• 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.

New Cricket Trivia - 'SJS format'

SJS

SJS

Hall of Fame Member
Is the feat you did achieve to do with taking wickets?
Is the feat you just missed, missed by two wickets ??
 
SJS

SJS

Hall of Fame Member
If it IS Freeman, then there are many records that he got including over three hundred wickets in an English season, more than 200 runs a season for seven consecutive seasons and so on.

The important one would be the one he missed by two wickets. I can think of the fact that he took 17 wickets in a match twice (once for only 67 runs). So, theoretically at least, if he had taken two more wickets, the chances are that he would have had the best FC match figures ever beating Laker's 19 for 90.
 
archie mac

archie mac

International Coach
SJS said:
If it IS Freeman, then there are many records that he got including over three hundred wickets in an English season, more than 200 runs a season for seven consecutive seasons and so on.

The important one would be the one he missed by two wickets. I can think of the fact that he took 17 wickets in a match twice (once for only 67 runs). So, theoretically at least, if he had taken two more wickets, the chances are that he would have had the best FC match figures ever beating Laker's 19 for 90.
Click to expand...
Yes that is him, I think he was the only one to take 300 wickets in a season and on another occasion he claimed 298

Your turn:)
 
SJS

SJS

Hall of Fame Member
archie mac said:
Yes that is him, I think he was the only one to take 300 wickets in a season and on another occasion he claimed 298

Your turn:)
Click to expand...
Yes indeed. 304 in 1928 and 298 in 1933.

I did not think of that as another record since he already HAD the record 5 years earlier :)
 
SJS

SJS

Hall of Fame Member
In what I consider one of the most credible cricket coaching/instruction books. There are six batsmen who have multiple pictures (two or more) of them in action used. Three are openers and three middle order.

However, only two bowlers have been bestowed this honour - one pacer and one spinner.

Name the players.

You cant ask questions regarding the name/year etc of the publication for once that is known it gives unfair advantage to the person who may own it (if any) and the name of the book is not really what we want to know anyway.

I would say getting the bowlers is the most important part of it because its easier to get some batsmen right once we know there are six of them.
 
archie mac

archie mac

International Coach
SJS said:
In what I consider one of the most credible cricket coaching/instruction books. There are six batsmen who have multiple pictures (two or more) of them in action used. Three are openers and three middle order.

However, only two bowlers have been bestowed this honour - one pacer and one spinner.

Name the players.

You cant ask questions regarding the name/year etc of the publication for once that is known it gives unfair advantage to the person who may own it (if any) and the name of the book is not really what we want to know anyway.

I would say getting the bowlers is the most important part of it because its easier to get some batsmen right once we know there are six of them.
Click to expand...

Are the bowlers in question dead?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Top