100 Hundreds

[GIMH]

If he hasn't retired from WA it leaves him about 30 games. Probably about 45 innings, given the amount it rains in this country, innings wins etc. Reckon he'll retire in the 90s

 

[dontcloseyoureyes]

JL retired from WA, didn't he?

Hmm I don't know, didn't think so. Doesn't strike me as someone who'd keep playing in England and not for his beloved state.

 

[tadeusz]

He has ftr.

 

[dontcloseyoureyes]

Yeah looked it up, genuinely shocked. Anyway.

 

[stumpski]

Good idea for Ramprakash to get another ton, in case someone decides that one of those he made earlier isn't first-class after all. It happened to Gooch: about ten years after the event, the ICC decided that the matches played by 'rebel' teams in South Africa were no longer first-class (a ruling ignored by statisticians everywhere) leaving Gooch unsure when and where he made his 100th.

 

[Goughy]

Good idea for Ramprakash to get another ton, in case someone decides that one of those he made earlier isn't first-class after all. It happened to Gooch: about ten years after the event, the ICC decided that the matches played by 'rebel' teams in South Africa were no longer first-class (a ruling ignored by statisticians everywhere) leaving Gooch unsure when and where he made his 100th.

Interesting point. Just thinking of a hypothetical.

If University games are excluded, who would be hurt the most?

 

[stumpski]

Hmmm ... it tends to be openers, doesn't it, who feast off the undergraduates early in the season? I'll see what I can turn up though.

England players often miss those games, because they're either being ordered to rest, or, if in the Windies, still touring.

 

[Richard]

Good idea for Ramprakash to get another ton, in case someone decides that one of those he made earlier isn't first-class after all. It happened to Gooch: about ten years after the event, the ICC decided that the matches played by 'rebel' teams in South Africa were no longer first-class (a ruling ignored by statisticians everywhere) leaving Gooch unsure when and where he made his 100th.

And now either being reversed or having someone lobby to have it reversed. And quite damn right too IMO.

 

[Burgey]

And now either being reversed or having someone lobby to have it reversed. And quite damn right too IMO.

Not that I necessarily disagree with you on this point, but I'm wondering why you think those matches should be included in FC records given the way you feel re WSC and the stats of those games?

 

[Indipper]

Probably because the university floggers tend to be professionals who think of themselves, not the good of the game.

 

[Richard]

Not that I necessarily disagree with you on this point, but I'm wondering why you think those matches should be included in FC records given the way you feel re WSC and the stats of those games?

Those games were First-Class cricket played by organisations who routinely organised First-Class cricket.

Kerry Packer's games were never considered First-Class and rightly so - they were entirely a private enterprise by someone with no background in the game whatsoever. Had the Rebel tour games never been First-Class, that'd probably be fair enough too. But they were considered so, and there was some case for that to be the way it was (unlike Packer matches)

While Rebel tours were highly disappointing, once the games had First-Class status it should stay that way IMO.

 

[Richard]

Probably because the university floggers tend to be professionals who think of themselves, not the good of the game.

What on Earth have UCCE games got to do with that? No, such games don't really deserve First-Class status either, but the angle there is a different one.

 

[Indipper]

I was just making light of your Kerry Packer argument from ages ago.

 

[Richard]

But as I said - what on Earth have UCCE games got to do with Packer games?

 

[Indipper]

Not much apart from that they are both 'undeserving' of FC status, though the reasons that rob the Packer games are the reasons that elevate the University matches and vice versa.

 

[Richard]

Unless the reasons are the same (and they're not - they're instead polar-opposite) there's no reason to bring them up TBH.

 

[Indipper]

Obviously I got the concept of internet forums wrong then. I thought you were supposed to pick up on what other people said. Oh well.

By the way the reasons are not polar opposites. If they were, they would indeed be the same reason. Apart from formality, quality and tradition/institution are not opposites.

 

[Richard]

Eh? I don't understand why you picked that up, because there was no reason to do so. Packer games have no case whatsoever for being First-Class; UCCE games shouldn't really be First-Class but for whatever odd reason have always been so (there was indeed a time when University sides, Oxford and Cambridge, were genuine matches for counties). If First-Class status was revoked from such games, I doubt anyone other than those opposed to the idea of changing the status of a game retrospectively would have many complaints.

 

[Indipper]

Packer games have no case whatsoever for being First-Class

That's your opinion. And most likely WSC will never be granted FC status by the ICC and other such institutions, who have a vested interest in retaining control the game. There is no reason for cricket historians and statisticians not to adjudge them as such. I mean, look at the South African Tests 1961 to 1970. The ICC ruled that those matches were no official tests but that historians wouldn't have to change their records because the records have been established for so long. So if even the ICC acknowledges the difference between an administrative/political perspective and a historical perspective, why not acknowledge that from a historical point of view, there isn't any qualitative difference between WSC and similar matches that were granted FC status. Like the International Wanderers for example.

With you regarding University matches though.

 

[fredfertang]

The first ever test match and a number of subsequent ones were wholly private affairs .

If first class players play a game of cricket in accordance with the laws of the game and under appropriate playing conditions then I don't see why it shouldn't be a first class match. My view, for what it's worth, is that the SAB tours should be first class and the UCCE's now shouldn't be - in truth they are only practice matches - the Packer ones are less clear cut as if I recall correctly there were some "playing conditions" issues but the standard of cricket played was, from what I have read, generally very high