-
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.
Greatest individual performance ever
- Thread starter oitoitoi
- Start date
Manee
Cricketer Of The Year
Great display of straight bowling there, all of the wickets were either in line with or just outside the line of the stumps.
Dissector
International Debutant
I had a look at Imran's stats in the India series in Pakistan and the series in England before that. Against India he got 12 lbw's out of 40 wickets in 6 tests. Against England he got 6 lbw's out of 21 wickets in 3 tests. That's practically the same rate. Lbw's aren't the only dismissal influenced by umpires but they are probably the biggest one. If Imran was getting a lot of wickets through bad umpiring, it certainly doesn't show in the stats. And I believe these matches were broadcast in India and watched by SJS and others and I don't think I have ever heard anyone say his bowling was anything less than superb. Given the nature of the wickets and the fairly strong Indian batting I would say it was one of the 3-4 greatest bowling performances in a series ever.
rivera213
U19 Vice-Captain
I don't think anyone can deny Kumble's 10 for. I don't care if the pitch is tailor made, how many bowlers have actually got a 10 for?
Exactly.
-----
Athers' 185 was awesome. Probably my favourite innings of any English batsman I've seen "live" (on TV but you know what I mean).
-----
Curtly Ambrose spell of 7 wickets for 1 run against the Aussies @ the WACA in 1993 was awesome and in that test, Ambrose's match figures of 9/79 and Bishop's 8/57 in that test was something else. I now it was a fast and bouncy track at Perth, but still some quality bowling.
-----
Pietersen's match saving 158 against Australia @ The Oval in 2005 was clutch.
-----
Simon Jones 6/53 @ Old Trafford and 5/44 @ Trent Bridge against Australia in 2005 with his reverse swing was awesome. Waqar Younis would be proud.
----
Just to prove I don't completely hate the Aussies-
Jeff Thomson's 33 wickets @ 17.93 in 9 innings in the 1974/75 Ashes was something else. He outbowled Lillee, not only statistically but in reality. That takes some doing.
Exactly.
-----
Athers' 185 was awesome. Probably my favourite innings of any English batsman I've seen "live" (on TV but you know what I mean).
-----
Curtly Ambrose spell of 7 wickets for 1 run against the Aussies @ the WACA in 1993 was awesome and in that test, Ambrose's match figures of 9/79 and Bishop's 8/57 in that test was something else. I now it was a fast and bouncy track at Perth, but still some quality bowling.
-----
Pietersen's match saving 158 against Australia @ The Oval in 2005 was clutch.
-----
Simon Jones 6/53 @ Old Trafford and 5/44 @ Trent Bridge against Australia in 2005 with his reverse swing was awesome. Waqar Younis would be proud.
----
Just to prove I don't completely hate the Aussies-
Jeff Thomson's 33 wickets @ 17.93 in 9 innings in the 1974/75 Ashes was something else. He outbowled Lillee, not only statistically but in reality. That takes some doing.
King Pietersen
International Captain
There's one innings that I read about a while ago now, almost certain it was played by Sir Jack Hobbs. He made a score of 50+ on a terrible wet wicket where basically everyone else failed, I just can't quite remember the match or find the one I'm thinking of on Cricinfo, but I think it may have come against Australia, but I'm not certain. Any ideas?
zaremba
Cricketer Of The Year
Jim Laker, of course - 9 in the first innings, 10 in the second. That really takes some thinking about. And in an Ashes Test.
The pitch was obviously tailor-made for him too but his team-mates weren't trying to avoid taking a wicket at the other end, as happened in Kumble's case.
rivera213
U19 Vice-Captain
Can't think of that from the top of my head, but there is a famous Ashes match at the Oval in 1926 when it absolutely pissed down overnight when we were early in our 2nd innings, and soaked the wicket. The media and probably even the fans thought we'd be bowled out for peanuts and lose but Hobbs made 100 exactly and Sutcliffe 160 odd to post 436. Larwood and Rhodes bowled the Aussies out for 125 including Ponsford for 12 (so it must've been crap conditions).
But, tbh, both Hobbs and Sutcliffe were apparently excellent on all types of wickets and were used to sticky surfaces.
rivera213
U19 Vice-Captain
Yep, 2 bowlers in the history of test cricket.
There have been some 9 for and quite a few 8 for's.
Laker's feat was remarkable. No-one will get 20 wickets in a match.
How do you know?
Were you watching in 1956?
Anyway, I don't think Harbhajan was avoiding taking a wicket at the other end, but when a bowler is on fire you contain at 1 end and let the guy on form do the business at the other end.
BTW- I very much doubt Lock was trying to take wickets at the other end and failed. To only take 1 in 2 innings points to both Laker being on fire and Lock not giving anything away the other end.
Laker was better of course, but not THAT much better than on a turning wicket he only took 1 wicket in 2 innings, especially after 50+ overs. I don't buy it.
Last edited:
zaremba
Cricketer Of The Year
Yes, I was fielding at 1st slip.
Your fundamentalist stance about needing to see a game in order to have a view on it gets no more persuasive with constant repetition.
