Triple Century in Sydney First Grade One-Day Match

[sherb]

314 from 141 balls for Western Suburbs in a Sydney First Grade One-Day match.

Several records broken, including presumably the number of lost balls.

Triple-hundred with 35 sixes! The hilarious $2k cost of Aussie’s ‘once-in-a-lifetime’ carnage

Triple-hundred with 35 sixes! Hilarious $2k cost of Aussie’s ‘once-in-a-lifetime’ carnage

www.foxsports.com.au

 

[Grumpyshades]

314 from 141 balls for Western Suburbs in a Sydney First Grade One-Day match.

Several records broken, including presumably the number of lost balls.

Triple-hundred with 35 sixes! The hilarious $2k cost of Aussie’s ‘once-in-a-lifetime’ carnage

Triple-hundred with 35 sixes! Hilarious $2k cost of Aussie’s ‘once-in-a-lifetime’ carnage

www.foxsports.com.au

looks like he has lost a few kegs as well

 

[Run n Spread]

Surely get him in for the next shield game.
Could even do a Konstas make a couple of tons and be a chance for a test debut

 

[Cleavy]

who pays the $2k for the lost balls?

 

[Tyberious Funk]

Watched the highlights and this guy was brutal. Hard to judge the quality of the bowling from just the highlights... but he was particularly harsh on the spinners.

Someone's gotta get him into the BBL.

 

[Ekomaira]

 

[PhatBoy]

Watched the highlights and this guy was brutal. Hard to judge the quality of the bowling from just the highlights... but he was particularly harsh on the spinners.

Someone's gotta get him into the BBL.

The sound off that bat was music to the ears I have to say. The bowling wasn’t exactly the best I’ve ever seen but they were pretty demoralised and it was just a day where everything he wanted to hit, he smashed

 

[Gethelred]

There's an awful lot of bowling right into the slot in there. Still, you've got to nail them and holy shit did he nail them!

 

[PhatBoy]

There's an awful lot of bowling right into the slot in there. Still, you've got to nail them and holy shit did he nail them!

There was but when he slammed his second (?) six of the innings inside out over cover it probably signalled it wasn’t going to matter too much where they were putting them on the day

 

[Gethelred]

There was but when he slammed his second (?) six of the innings inside out over cover it probably signalled it wasn’t going to matter too much where they were putting them on the day

See, part of the problem is that unlike the Jake F-M quickfire double ton, not every ball was on that footage. We don't get to see the dots or the things they tried to stop him. All we get is him getting slightly fuller than back a length and him pounding the thing into the northern hemisphere.

But you would've thought that you'd notice the bloke likes the thing on that length and tried to give him legitimately anything else, wouldn't you?

 

[PhatBoy]

See, part of the problem is that unlike the Jake F-M quickfire double ton, not every ball was on that footage. We don't get to see the dots or the things they tried to stop him. All we get is him getting slightly fuller than back a length and him pounding the thing into the northern hemisphere.

But you would've thought that you'd notice the bloke likes the thing on that length and tried to give him legitimately anything else, wouldn't you?

Much as they talk about how it’s the best suburban competition in the world - and it probably is - it’s worth remembering they’re still grade cricketers so even if their tactics are good, the reason they’re grade cricketers is because they can’t execute those tactics with the frequency of blokes who go the next step.

He was also taking a lot of balls from outside off stump through the onside as well, I read a lot of comments saying ‘just bowl wide of off stump.' There was a lot of balls well outside it that we’re still getting hammered either back over the bowler’s head or over mid wicket, whether they were in the slot or a bit shorter.

Not saying the bowling was defendable or decent or anything but I reckon there were a few mitigating factors

 

[Gethelred]

Much as they talk about how it’s the best suburban competition in the world - and it probably is - it’s worth remembering they’re still grade cricketers so even if their tactics are good, the reason they’re grade cricketers is because they can’t execute those tactics with the frequency of blokes who go the next step.

He was also taking a lot of balls from outside off stump through the onside as well, I read a lot of comments saying ‘just bowl wide of off stump.' There was a lot of balls well outside it that we’re still getting hammered either back over the bowler’s head or over mid wicket, whether they were in the slot or a bit shorter.

Not saying the bowling was defendable or decent or anything but I reckon there were a few mitigating factors

His comments after the game were illuminating for me, because he mentioned that he'd been working on his power hitting multiple times and that he was happy it came off.

Cricketers at that level aren't smart enough to try and use the media for marketing, so there's no reason to doubt the statement. As a consequence, I think he genuinely spent the time working on his ability to play those shots anywhere on the pitch provided he got that length; there's a school of power-hitting coaching that suggests something like that, developing the same bat arc for different lines and practicing to make it effective provided you get that length.

He might've been dragging those balls straight from wide of the pitch, but you've played enough cricket Phat to know there are some blokes who can play the ball to particular parts of the ground from almost any line provided they get the length they want. He developed a methodology to allow him to cart the ball off that length, and they didn't seem to try to throw him off that length.

