Australia are beginning a demanding year of Test cricket with a question that has become increasingly difficult to answer with a single number: what does a good Test batter look like in an era increasingly dominated by the ball? For Australia head coach Andrew McDonald, the answer is no longer simply an average of 50.
As Australia prepare to begin a run of as many as 20 Tests in 12 months, their coaching staff have been examining batting performances through a wider set of measures, including a player’s share of the team’s runs, median contribution in an innings and how often a batter scores more than a quarter of the team’s total.
The thinking has a simple premise: 40 may be the new 50. McDonald told ESPNcricinfo that the conditions in which modern Test cricket is being played have to be considered before judging individual batting numbers.
“We’ve been challenged by the conditions that we play in,” McDonald said. “You’ve even seen greats of the game decline in terms of their averages.”
He pointed specifically to the changing environment in which Australia and other leading Test teams are operating. His argument is not that averages have become irrelevant, but that they no longer tell the entire story of a batter’s contribution. That matters for an Australian batting group that has faced scrutiny despite a strong team record.
Why are Test averages shrinking
The shrinking of individual Test averages isn’t merely a byproduct of bowler-friendly pitch preparation, it is the result of a structural evolution across the modern game. With the relentless expansion of white-ball leagues reshaping batting mindsets, players increasingly approach Red-Ball cricket with higher risk profiles and accelerated scoring rates, trading long-innings durability for immediate match impact.
Coupled with hyper-aggressive tactics and spicy pitch conditions, Test matches are now routinely concluding inside three or four days. In an era where 250 is often a match-winning total and draws have virtually vanished, evaluating batters by a historic “50 average” distorts their real-world contribution. Under these accelerated conditions, a high-impact, rapid 40 often carries the exact same match-winning weight that a methodical century did a decade ago.
The 40-is-the-new-50 argument
The contrast with Australia’s great batting generation is stark. ESPNcricinfo’s analysis, based on data compiled by Australia’s coaching staff and analyst Tom Body, compares the current group with the 2001-04 side led by Steve Waugh and, later, Ricky Ponting.
Between 2001 and 2004, six members of that Australian group averaged more than 50. Ponting and Matthew Hayden averaged about 63, while the team produced 33 centuries during the period.
The current generation has not produced numbers of that scale. Between 2022 and 2026, Steve Smith had the highest Test average among the group at 46.90, while only four Australian batters averaged above 40. On a traditional scorecard, that looks like a significant decline.
But Australia’s coaching staff believe the comparison needs more context. Rather than asking only how many runs a player scored before being dismissed, they are also asking how large a share of Australia’s total those runs represented. That changes the picture.
The analysis found that Smith, Hayden and Ponting had broadly similar shares of their team’s runs and median contributions during their respective periods, despite Smith averaging 17 runs fewer per dismissal than the two former Australia greats.
The point is not that Smith is statistically equivalent to Hayden or Ponting. It is that the environment around the batting performance has changed, and raw averages can exaggerate the difference.
A batter averaging 42 in a team regularly making 250 may be contributing more meaningfully to winning than a batter averaging 52 in a team routinely making 450. That is the thinking behind Australia’s expanded evaluation.
Labuschagne, Green and Weatherald under the microscope
The timing of the exercise is significant because several members of Australia’s batting order enter the next phase of the cycle under pressure.
Marnus Labuschagne has not made a Test century since 2023 and has averaged 25.75 over his last 21 Tests, according to the figures cited by ESPNcricinfo.
Cameron Green has averaged 32.75 across 37 Tests and has only two centuries. His most recent Ashes series produced no score higher than 45 across eight innings.
Jake Weatherald, meanwhile, averaged 22.33 in his debut series and made one half-century. Those numbers would ordinarily form the centre of the conversation around selection. McDonald wants his staff and players to look at more than that. “We measure in terms of percentage of runs [of the team’s total] and their impact in games,” he said.
That does not mean Australia are lowering their expectations. McDonald made clear that the players themselves want to score more runs and reach the traditional benchmarks. But the internal assessment is increasingly about whether a batter is helping Australia win, rather than whether his individual average looks impressive.
