Test Frank Worrell Trophy First Test West Indies v Australia June 25-29 2330hrs @ Kensington Oval, Barbados

[Sykes_]

It’s his first one away from home, and his third one against the West Indies along with one against what was a pretty pathetic SA side 3 years ago.

He’s undoubtedly an extremely valuable member of his side but probably a bit too soon to put him in that sort of exalted company just yet based on a ratio

The other greats he’s up against had great players around them. Basically the opposite for Head (besides Smith).
More often than not he comes in at 3 for not many (another reason why he has so many MOTM awards) and saves us.

Just think how better he’d be statistically if he wasn’t thrown to the wolves by our top order…

 

[MarcMaverick]

Travis Head being a clutch player and bailing us out way too frequently, highlights just how frail and brittle our batting order is.

 

[ams4crows]

When your top 4 fail twice in the game and still win by 150 runs, we gotta appreciate our Bowlers more, they are like top 3 bowling group in the history of the game and we are so lucky to watch them do their thing, they are also the bowling group that's asked to do more with the bat than any other bowling group in history because our batting is so weak.

 

[PhatBoy]

The other greats he’s up against had great players around them. Basically the opposite for Head (besides Smith).
More often than not he comes in at 3 for not many (another reason why he has so many MOTM awards) and saves us.

Just think how better he’d be statistically if he wasn’t thrown to the wolves by our top order…

I think his stats would probably be better but his MOTM ratio would probably be a lot worse

 

[DaRick]

During the 1990s, Tendulkar was India's only reliable batsman whenever they played overseas, which no doubt hurt his MOTM count.

Both Warne and Wasim had some quality bowlers to compete with. Lousy fielding wouldn't have helped Wasim, either.

 

[ams4crows]

Bancroft has to be in the Ashes squad, either opening or at number 3, he's been punished long enough. Wouldn't mind seeing Patterson at 3 either he's another one who played for Australia made runs and never got another look in. He's been in good shield form for a few seasons now.

Also super impressed with Webster, has absolutely gobbled up his chance, he's made it extremely difficult for selectors as his batting has been vital and he's done well with the ball.

 

[PhatBoy]

During the 1990s, Tendulkar was India's only reliable batsman whenever they played overseas, which no doubt hurt his MOTM count.

Both Warne and Wasim had some quality bowlers to compete with. Lousy fielding wouldn't have helped Wasim, either.

That’s not strictly true.

Though he only played for four years of the decade, Dravid averaged 60 away from home.

That was his whole MO - his away average was better than home for his entire career. But Tendulkar played the whole decade, Dravid played 4 years of it.

Azharuddin was very hit and miss. Good in England and NZ, bad in WI and SA, hit a century in Australia but otherwise ordinary there.

Ganguly had some occasional moments of brilliance but again was only around for 4 years.

It’s a fair point to a degree - probably owed more to them being unable to bowl teams out as much as anything though.

 

[PhatBoy]

re. The man of the match thing, a way to look at it with Head would be to compare him with Kallis.

Kallis has the all time record for awards - he won 23 of them and a big knock on him was that he won a lot in boring draws. Some of that has some substance, some doesn’t. He won 9 in draws, at least one of them, his first, was to play a brilliant knock against Warne and McGrath and co to get SA out of trouble and bat them to safety.

But I digress. He won 14 in wins.

Basically all those wins had something in common: they featured the revered SA attack where they were routinely dismantling the opposition. And while he had a stronger batting line up around him than Head does (definitely not questioning that), the SA bowling, like Australia’s, was its trump card, so when someone stands out with the bat, you’re probably more inclined to go ‘well who was the standout with the team’s weaker suit when their strength was always going to fire’ if that makes sense.


that’s not a knock on Head - as I said if he were in a better batting side I’m certain he’d have a better record in general because he’s constantly having to launch these rescue missions

 

[Zach Package]

Steve Smith at 36 is still our best batsman.
That’s pretty poor when you think about it.

Root is 34, Williamson is 34, Chandimal is 35, Elgar is 38 and still would be if South African cricket was more organised and there was more money in it.

Not abnormal at all.

 

[BGman]

I saw this clip. WOW.

