PDA

View Full Version : Sub dismissals


usalion
8 Sep 2005, 13:30
Well, no surprise in this article- if he isn't being called into the actual side, we really should get Andrew Symonds from duty for Lancs to be OUR permanent sub fielder...wonder who the Poms will pull out of their arse?

Here's the article from the BBC

England leading in sub dismissals
SUB DISMISSALS SINCE SEP 2001

England 18 in 52 Tests (17 catches, 1 run-out)
W Indies 16 in 47 (12c, 4Rro)
India 14 in 41 (13c, 1ro)
Pakistan 10 in 33 (9c, 1ro)
New Zealand 10 in 36 (10c)
Bangladesh 8 in 34 (8c)
Sri Lanka 7 in 37 (6c, 1Rro)
Zimbabwe 5 in 27 (5c)
South Africa 8 in 47 (8c)
Australia 4 in 50 (3c, 1Rro)
Ponting slams England sub policy
England substitute fielders have effected more Test dismissals than any other team over the past four years.

In 52 Tests since September 2001, England subs have dismissed 18 batsmen - in contrast to four by Australia.

The statistic will not surprise Australia, who have voiced great displeasure at England's exaggerated use of sub fielders this Ashes series.

Ricky Ponting was fined for an angry outburst after being run out by sub fielder Gary Pratt in the fourth Test.

Pratt was on the field at Trent Bridge for the genuinely injured Simon Jones, but Australia have been unhappy that England bowlers have been replaced on the field by specialist fielders after spells.

England claim the bowlers are simply taking toilet breaks, and in any case the ploy is not against the rules of cricket.

The research, carried out by Cricinfo, shows that England are two ahead of West Indies and four ahead of India, while Australia are four dismissals behind second-last nation South Africa.

sinepari
8 Sep 2005, 13:31
Very interesting Usalion. Cheers for the post.

usalion
8 Sep 2005, 13:50
Very interesting Usalion. Cheers for the post.


No problem- things like this make the discussion interesting....wonder what "stats" the Victorian Pommy Paperboy will invent to refute this? Or- the Poms just pick better fielders as 12th man.....bring on the test and an Aussie victory...no matter who the selectors put on the paddock.....

jagx00
8 Sep 2005, 14:15
Looking at it in wickets per 100 Tests, we get:

E 34.6
WI 34.0
I 34.1
P 30.3
NZ 27.8
B 23.5
SL 18.9
Z 18.5
SA 17.0
A 8.0

So, most countries use subs a lot. Australia are out of step.

Having said that, England, West Indies, India and Pakistan are probably pushing the laws to their limits. Australia can do this too if they want to.

The ICC does need to clarify their policy on this and after all the hoo ha probably will.

RoK
8 Sep 2005, 15:45
Looking at it in wickets per 100 Tests, we get:

E 34.6
WI 34.0
I 34.1
P 30.3
NZ 27.8
B 23.5
SL 18.9
Z 18.5
SA 17.0
A 8.0

So, most countries use subs a lot. Australia are out of step.

Having said that, England, West Indies, India and Pakistan are probably pushing the laws to their limits. Australia can do this too if they want to.

The ICC does need to clarify their policy on this and after all the hoo ha probably will.

It is called cheating but the ICC wil do nothing about it.

sinepari
8 Sep 2005, 15:47
Eddie???

Browney
8 Sep 2005, 16:33
Hang on a minute, wernt the Aussies Whinging about this a couple of weeks ago?

sinepari
8 Sep 2005, 16:47
Hang on a minute, wernt the Aussies Whinging about this a couple of weeks ago?

What?

jagx00
9 Sep 2005, 14:08
It is called cheating but the ICC wil do nothing about it.

More a case of pushing the laws to their limits.

Like sledging, slow over rates, pretending to need a change of gloves, appealing when you know it's not out.

jagx00
10 Sep 2005, 14:33
It is called cheating but the ICC wil do nothing about it.

http://content-aus.cricinfo.com/ci/content/story/218588.html