That distinction could become increasingly important as Australia move through a schedule featuring Bangladesh, South Africa, New Zealand, India and England.
Australia are winning despite the batting numbers
The broader team numbers help explain why the coaching staff are reluctant to judge the batting group too harshly. Australia have won 29 of their 45 Tests in the 2022-26 period, losing only one series and drawing three, according to the data analysis cited by ESPNcricinfo.
That is not the record of a team whose batting system has stopped functioning. It is the record of a side that has found other ways to win. Australia’s fast bowlers have been central to that success, particularly in an era in which pitches and match conditions have often made batting difficult.
McDonald acknowledged that his alternative metrics are imperfect and are influenced by Australia’s strong winning record. But he believes they provide a better internal picture of performance. “All the metrics become irrelevant if Australia are not winning games,” he said.
The argument is particularly relevant to players such as Alex Carey and Beau Webster, whose value can be understated when judged primarily through career averages.
Carey averaged 37.26 in the 2022-26 period, but his median share of Australia’s runs was 9.6%. That compared with Adam Gilchrist’s 8.8% during the earlier period, when Gilchrist averaged 51.82.
Again, the comparison is not intended to suggest Carey is Gilchrist’s statistical equivalent. It shows how a batter’s contribution to a team’s overall output can remain meaningful even when the headline average is lower.
The same problem exists below the Test team
Australia’s rethink does not stop with the national side. The country’s domestic Sheffield Shield competition is producing similarly modest batting numbers, while seam bowlers have been highly effective.
Between 2021 and 2026, no Shield batter with at least 500 runs averaged above 50, according to the data cited by ESPNcricinfo. Only 10 players averaged above 40.
Several are already connected to the Test set-up. Cameron Green had the highest average among them at 48.63, followed by Carey at 47.37, Webster at 46.41, Josh Inglis at 42.45, Weatherald at 40.32 and Labuschagne at 40.13.
The bowling numbers provide the other half of the equation. The four leading Shield seamers in the period, among those with more than 100 wickets, averaged below 22. Scott Boland led the group with 132 wickets at 16.78. That is a radically different batting environment from the one Australia experienced during the previous generation.
The comparison with 2005-10 is revealing
The difference becomes even clearer when Australia’s current domestic numbers are compared with the period from 2005 to 2010, when the country was transitioning away from its previous great Test side.
During that period, 10 Sheffield Shield batters with at least 500 runs averaged more than 50. All 10 eventually played Test cricket. Four averaged above 63: Michael Clarke, Simon Katich, Darren Lehmann and Phil Hughes.
Current domestic coaches Chris Rogers and Brad Haddin were also among those who averaged more than 52. The bowling environment was almost the reverse of today’s. Only six seamers took at least 100 wickets between 2005 and 2010, with Doug Bollinger the only one among them to average below 25.
The numbers suggest that Australian batting development is taking place in a tougher domestic environment than it did during the previous transition. That has implications for selection.
If the benchmark for a successful Shield batter is set at 50 regardless of conditions, Australia risks overlooking players who are producing valuable performances on difficult surfaces.
The bigger question for Test cricket
Australia’s approach reflects a wider problem facing Test cricket. Traditional statistics were built around an assumption that conditions would eventually even themselves out. But when pitches become more bowler-friendly, schedules become more compressed and teams increasingly play in different conditions around the world, the same average can represent very different levels of difficulty.
A 50 average remains an excellent number. But a 40 average no longer automatically tells the story of an underperforming batter. That is where measures such as share of team runs and median contribution can add useful context.
The danger, of course, is going too far in the opposite direction. Alternative metrics should explain performance, not become a way of protecting players from legitimate criticism. McDonald appears conscious of that balance.
“Our job is to solve the problems that present with the conditions that are there, the opponent that’s there,” he said. Australia’s immediate challenge will be to turn that philosophy into runs.
They begin against Bangladesh in Darwin on Thursday, followed by a packed schedule that could include 20 Tests across the next year. For the players under pressure, the message from the coaching staff is clear: the number next to their name still matters, but it is no longer the only number Australia are looking at.
In an era where bowlers are increasingly dictating the terms, 40 may not mean what 40 once meant. And 50 may no longer be the only definition of a successful Test batter.