• Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

2007 - some stats

NZTailender

I can't believe I ate the whole thing
Just looking through the records for 2007. New Zealand played 2 - just 2 tests in 2007. What was surprising though is Australia played only double that, while England played 11.

It's a world gone topsy turvy when Andrew Symonds outscores Ricky Ponting in a calendar year, but thats what happened.

Hayden was the most prolific in ODI's while Sachin Tendulkar just couldn't convert those fifties, nor could Ganguly. Lou Vincent played 15 ODI's and scored 512 @ 36. Gun IMO. But noone could match Ponting who averaged an eye popping 79 in 2007, in 5 less matches than Hayden.

The first class scene was dominated by Australians, two of which (arguably) should be in the Australian side. Some bloke named Badrinath did okay too.

The List A list looks much like the ODI one, with Hayden-Ponting-Tendulkar at the top.

Brad Hodge ending up scoring the most T20 runs in 2007, Followed by Gambhir and Wright.

Two spinners were tied at the top of the bowling table; Kumble and Murali with 49 a piece.

There wasn't too much for us Kiwi's to gloat about in 2007 but we have found at least one thing with Daniel Vettori taking the most one day international wickets in 2007 with 43. Though it should be pointed out Glenn McGrath played only 20 matches for 39 wickets - phenomenal.

Vettori nearly did a double, as he was third on the T20 International list.

Danish Kaneria, Murali and Yasir Arafat dominated the first class scene.

Powell was the surprising leading wicket taker in List A matches, with 59.

While Morkel took the most in T20.
 

Pup_23

School Boy/Girl Captain
Makes you wonder how Ponting made Roebuck's test team of the year.
No doubt one dayers would have played a part regardless(Right or Wrong) of it being a test team, and also reputation as well.
 

Prince EWS

Global Moderator
Makes you wonder how Ponting made Roebuck's test team of the year.
Yeah. Roebuck's test team of the year lost all credibility when he did that along with the fact that he decided to open with Sangakkara and then blast India for opening with Dravid.
 
Last edited:

Prince EWS

Global Moderator
No doubt one dayers would have played a part regardless(Right or Wrong) of it being a test team, and also reputation as well.
Not only does that defeat the purpose of a "team of the year", he also stated specifically he wouldn't do that.

"Our task is to name the strongest team from the Test matches played in 2007. None of the retirees have been considered. Reputations mean nothing. Nationality has been disregarded. Sensitivities have been ignored. No apologies are made for the list leaning towards locals, or those who have blocked their path. It is the testing ground."
 

NZTailender

I can't believe I ate the whole thing
My Test Side for 2007
1. P Jaques
2. W Jaffer
3. K Sangakkara
4. J Kallis
5. K Pietersen
6. S Ganguly
7. MS Dhoni+
8. A Kumble
9. Z Khan
10. M Muralitharan
11. D Steyn
12th man. B Lee

My ODI Side for 2007
1. M Hayden
2. S Tendulkar
3. R Ponting
4. S Ganguly
5. Y Singh
6. A Symonds
7. MS Dhoni+
8. D Vettori
9. S Bond
10. D Fernando
11. G McGrath
12th Man. S Styris
 
Last edited:

Prince EWS

Global Moderator
Akmal? Batted okay on some of the roads, but his keeping was absolutely dreadful and fans were calling for his head regularly.
 

Pup_23

School Boy/Girl Captain
Not only does that defeat the purpose of a "team of the year", he also stated specifically he wouldn't do that.

"Our task is to name the strongest team from the Test matches played in 2007. None of the retirees have been considered. Reputations mean nothing. Nationality has been disregarded. Sensitivities have been ignored. No apologies are made for the list leaning towards locals, or those who have blocked their path. It is the testing ground."
I agree with you but i just cant see how he would have made it then?

My sides would be something like this.

Test XI

Jaques
Jaffer
Sangakkara
Kallis
Chanderpaul
Ganguly
Jayawardene
Kumble
Khan
Murali
Steyn

* Have used Kumar as the keeper, now there may be some negative comments about that but i think it is a way to reward another batsmen. IMO no other keepers can dislodge Jayawardene as a batsmen and why play a keeper when there is already one in the side.

*Worth mentioning where the players that i thought had a chance of making my side and they where Cook, Tendulkar, Bell, Ul Haq, Ntini, Panesar and Lee (Who was very unlucky but only played 4 games)

ODI XI

Hayden
Tendulkar
Ponting
Yousuf
Ganguly
Chanderpaul
Dhoni
Hogg
Vettori
Khan
McGrath

* I realise McGrath is now retired but his effort in the one dayers this year was brilliant and deserves a spot in the team retired or not.

* Also worth a mention where Singh, AB De Villiers, Jayawardene, Kallis, and Michael Clarke, Powell, Fernando, Bracken and Shane Bond.
 

burr

State Vice-Captain
I thought nobody took Roebuck seriously.
Well I certainly don’t – everything he writes is ill-considered and he always exaggerates just to make some not particularly insightful point. He also writes in a painfully overwrought style – which may be why I don’t mind him so much on radio as long as you take everything he says with a huge dose of salt.

Anyway Roebuck’s teams of the year are always a joke - particularly the 2004 side. :dry: He said he laughed out loud at Warne’s 50 best players – I think many do the same when reading his articles.
 

JASON

Cricketer Of The Year
Just a question thats bugging me - Is Strike Rate of any use in comparing bowlers ?

Because to use Strike rate to compare fast bowlers and spinners, is IMO very flawed - I just happened to notice Fidel Edwards has a strike rate of 42 or 45 in 2007 and a few others likewise...does that make them better bowlers than a spinner like Murali whose strike rate is 50 .9 in the same period ....Because fast bowlers bowl fewer overs ie shorter spells and fewer overs in a day than spinners in general would, they are bound to have lower Strike rates ... Does it then say that they would get more wickets had they bowled more overs or longer spells ...no.....so Strike Rate as a comparison between different types of bowlers is pointless....any thoughts?
 

Top