• 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.

**Official** England in New Zealand

Richard

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
Nah, a team with Atherton, Hussain, Stewart and Thorpe (very late on) surely? Maybe somewhere in Pakistan or Sri Lanka in 2000\01, with Hick in there too?
 
wpdavid

wpdavid

Hall of Fame Member
Richard said:
Nah, a team with Atherton, Hussain, Stewart and Thorpe (very late on) surely? Maybe somewhere in Pakistan or Sri Lanka in 2000\01, with Hick in there too?
Click to expand...
Good call. In that case, you'd better make it SL if Hick played in any of the games out there. I'm still not convinced they'd aggregate more than my boys iat the end of 2005 though.

My other thought was the first test at home to India in 1974, when Boycott, Edrich, Amiss, Denness, Fletcher, Greig & Knott all played. It was Boycs' last game before dropping out, and they'd have had a few between them at that stage.

EDIT
Looking at it, your shout for the 2nd test in SL 2001 is a pretty good one.
I reckon Atherton, Trescothick, Hussain, Thorpe, Stewart & Hick had 52 between them. Faced with that, lets quietly forget about my 2005 stab in the d ark.
 
Last edited:
Goughy

Goughy

Hall of Fame Member
aussie said:
I disagree, Anderson along with Harmison & Jones is easily one of those most naturally talented fast bowlers England have produced post Gough/Caddick & as i keep saying his test career as been interrupted by injuries etc let me give a run down of his career to date since i believe based on how you blokes can bold to say 1``he isnt very good`` lets take a walk back in time on the James Anderson journey..

- thrown into the deep in Aus in VB series 2002/03 as a raw 20 year old who hadn't played much lancashire and was basically playing his cricket for club but left with encouraging peformances i.e his superb spell of 10-12-1 in adelaide. Goes to the WC & has a superb tournament namely wrecking PAK in capetown.

- continues his superb start by wrecking the awful zimbabwe at home & many began to hail as the next great english fast-bowling hope. The South African's came to town & on some overall flat decks againts where he was almost the leader of a young average attack againts some flat-track bullys was brought down back to earth. Goes on tour to BAG & SRI is injured for most of tour plays one test in alien conditions does poorly. Which begins his plagued journey for the next 4 1/2 years.

- watches the entire tour of the WI & home series vs NZ on the sidelines, plays a few few county matches (dont know how much but valuable time there for him would have been interrupted given international commitments in the ODI arena). Get to play vs WI but is relatively unused in 3 test as Harmo/Giles/Hoggard & an injured Flintoff is used by Vaughan. Thus his season is wasted when he could have been at Lancashire properly learnning his trade to become a better in the long form of the game.

- goes to SA underbowled thrown into the crucial Jo'Burg test bowls poorly & spends the rest of the tour on the bench.

- Played no test or ODI's during the famous 2005 summer but had his 1st full county season where he did pretty well thus earning a call up for the 5th test @ the Oval & tour rights to Pakistan.

- Understandably overlooked for the test in PAK, but played in the ODI's has he continued to prove why along with Flintoff he was one of Englad's better modern day ODI bowlers. Went to India again overlooked for the test until Mumbai where he produced this which wasn't bad for a man who had spent most of that winter on the bench.

- Then just when the injury crisis began to get ugly & many would have been hoping Anderson would have gotten a good run in the side vs SRI & PAK he himself was a victim until late in the season until he played a few county games for Lancashire thus another season wasted.

- With the injury crisis very bad, having played a few conty games and 3 ODI's in the CT. Thrown into the Ashes series without playing a test for 8 months & is roughed up by the mighty Aussies.

- Continues his solid ODI bowling performances in the CB series through the WC. Injuries or another bowler being preffered can't remember exactly misses the WI test but comes back to have a very good encouraging test series vs IND (although many here reckoned he was poor). Tops that off with another solid ODI series performance agains them as well.

- Goes to SRI does poorly in conditions that he is alien to & has an average ODI series & to was awful in NZ to complete his first full year of international since his 2002/03 explosion.