How do you know? Were you watching in 1956? (
Well this is the view of one of the players who was there, Alan Oakman. Now, before you challenge that, I must admit that I don't know if Alan Oakman genuinely wrote this because I didn't witness him writing it with my own eyes, but I'm prepared to take it on faith:
"Tony Lock got so cross that he wasn't getting any wickets that he was bowling faster and faster.
"So in actual fact he bowled as a seam bowler who never turned the ball. If he had slowed down he had to get wickets but his reaction was to simply skid the ball through.
"The harder Locky tried the less he looked like getting a wicket - he didn't even have a catch dropped or a stumping missed.
"When Jim was coming up to 14/15 wickets we realised something special might be happening but at the same time we kept thinking Locky must surely get a wicket somewhere along the line.
"The more wickets Jim took the more annoyed Tony got because the pitch was the same at both ends.
"We went off the field afterwards and Jim went out onto the balcony to hold up a glass of Lucozade - he was sponsored by them - to the crowd and photographers.
"By the time he came back into the dressing room Locky had gone, he was so upset and deflated."
GIMH
Norwood's on Fire
Richard
Cricket Web Staff Member
No it isn't. I'm the one typing the words - thus, I know better than you what is meant!
Richard
Cricket Web Staff Member
I don't think Harbhajan played that Test from memory, but Azharuddin certainly instructed Srinath - privately - to bowl a wayward line in the over between Kumble's ninth and tenth wickets. To my knowledge, though, that was the first time anyone had been instructed not to try.
As for Lock in 1956, I was going to post what Mr. z posted - the famous account that Lock was in fact trying too hard to get wickets. But he beat me to it.
aussie
Hall of Fame Member
Haha. Yo whatever you meant the basis of the argument is crap. I know that brick walll - which is your head, wont alter position. So you can take this belief along with the others to the grave shotta...
it was certainly the case, i watched that series on television almost in its entirety and the laughably wrong decisions were so many that the series result became almost a farce...pakistan were the stronger team(batting & fielding were more or less evenly matched, bowling was significantly superior) and did not really need two cheating, sorry examples of umpires to win, and i am not disputing imran's brilliance or greatness here and i am not even talking about the bottletops that might have been used by imran and sarfraz(what bagapath alluded to), but i saw some of the decisions that went imran's way and it was just wrong what happened in that series...i think amarnath(the only indian batsmen who played very well consistently in that series) was the one who said that the only way to stay not out was not to let the ball hit the pad...
, and it was not much of an exaggeration...
rivera213
U19 Vice-Captain
Oh ok, well by all means, continue to speak from a position of complete ****ing ignorance.
I'm sure you wasn't watching Kumble's 10-for by the assumption no-one was trying to take a wicket when Harbhajan was. Every spinner's eyes lit up in that game.
Kumble was just a class above the other 3 on show and cashed in.
In that case, I stand corrected (by Alan).How do you know? Were you watching in 1956? (
Well this is the view of one of the players who was there, Alan Oakman. Now, before you challenge that, I must admit that I don't know if Alan Oakman genuinely wrote this because I didn't witness him writing it with my own eyes, but I'm prepared to take it on faith:
"Tony Lock got so cross that he wasn't getting any wickets that he was bowling faster and faster.
"So in actual fact he bowled as a seam bowler who never turned the ball. If he had slowed down he had to get wickets but his reaction was to simply skid the ball through.
"The harder Locky tried the less he looked like getting a wicket - he didn't even have a catch dropped or a stumping missed.
"When Jim was coming up to 14/15 wickets we realised something special might be happening but at the same time we kept thinking Locky must surely get a wicket somewhere along the line.
"The more wickets Jim took the more annoyed Tony got because the pitch was the same at both ends.
"We went off the field afterwards and Jim went out onto the balcony to hold up a glass of Lucozade - he was sponsored by them - to the crowd and photographers.
"By the time he came back into the dressing room Locky had gone, he was so upset and deflated."
Don't know how he managed to maintain an economy rate as good as Laker's in that case.
He did play and got 3/30 in the 1st innings.
Srinath wouldn't have taken a wicket in the 2nd innings if no-one was standing in front of the stumps.
It was a match for spin and even Wasim Akram struggled (though he got a few in the 2nd innings).
Harbhajan was definately trying to take wickets.
I heard that Azharuddin popped down to the local bookies just before Kumble's 10th wicket.
Last edited:
zaremba
Cricketer Of The Year
Come on Steve, you're better than that.
zaremba
Cricketer Of The Year
Which raises the obvious question, why was Srinath even bowling when 9 wickets were down, if he had no chance of taking a wicket?
fredfertang
Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Ordinarily given the match situation it would be churlish to criticise a captain if he did instruct Srinath not to go for that tenth wicket and possibly the 9th as well - it's only because it was Azhar that anything that smacks of not trying is so distasteful
zaremba
Cricketer Of The Year
Yep. I'm not criticising Azhar here, or Kumble, or Srinath. It's just that, if true (and I've no desire to enter into another tedious epistemological quarrel with rivera on this), I can't help thinking it ever so slightly dulls a little of the gloss on Kumble's achievement.