelope calculation at best. And we can be certain that these tables will give clear pointers to the forthcoming best Test batter selections.

The methodology is simple. I have taken the four basic measures for each batter, assigned them relative weights, accumulated and tabulated the same. The top-five batters for each team are briefly written about. My initial idea was to do this for the top eight teams but I realised it was only fair to do it for all ten teams that have played Test cricket for a reasonable length of time.

I have used the following four measures, which are basic for each batter, and for which the figures are easily obtainable in the public domain. A total of ten points are allotted for each batter and the top-five batters are then determined. The ten points are split in a simple 4-3-2-1 pattern, as explained below. I have provided the data for the exercise in an Excel sheet so that anyone interested can play around with differing weights. I considered, and quickly discarded, the idea of having differing weights for different teams. It would not have made a difference to the final placements anyway, which are based on relative weights.

4.0 points: Career Runs
This is a measure of the batter's main function - to score runs. Everything else is secondary. This measure correlates with longevity, but I have worked on the basis that this is the main responsibility of the batter. The maximum points are allotted for 16,000 runs (Current high value: 15,921 by Sachin Tendulkar).

3.0 points: Batting Average
This is a true performance measure. Inarguably, the most important one. The round figure of 100 gets the maximum allotment. (Current high value: 99.94 by Don Bradman).

2.0 points: Runs per Test
Subtly different from the average and a true measure of what was delivered by the batter. The high value of 140 runs per Test gets the maximum. (Current high value: 134.5 by Don Bradman).

1.0 points: Percentage of Team Runs
A reflection of a batter's contribution to the team. The significant feature of this measure is the coverage across the complete career of the batter. A total of 25% share of the team runs gets the full value. (Current high value: 24.97% for Don Bradman).

For Zimbabwe and Bangladesh, the qualifying mark is 2000 Test runs. For the other eight teams, a batter has to have scored over 3000 Test runs to get into the mix. It pains me to leave out Graeme Pollock and George Headley, who have 2000-plus runs and averages above 60. However, reducing the cutoff to 2000 runs would dilute the selections greatly and according special treatment to only these two all-time great batters would be unfair. I can only apologise to Pollock and Headley and their admirers.

Let us start with the top batters of Australia. Forty batters qualify.

Ponting is in second place with a truckload of runs, a near-52 average, and a near-80 RpT. Because of Australia's batting strength in that era, he scored only around 14% of the team's. Steven Smith follows, with better performance figures than Ponting; he could easily have been in second place if he had maintained his 60-plus average. He could still move above Ponting. Two middle-order stalwarts, Allan Border and Steve Waugh, follow and complete the Australian five. Both these batters had over 10,000 runs and averages of above 50. Matthew Hayden misses out, as does Michael Clarke.

I can hear loud clamouring from the back benches. "Hey, what about the first-placed batter? You seem to have forgotten that gentleman." Well, is there any need to gild the lily and talk about the greatest among the greats, Bradman? Suffice to say that he leads across the board on three measures and clocks in at a very impressive 7.67 points. The numbers 99.94, 134.5, and 24.97% represent the pinnacle of batsmanship.

Now on to the England batters. Forty-seven batters crossed the cutoff mark.

No prizes for guessing who is at the top. It's Joe Root, with over 13,000 runs scored at an average of 51-plus and over 85 runs per Test. He is followed by Alastair Cook, who trails Root on all four measures. He is the only one from the two founding countries to have a sub-50 batting average. Then come the two greats from the pre- and post-World War Two periods - Wally Hammond and Len Hutton. They have very impressive figures all round. In fifth place is possibly a surprise to some modern cricket followers: Ken Barrington. But how can one argue with the second-best average among all England batters? Graham Gooch and Kevin Pietersen just miss out.

Next come South Africa, with only 17 players - certainly a result of their absence from Test cricket of over 25 years.

Jacques Kallis has amazing figures - over 13,000 runs at a 55-plus average and over 80 runs per Test. Let us remember that this is an allrounder with over 200 Test wickets. Way behind in second place comes Graeme Smith with a huge haul of runs but at a sub-50 average. Then comes AB de Villiers, with an average of more than 50, proving that he could play the waiting game too, in addition to providing pyrotechnics in white-ball cricket. The next two places are occupied by two predictable banker batters, Hashim Amla and Gary Kirsten, though their averages are sub-50. Herschelle Gibbs and Bruce Mitchell just miss the cut.

For West Indies, 26 batters make the cut.

Brian Lara, who traversed the Test scene like a colossus, is the top West Indies batter. He took the problems of moving from a destroyer to the Lusitania in his stride. Nearly 12,000 runs at nearly 53, and an excellent figure of 90-plus runs per Test are the reasons why. The icing on the cake was the 19% share of team runs. It may be a surprise to see Shivnarine Chanderpaul in second position, but he is impressively close to Lara in terms of runs and average.