 

[240volt]

Root is 34, Williamson is 34, Chandimal is 35, Elgar is 38 and still would be if South African cricket was more organised and there was more money in it.

Not abnormal at all.

My point is there’s nothing even close to him, maybe Head but after that bugger all.
I’d say our wicket keeper Carey would be after Head.

 

[jb04]

When your top 4 fail twice in the game and still win by 150 runs, we gotta appreciate our Bowlers more, they are like top 3 bowling group in the history of the game and we are so lucky to watch them do their thing, they are also the bowling group that's asked to do more with the bat than any other bowling group in history because our batting is so weak.

All the top 4 really did this match was hold their catches (mostly, I don't recall any drops off the top of my head).

5-6-7 did the heavy lifting as is becoming all to common.

It's also a credit to the maturity of this bowling lineup, that they usually put a price on their wickets and offset the top order not performing. Such a saving grace.

 

[DaRick]

That’s not strictly true.

Though he only played for four years of the decade, Dravid averaged 60 away from home.

That was his whole MO - his away average was better than home for his entire career. But Tendulkar played the whole decade, Dravid played 4 years of it.

Azharuddin was very hit and miss. Good in England and NZ, bad in WI and SA, hit a century in Australia but otherwise ordinary there.

Ganguly had some occasional moments of brilliance but again was only around for 4 years.

It’s a fair point to a degree - probably owed more to them being unable to bowl teams out as much as anything though.

I did consider Dravid, but he didn't peak until the 2000s, and while he was the best of the rest, he wasn't necessarily consistent overseas either.

He was great in ENG and NZ, good in WI, meh in SL, had one good Test in SA, and was horrid in AUS.

Agree that their bowlers couldn't consistently take 20 wickets.

 

[PhatBoy]

I did consider Dravid, but he didn't peak until the 2000s, and while he was the best of the rest, he wasn't necessarily consistent overseas either.

He was great in ENG and NZ, good in WI, meh in SL, had one good Test in SA, and was horrid in AUS.

Agree that their bowlers couldn't consistently take 20 wickets.

In the 1990s yes. Probably fair.


Horrid in Australia is harsh, he’d only played two tests by that point from memory.


He more than made up for that. He hit at least a 90 on every ground he played on here aside from the Gabba where he only played one test, and one of his innings there was 43*.

On him, I always felt sorry for him playing with Sachin given the plaudits Tendulkar got. You can’t deny the greatness of Sachin, he performed everywhere against everyone. No argument. But for whatever reason it just didn’t achieve what it probably should have. It wasn’t until Dravid started to hit runs that the difference was made.

He won them a test here almost off his own bat with some help from Agarkar and Laxman.

if your worst overseas effort save for SA is averaging 42 in Australia as an Asian batsman during an era where Australia were the best team in the world, it’s fair to say you have done a reasonable job.

The thing with Dravid was when they were knocking a few doors down overseas - winning landmark tests - it was often him and not Tendulkar doing it.
When they still played Pakistan, it was on the back of Dravid that they went there and did it for the first time in god knows how long.

When they finally won a test in Australia, it was on the back of him that they did it.

When they finally won a series in the west indies, it was on the back of a match where the highest innings score was 219, and Dravid hit 81 and 68; only one other batsman (Sarwan, 51) passed 40 for the match.

When they won a series in England in 2002 Tendulkar DID hit a century in the decisive test…. But it was after Dravid had already hit one.

He played that innings with Laxman at Kolkata. When they didn’t have an opener in England, after he’d hit a century in the middle order, he goes up the order and hits two centuries at the top.

 

[Zach Package]

My point is there’s nothing even close to him, maybe Head but after that bugger all.
I’d say our wicket keeper Carey would be after Head.

Head has been our best batsman for the last 2 years

 

[sr36]

It’s his first one away from home, and his third one against the West Indies along with one against what was a pretty pathetic SA side 3 years ago.

He’s undoubtedly an extremely valuable member of his side but probably a bit too soon to put him in that sort of exalted company just yet based on a ratio

Particularly when it was a pretty dodgy MOM. When's the last time they gave a bowler MOM for a solid contribution in each innings of a batsman dominated match?

 

[MarcMaverick]

Particularly when it was a pretty dodgy MOM. When's the last time they gave a bowler MOM for a solid contribution in each innings of a batsman dominated match?

