Look no further than Trott for Ashes run threat
Published:
Captain Alistair Cook and the returning Kevin Pietersen have grabbed most of the headlines in the build-up to this summer’s Ashes as far as the Top England Runscorer market is concerned.
And when you look at their respective records against the Aussies it’s easy to see why many are backing the duo to lead from the front in the upcoming series.
Pietersen was made for the big stage and has rarely looked as comfortable at the crease in his international career as he has against the men from down under. He smashed a 121 in his first Test against the Baggy Greens and after his first six outings boasted an average of 96.83, explaining his odds of 3/1.
Captain Cook’s start was not quite as imperious as that of the now-Surrey batsman, but a top score of 235 – achieved in Brisbane in 2010 – and recent knocks of 148 and 189 shows that the 28-year-old is more than capable of inflicting damage on the Aussie attack and see the Essex man priced as the 5/2 favourite.
However, while Cook has managed some huge scores against the Australians, his average in 15 matches against them has dropped to 50.56.
Pietersen’s blazing start has inevitably cooled somewhat and after 17 Tests his average now stands at 52.71.
Trott, however, has smashed 605 runs in his six matches against Australia thus far, giving him an average of 86.42 and if the Warwickshire man can maintain this form, the 3/1 on him being England’s top runscorer in the series represents good value.
It is perhaps unfair to compare the averages of Cook and Trott, with the former having played almost three times as many games against the Aussies, but it is worth noting that after six games the captain’s average stood at just 48.66, almost 40 runs lower than Trott’s current record.
Trott failed to bother the scorers last time out against the Aussies and that may explain the healthy odds of 3/1 but the 445 he amassed in four 2010 matches against the Ashes opponents could tempt many to back him to shine this time round.
All Odds and Markets are correct as of the date of publishing.