Garry Sobers is in third place. His top-notch batting average partly makes up for his relatively fewer runs. In fourth place is the great Viv Richards. Everton Weekes deserves his place despite his low aggregate of runs because of his high average and runs-per-Test values. Gordon Greenidge and Clive Lloyd do not make the cut.

Onwards to New Zealand, 16 of whose batters reach the cutoff of 3000 runs.

As expected, Kane Williamson is ahead by a mile. He leads on all four metrics and will certainly increase his lead at the top. Ross Taylor follows in second place, which will not surprise many, and neither will Stephen Fleming's third place. Martin Crowe follows next with Brendon McCullum finishing the top-five group. For a full -fledged wicketkeeper, McCullum's batting average of 38-plus runs is very creditable indeed. Tom Latham finished sixth.

India follow next. They have played enough Tests for 27 batters to qualify.

You cannot keep Tendulkar, Dravid and Gavaskar out of the top three. All have scored in excess of 10,000 runs at 50-plus averages. Gavaskar scored a higher percentage of India's runs than the other two, indicating the slight absence of support. Surprisingly, apart from the runs scored, the numbers of all three players are quite close to each other.

Is it a surprise that Virender Sehwag comes in next? What is forgotten is that Sehwag, despite his propensity to bat in an attacking manner, averaged nearly 50 and has the highest RpT value among the five featured batters. And let us not forget that Sehwag's strong suit, strike rate, is not included in this analysis. Kohli comes in next with numbers that are somewhat low compared to others. Laxman misses out by a few hundredths of a decimal point.

Next come Pakistan, for whom 20 batters qualify.

Younis Khan leads the parade, scoring over 10,000 runs at a very good average of 52.05, and he excels on the other metrics too. Javed Miandad's average is very good, the best for Pakistan, but he scored fewer than the others per Test. Inzamam-ul-Haq comes in next, and just behind is Mohammad Yousuf. The top four seem to be perfectly ordered. They are indeed the four top Pakistan batters. The next place is a toss-up between Azhar Ali and Misbah-ul-Haq, with Azhar edging ahead.

A total of 15 batters qualify for Sri Lanka.

Kumar Sangakkara has numbers that call for a top-five finish, not just among Sri Lankan batters but across countries. He has 12,400 runs at an average of 57.41, scored 92.5 runs per Test, and made 17.2% of the team's runs - the best on all four counts. Mahela Jayawardene, who is second here, seemed quite close to Sangakkara during their parallel careers. However, he is over seven runs behind in terms of average. The recently retired Angelo Mathews is in third place. Dimuth Karunaratne is fourth, just ahead of the classicist, Aravinda de Silva. What a fabulous five this is. Dinesh Chandimal is 0.01 points behind de Silva.

Only six Zimbabwe batters make the cut, even at the lower cutoff of 2000 runs. I have featured the top three here.

Andy Flower is the leading Zimbabwean batter, by the proverbial mile. He is 1300 runs ahead of second-placed Brendan Taylor and has a 50-plus average - the only batter from this African nation to achieve this feat. A pretty decent RpT value completes his credentials. Grant Flower is in third place.

Finally come the Bangladesh batters, of whom ten qualify.

That diminutive master batter Mushfiqur Rahim leads the Bangladesh trio. His numbers are quite good - lots of runs and an average near 40 average. Tamim Iqbal follows, with almost comparable numbers. Shakib Al Hasan is in third place; his value to the team is more from his all-round contributions.

The complete data for all qualifying batters has been exported into an Excel file and you could download the file by clicking here.

Six current players (Smith, Root, Williamson, Mushfiqur, Kohli, and Karunaratne) feature in the overall group of 46 batters. That is a fairly decent representation - although the last two batters have retired recently. Overall there is fairly good representation across eras. The high performance measures of the older-generation batters compensates for their lower run-aggregate values, to a certain extent.

Coming back to my initial doubts. Yes, Kohli is not a shoo-in in the top Indian quartet. Sehwag is underrated and gets in ahead of Kohli. Although Kohli also gets in since I have featured the top five for each team. Barrington is also grossly underrated, and Misbah is unfortunate to miss out.

Below are the five batters who have secured the most points, across teams. Possibly a pointer to my upcoming best Test batter analysis. Of course, context will play a very important fact in that analysis.

The companion piece to this article, on the top bowlers for each team, will follow next. The measures used will be similar - deriving from only basic data that is in the public domain.

Potpourri
This time's Potpourri collection is something special indeed. These feature the Tests in which teams lost five or more wickets at the same score.

In the first match above, over 11 balls India went from a lead of 98 with six wickets in hand, to a lead of 98 and having to start bowling. Amazingingly, they still won comfortably. This is the only instance of a team losing six wickets at the same score. Nearly 70 years earlier, West Indies had slid from 89 for 5 to 89 all out, getting Lock-ed (and Laker-ed). Forward to 2013: Bangladesh lost five wickets at the score of 134 for 5 and went on to lose by a thousand runs or so.

Talking Cricket Group
Any reader who wishes to join my general-purpose cricket-ideas-exchange group of this name can email me a request for inclusion, providing their name, place of residence, and what they do.