Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Sorry.Pffft.
Amla couldn't handle Johnson - except for the time he hit a century against Johnson and Harris at Newlands the day after both sides got bowled out for double figures.
And then came out and did in the next match against Johnson and Cummins.
Or when he did it, at Perth, at a run a ball, against Johnson and Starc.
Or at Brisbane when he did it against Pattinson.
Or the times he did it against Anderson, broad and Finn (when Finn wasn't hopeless).
Man oh man, Aussie fans need to lose this obsession with people battling against Johnson.
The guy was scarily good on his day but it doesn't cancel out the times he got dominated.
Sorry.
There was a time when Finn wasn't hopeless???
No. I meant other than that....The two times he took 6-for against Australia, curiously enough
As others have said the 2 bouncers per over would change things somewhat.
I think Warner would go ok against them, his bigger problem is spin generally. Maybe a few failures but he would still make runs and average 40 or so.
Smith I think would be better but below his career average maybe 45 or so against them.
All the others would have significant issues. Renshaw would have his deficiencies exposed quick smart, Khawaja may actually go ok, while Handscomb and Maxwell would really battle.
Btw People reminisce about the windies but they used gamesmanship and intimidation just like the apparently evil 95-08 Australian teams did.
Slow over rates, sledging, running out Dean Jones off a no ball, bowling 7 overs in an hour to prevent an English victory in 1990 etc.
I'd love to see them powerful again but chances are they will produce their own Kohli who will antagonize and anger people.
Contrary to my regular criticism of him, I think Warner would play the occasional brutal innings against that sort of bowling. But they would be mitigated by a lot of low scores.
The gamesmanship thing was addressed in another thread I think, but as Fire In babylon explains, their hard nosed approach was expressly born out of what they encountered out here when they were flogged 5-1.
They were shocked at the sledging and all-out-warfare from the Aussies and realised that their best option was to just do it back to them.
This is cool.
A bit like Wasim Akram in that respect. Both always seemed to have more because they got to, and importantly through, the crease so easily. Yet still freakishly fast, and in control.Can tell from watching the batsman that irrespective of the actual pace coming down at them, they just can’t compute that the languid, lazy run up, is translating to the literal pace of what they’re facing.
A bit like Wasim Akram in that respect. Both always seemed to have more because they got to, and importantly through, the crease so easily. Yet still freakishly fast, and in control.
Most imo.
This is what I'm curious about. If we accept with modern professionalism, more advanced training techniques, sports science, athletes full time and people being bigger and stronger and this impacts sports. i.e. AFL players are quicker and stronger, tennis players now serve and hit harder etc
Does the same apply to cricket? Ergo bowlers today are quicker than in previous eras. While only a select few WIs types could push 145-150km/h today most pace bowlers can hit that mark and a select few can push mid 150s 160.
Anyone seen/played across eras? Is there a discernible difference?
The doco was like pr0n for me so I imagine the book would be heaven as well.I'm half way through Fire in Babylon the book PhatBoy, you'd love it.
I'll say one thing that Close did right though - unlike far too many batsmen now - he watched the ball. Even the one where he moved his head at the absolute last second, he was still watching the ball the whole time.
there is famous footage of michael holding bowling to brian close.
for those who don't know, to set the scene close played his first test as a youngster in 1949 and the last test of his "main" career in 1967, but only played a total of 19 tests in between averaging 24. in other words, he was bog average.
so in 1976, the english decide to resurrect the now 45 year old's career to try and fend of the fiercing pace attack of andy roberts, michael holding and wayne daniel.
this was the result. how the second ball doesn't send his teeth all the way to the boundary is a miracle. the classic scene is directly after and you can pretty much see the keeper talking to the slips saying "this isn't right. we are going to kill this guy"
amazingly he scored 60 and 46 in the second test.
I played some Sub Dist cricket at the time but did not face him as in different group. I think he enjoyed himself but did not bowl full pace from what I remember. West Indians were well known as good time party boys. Liked the girls also.Marshall played for Moorabbin in the early '80s, after he'd played about a dozen tests.
http://news.google.com/newspapers?n...vOMQAAAAIBAJ&sjid=d5QDAAAAIBAJ&pg=2189,275308
It would be a mess. 5 nil losses all over the place.
Sides bowled out for 80's and 90's.
I fear the current Australian batting line up would fair worse than their 1983 to 85 types.
The current West Indies era is like 20 levels down on back then. It is literally scary how different it is.
Beating them in a single game back then in late 70s and most of 80's was like climbing Mount Everest in terms of cricket results. It is why a regular one day game at MCG against them could draw 80,000
No hope of seeing that now.
I miss the challenge of beating or getting as good as a team like that.