All of this says that Anderson is a very talented bowler who was exposed way too early. When he could have been learning his trade in county cricket he has had to learn it at the highest level which has been pretty rough for him. His best years in test IMO are very much ahead of him just needs to stay fit & perform because the ability is very much there.
Click to expand...
There isnt 1 thing you mention there that has any relevance to Test cricket. Talking ODIs when refering to Test is meaningless. In addition to the fact his 2005 County season was ordinary. The only thing special about it was that he played a full season.

As I keep on saying, he isnt the same bowler as 2003/4. His action is completely different and he has neither the pace, accuracy or movement to be a consistent success at Test level.

Instead of 130 kph big outswingers he now bowls 140 kph straight erractic balls.

Simply it (and he) isnt good enough to have long term success. There is a reason he has a FC av of over 30 and a Test av of 40 and he isnt getting any better.
 
Last edited:
J

JHutch

Cricket Spectator
I did see a comparison of the number of balls bowled on a line and length at the last world cup with glenn mcgrath and jimmy anderson as the subjects. I cant remember the exact figures but i think that McGrath was 40 something % and anderson was 20 something %. The explanation given was that the england coaching staff have been trying to get him to practice bowling a different line and length too much rather than just concentrating on a line and length and then moving out from there
 
FBU

FBU

International Debutant
How can a bowler get a chance when he never has a run in the team which I consider to be 10 consecutive Tests.

Played 7 then left out for 4 because of injury
1 left out for 8
3 left out for 3
1 left out for 12
1 out for 7 for injury
2 left out for 2
1 left out for 4
4 left out for 3
 
wpdavid

wpdavid

Hall of Fame Member
Goughy said:
No reason for putting this here but I dont know where else to put it.

Which England side had the most Test centuries at the time of the game?

Anyone know?

EDIT- Maybe one for ATS but Id rather not wait :)
Click to expand...
A passing thought whilst bathing the kids was that the XI who played in Hamilton must have had around 50 tons between them - maybe even more than the guys Richard & I were discussing earlier.

Maybe that's the answer and the reason you asked the question here?
 
Richard

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
55, by my count. 2 of which came against Bangladesh, so 53 really.

Truly remarkable how many centuries the likes of Strauss, Vaughan and Pietersen actually have.

Had Gower played instead of Hick in the Second Test against Pakistan in 1992, there'd have been 58 there. As it was, though, just 40.

I can't immediately think of any game that might have had more. The only remotely possible time would've been some game around 1972-1973 or something. EDIT: Which, having had a brief look, there doesn't appear to be.

EDIT2: another "almost" is the Fifth Test in 2003, in which had Hussain played instead of Ed Smith, there'd have been 61.
 
Last edited:
Richard

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
It just goes to show, really, how little meaning number-of-centuries truly has. Especially in this bat-friendly age we either are in or have recently emerged from. Often, recently, a century has been a not-particularly-remarkable score.

Regarding the batting in 1992 - there'd have been loads of centuries there had Gower played, but that line-up hardly fills me with confidence either. Past glories can mean little.
 
Richard

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
BoyBrumby said:
Ineterested to see how Gillespie goes. You don't see many fat seamers about nowadays.
Click to expand...
I've seen plenty worse in the waist-size stakes than Gillespie. And also plenty slower - Gillespie can hit 91mph at the quickest.

Gillespie is also a pretty decent bowler, who even bowled well later on on his Test debut, and more than deserves another chance.
 
Woodster

Woodster

International Captain
Richard said:
I've seen plenty worse in the waist-size stakes than Gillespie. And also plenty slower - Gillespie can hit 91mph at the quickest.

Gillespie is also a pretty decent bowler, who even bowled well later on on his Test debut, and more than deserves another chance.
Click to expand...
A better option than O'Brien, Rich ?
 
Richard

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
BoyBrumby said:
Recently? Who? No-one I can think of since Goughy waltzed off the international scene.
Click to expand...
Sure there's been someone, can't think who. Will look sometime soon.
CricInfo said:
"Go BlAcKcApS!" coughs Hitesh.
Click to expand...
Is this our own KiWi I wonder?

Either way, Danny Vettori wins the toss and fields. Wise decision for mine.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Top