I feel that Head's MOTM was the "safer" option.

 

[sr36]

I feel that Head's MOTM was the "safer" option.

Yep.

 

[CrowBloke]

My point is there’s nothing even close to him, maybe Head but after that bugger all.
I’d say our wicket keeper Carey would be after Head.

Unfortunate phraseology ... I ain't touchin' that

 

[DaRick]

In the 1990s yes. Probably fair.


Horrid in Australia is harsh, he’d only played two tests by that point from memory.


He more than made up for that. He hit at least a 90 on every ground he played on here aside from the Gabba where he only played one test, and one of his innings there was 43*.

On him, I always felt sorry for him playing with Sachin given the plaudits Tendulkar got. You can’t deny the greatness of Sachin, he performed everywhere against everyone. No argument. But for whatever reason it just didn’t achieve what it probably should have. It wasn’t until Dravid started to hit runs that the difference was made.

He won them a test here almost off his own bat with some help from Agarkar and Laxman.

if your worst overseas effort save for SA is averaging 42 in Australia as an Asian batsman during an era where Australia were the best team in the world, it’s fair to say you have done a reasonable job.

The thing with Dravid was when they were knocking a few doors down overseas - winning landmark tests - it was often him and not Tendulkar doing it.
When they still played Pakistan, it was on the back of Dravid that they went there and did it for the first time in god knows how long.

When they finally won a test in Australia, it was on the back of him that they did it.

When they finally won a series in the west indies, it was on the back of a match where the highest innings score was 219, and Dravid hit 81 and 68; only one other batsman (Sarwan, 51) passed 40 for the match.

When they won a series in England in 2002 Tendulkar DID hit a century in the decisive test…. But it was after Dravid had already hit one.

He played that innings with Laxman at Kolkata. When they didn’t have an opener in England, after he’d hit a century in the middle order, he goes up the order and hits two centuries at the top.

I don't see where the disagreement lies.

He was horrid during the 1999/00 series because he couldn't adjust to the pace and bounce. And averaged 13.

He clearly peaked during the 2000s, and I rank him very highly overall. Not quite on par with Ponting/Border/Waugh (more minnow bashing than Ponting, batted in an easier era than the latter two), but very close.

 

[CrowBloke]

All the top 4 really did this match was hold their catches (mostly, I don't recall any drops off the top of my head).

Green dropped Carty on 1 in the second dig. He went on to 20.

Carey dropped King behind; was pretty easy but he's not Top 4 (well, not in the batting order anyway, but he's performing Top 4 ) and his second dig more than makes up for it.

 

[sabso]

What are the criteria for Man-of-the-Match, anyone?
Head was chosen (another big-game contribution) since his two 60's clearly contributed massively to the win
BUT
Shamar Joseph took 9/133 (with several catches dropped off his bowling) with 8 and 44 runs off a total of 30 balls.
Stiff not to get MotM, I reckon.

P.S. you can bet the Poms' Coaches are looking at hours of Head's recent batting to formulate a plan to get him out.

Somehow there seems to be an obligation to give motm to a player from the winning side nowadays. Pant had a better game than duckett as well.

 

[Around the Wicket]

To be fair if the side loses comfortably which Windies did in the end the MOM should go to a Australian player.

 

[CrowBloke]

To be fair if the side loses comfortably which Windies did in the end the MOM should go to a Australian player.

Yeah, I was thinking similarly.
MotM would go to the player who contributed most to the solid win.
Given the state of the wicket, the quality of the bowling and the state of each Innings when he came in, that player was Head.

 

[sr36]

What are the criteria for Man-of-the-Match, anyone?
Head was chosen (another big-game contribution) since his two 60's clearly contributed massively to the win
BUT
Shamar Joseph took 9/133 (with several catches dropped off his bowling) with 8 and 44 runs off a total of 30 balls.
Stiff not to get MotM, I reckon.

P.S. you can bet the Poms' Coaches are looking at hours of Head's recent batting to formulate a plan to get him out.

In this game, I suspect the criteria included avoiding a massive scandal.

Poms will stick with leg theory for Head. 2023 Ashes tour it was relatively effective - his best innings was on a seamer where conditions made them switch to off stump.