Endless Summer of Cricket

Remove this Banner Ad

Status
Not open for further replies.
BronCrow said:
It is also because they average more runs against because they pitch the ball up, so therefore deliver more "4 balls" than the 6 foot 3 inch 145km/h short pitch/bouncer bowlers that we pick, that for the most part look ineffective.
Click to expand...
Takes a lot more physical effort to bowl short, and you could tell by halfway through the final day in Melbourne they were spent.
 
jackster83 said:
Dale Steyn and Jimmy Anderson would never have been selected for us.
Click to expand...
Steyn in his early days would've, he was real quick.

Saw the Redbacks lads and coaches along with Boof today down at KRO..... **** me Wes Agar is a massive lad.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Drugs Are Bad Mackay? said:
No swing bowlers is The McGrath Effect
Click to expand...
It's very dangerous to base a theory on one of the greatest bowlers ever seen. It's the same theory that's seen us relentlessly chase an all-rounder since the 2005 Ashes and only now has one potentially come along.

We need a variety of skill in the game.
 
hey shorty said:
At ODI level
Click to expand...
Correct weight.

There would be about half a dozen great all-rounders in the history of test cricket, not many more. We have had one. We are looking for something that may never come along.

Miller
Sobers
Kallis
Flintoff
Stokes
Botham
Dev
Khan
Hadlee

Feel free to add to that list
 
skam85 said:
His test avgs were still very good. He just couldn't convert his many 50s into tons.
Click to expand...
75 wickets at test level is useful, but does not put you in to a category of being a very good all rounder at test level.
 
BronCrow said:
Correct weight.

There would be about half a dozen great all-rounders in the history of test cricket, not many more. We have had one. We are looking for something that may never come along.

Miller
Sobers
Kallis
Flintoff
Stokes
Botham
Dev
Khan
Hadlee

Feel free to add to that list
Click to expand...

If you're adding Stokes, you have to have Watson.
Their stats are extremely similar.


FWIW Stokes is the one on that list that doesn't stand out.

Shahid Afridi, Chris Cairns, Shakib al Hasan all could be in the conversation as well.
 
Jason Gillespie will tell you he's a Test all rounder.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

skam85 said:
If you're adding Stokes, you have to have Watson.
Their stats are extremely similar.


FWIW Stokes is the one on that list that doesn't stand out.
Click to expand...
Probably true, but he's done it longer than Watson did.

I mean he virtually saved them single-handedly from a 4 zip defeat in the last Ashes.
 
BronCrow said:
Correct weight.

There would be about half a dozen great all-rounders in the history of test cricket, not many more. We have had one. We are looking for something that may never come along.

Miller
Sobers
Kallis
Flintoff
Stokes
Botham
Dev
Khan
Hadlee

Feel free to add to that list
Click to expand...
Good list.

Akram too.
 
skam85 said:
If you're adding Stokes, you have to have Watson.
Their stats are extremely similar.


FWIW Stokes is the one on that list that doesn't stand out.

Shahid Afridi, Chris Cairns, Shakib al Hasan all could be in the conversation as well.
Click to expand...
Might be an early call on Stokes, though I think he will be in that company one day. You most certainly do not have to have Watson if you are having Stokes on there. Stokes has twice the number of wickets than Watson with a greater average in only 10 more tests. Otherwise you may as well add Lance Klusener on there as well.

Afridi only played 27 tests, and only taken 48 test wickets. It is an insult to the guys mentioned above to have mention Afridi in the same breath. Cairns I don't is quite in that company on the list I mentioned, though is a fine players in his own right.

Shakib's figures are certainly worthy of potentially throwing in the mix. Though the opposition that he has played against, and where he has played that opposition, may skew those figures somewhat.
 
Kane McGoodwin said:
Good list.

Akram too.
Click to expand...
Thank you.

Thought about Akram, but averaged under 23 with the bat, which was a bit low for mine, though I suspect was a fair bit higher earlier in his career. Would have Pollock ahead of him, who averaged 32 with the bat.
 
BronCrow said:
Thank you.

Thought about Akram, but averaged under 23 with the bat, which was a bit low for mine, though I suspect was a fair bit higher earlier in his career. Would have Pollock ahead of him, who averaged 32 with the bat.
Click to expand...
I can recall the 1st time he played at Adelaide Oval & destroyed our attack with a century & some big straight sixes.

Think he took a 5 for too.

You are right in saying he didn't put as much into his batting later in his career & should have had a higher average. Would have thought similar to Hadlee.
 
skam85 said:
If you're adding Stokes, you have to have Watson.
Their stats are extremely similar.


FWIW Stokes is the one on that list that doesn't stand out.

Shahid Afridi, Chris Cairns, Shakib al Hasan all could be in the conversation as well.
Click to expand...

Ravi Jadeja and Jason Holder go alright too.
 
Spin is ripping India apart, and not even good spin.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Drugs Are Bad Mackay?
Competitions Crouch's Lock of the Week Game
2 3 4 5
Replies
114
Views
5K
Drugs Are Bad Mackay?
Drugs Are Bad Mackay?

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top