Mind you, this kind of marries with what I've thought about high level cricket for a while: you don't get the best tactics at the top, because why would you need them when you have Ricky Ponting at three and Glenn McGrath opening the bowling? You get captains who simply do not need to be strategic innovators because they can just get statisticians to tell them who should be bowling when and what shot is a player's weakest scoring area.

I dunno. It's not as simple as 'don't bowl there', but I refuse to say there was nothing they could've done to change things. It undervalues the knock if there was no way they could've gotten him out.

 

[PhatBoy]

His comments after the game were illuminating for me, because he mentioned that he'd been working on his power hitting multiple times and that he was happy it came off.

Cricketers at that level aren't smart enough to try and use the media for marketing, so there's no reason to doubt the statement. As a consequence, I think he genuinely spent the time working on his ability to play those shots anywhere on the pitch provided he got that length; there's a school of power-hitting coaching that suggests something like that, developing the same bat arc for different lines and practicing to make it effective provided you get that length.

He might've been dragging those balls straight from wide of the pitch, but you've played enough cricket Phat to know there are some blokes who can play the ball to particular parts of the ground from almost any line provided they get the length they want. He developed a methodology to allow him to cart the ball off that length, and they didn't seem to try to throw him off that length.

Mind you, this kind of marries with what I've thought about high level cricket for a while: you don't get the best tactics at the top, because why would you need them when you have Ricky Ponting at three and Glenn McGrath opening the bowling? You get captains who simply do not need to be strategic innovators because they can just get statisticians to tell them who should be bowling when and what shot is a player's weakest scoring area.

I dunno. It's not as simple as 'don't bowl there', but I refuse to say there was nothing they could've done to change things. It undervalues the knock if there was no way they could've gotten him out.

oh i definitely think they could have changed things a bit but like you said, we’ve watched and played enough to also know that the best laid plans can just go to shit if you’re under the pump - it seemed to me just watching the score tick over that his first 100-150 that he waited for balls in his slot and smoked them. As the gap between his score and the balls faced got wider, the boundaries got more and more frequent which to me suggests a bit of panic maybe as well and the captain and bowlers might have been a bit demoralised.

I always found and I reckon data even at the high levels would probably back this up, when a ‘plan B’ doesn’t work just a couple of times, players lose faith in it.

For example, Smith is picking you off through the offside relentlessly so you set a fine leg, deep square and someone in the circle behind square and bowl at his stumps but he gets 2-3 boundaries away. Teams go away from it really quickly but it might take time 6-7 boundaries to make them do it in the first place.
Similarly maybe these guys - because I noticed in grade cricket terms they MOSTLY gave the ball a bit of air - started out trying to bowl positively, disappeared for 5-6 sixes, briefly tried to bowl flatter and shorter and skid them in, went for a couple of boundaries and really quickly went away from it rather than sticking with it.
Could be totally wrong, just theorising.

The exception to that theory of course is the short ball Plan B that everyone seems to stick with long after it’s run it’s time

 

[Gethelred]

oh i definitely think they could have changed things a bit but like you said, we’ve watched and played enough to also know that the best laid plans can just go to shit if you’re under the pump - it seemed to me just watching the score tick over that his first 100-150 that he waited for balls in his slot and smoked them. As the gap between his score and the balls faced got wider, the boundaries got more and more frequent which to me suggests a bit of panic maybe as well and the captain and bowlers might have been a bit demoralised.

I always found and I reckon data even at the high levels would probably back this up, when a ‘plan B’ doesn’t work just a couple of times, players lose faith in it.

For example, Smith is picking you off through the offside relentlessly so you set a fine leg, deep square and someone in the circle behind square and bowl at his stumps but he gets 2-3 boundaries away. Teams go away from it really quickly but it might take time 6-7 boundaries to make them do it in the first place.
Similarly maybe these guys - because I noticed in grade cricket terms they MOSTLY gave the ball a bit of air - started out trying to bowl positively, disappeared for 5-6 sixes, briefly tried to bowl flatter and shorter and skid them in, went for a couple of boundaries and really quickly went away from it rather than sticking with it.
Could be totally wrong, just theorising.

The exception to that theory of course is the short ball Plan B that everyone seems to stick with long after it’s run it’s time

Think the short ball is what they should've done, really. See if he can continuously clear the rope square of the wicket to a leg side set field with a quick bowling cutters at his armpit around the wicket.

You need the bowlers to do it, but there's no excuses for a bowler not to be able to do it at first grade level.

 

[Cleavy]

let's see how he goes for the NSW 2nd XI next week

 

[Black Diamond]

An interesting one from the weekend just gone.

https://www.playhq.com/cricket-australia/org/nsw-premier-cricket/nsw-premier-cricket-mens-summer-202526/first-grade-belvidere-cup/game-centre/96d41d40

Western Suburbs batting first, and featuring Harjas Singh again, score 401. Includes 197 of 115 from Josh Philippe.

Randwick in response reach 400 on the last ball of the innings.