Burgey
Request Your Custom Title Now!
It genuinely is. Dermo Abbott for Ashes
-
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.
Australian Domestic Season 2018/19
- Thread starter brockley
- Start date
stephen
Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
So I was trying to find the number of times that players had scored 1000 runs in a season at shield level, which brought me to Hayden.
Incredibly, in 1993/94 Hayden played 6 matches and scored 1136 runs with 7 hundreds and one fifty (96*) and averaged 126. Imagine if he'd been given more than a single test against Donald and De Villiers to settle into the side. Looking over his pre-2000 career, he was very unlucky to not have been given more tests. I really do think that Taylor must have hated him.
Imagine a young batsman today who is in red hot form, hitting 1000 runs in a season for like 4 seasons in a row, getting picked against a West Indies side that has an attack of Bishop, Ambrose and Walsh and then for one overseas series against Donald, Pollock, Klusener and Kallis and being dropped for years after that, despite doing at least as well as the other opener and then basically being written off for another four years. It's utterly absurd. Should have played a lot more tests than he did through the 90s.
The baggy-green with a baggy-blue was very strong during the 90s.
Incredibly, in 1993/94 Hayden played 6 matches and scored 1136 runs with 7 hundreds and one fifty (96*) and averaged 126. Imagine if he'd been given more than a single test against Donald and De Villiers to settle into the side. Looking over his pre-2000 career, he was very unlucky to not have been given more tests. I really do think that Taylor must have hated him.
Imagine a young batsman today who is in red hot form, hitting 1000 runs in a season for like 4 seasons in a row, getting picked against a West Indies side that has an attack of Bishop, Ambrose and Walsh and then for one overseas series against Donald, Pollock, Klusener and Kallis and being dropped for years after that, despite doing at least as well as the other opener and then basically being written off for another four years. It's utterly absurd. Should have played a lot more tests than he did through the 90s.
The baggy-green with a baggy-blue was very strong during the 90s.
Spikey
Request Your Custom Title Now!
it's just that michael slater was really good in test cricket, particularly during this period, and mark taylor was undroppable (as shown when slater got dropped despite averaging 7 odd runs more than taylor over the preceding period)
and of course when slater was dropped (on the basis of one shot basically) it was a victorian who came in
Last edited:
James90
Cricketer Of The Year
I always thought that Blewett and Elliott were talented batsmen that would have dominated any other era, but had to compete with the likes of Taylor, Slater and Hayden for their place. Turns out they both had a decent shot at test cricket and only averaged in the mid 30s. Things you learn.
James90
Cricketer Of The Year
Not sure how that's typical. Renshaw single-handedly won Queensland the Shield last year and hit hundreds in several clutch games.
Test_Fan_Only
First Class Debutant
The 90s was a period of a lot of excellent batsmen who did not play as much test cricket as perhaps they could have and would do if they were around today. Hayden was one examples, other include, Law, Lehmann, Siddons and Bevan.
I seem to remember Hayden was dropped so quickly because it was believed he had a huge technical flaw in his game and he did not have the game to succeed at test level.
I seem to remember Hayden was dropped so quickly because it was believed he had a huge technical flaw in his game and he did not have the game to succeed at test level.
mr_mister
Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
I definitely think Taylor was undeserving of his spot after like 94. Hayden-Elliott-Slater all probably better bats than him. Taylor averaged barely 20 over like 30 tests around 96-97. And his famous career saving century at the start of the 97 ashes was followed by pure crap the rest of the 6 test series.
But he was leading a side that was doing amazing things and beating everybody so I guess that saved his tubby bacon
But he was leading a side that was doing amazing things and beating everybody so I guess that saved his tubby bacon
mr_mister
Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
True for Blewett but harsh on Elliott. Averaged about 43 after 15 of his 21 overall tests. An isolated poor series in the Caribbean in 99 was a hiccup(hadn't played a test in over 12 months) then failed in a brief recall in 2004 and ended up with a mediocre average of 33
Blewett got a massive run from 99-00 of around 15 tests with Slater and continuously failed
Last edited:
morgieb
Request Your Custom Title Now!
Yeah with Elliott it was more 2 bad series against some really good bowling and not really getting a chance after that that killed his average. Bit different to Blewett I think.
Test_Fan_Only
First Class Debutant
cricket.com.au have released their Sheffield Shield team of the season. https://www.cricket.com.au/news/she...vski-bird-boland-holland-maddinson/2019-03-23
Harris
Hughes
Pucovski
Paterson
Maddinson
Wade captain and wicketkeeper
Neser
Copeland
Boland
Bird
Holland
Seems pretty good to me.
Harris
Hughes
Pucovski
Paterson
Maddinson
Wade captain and wicketkeeper
Neser
Copeland
Boland
Bird
Holland
Seems pretty good to me.
Test_Fan_Only
First Class Debutant
Elliot was a better player than Blewett. In an era when lots of batsmen were putting up strong FC performances and did not get opportunities Blewett is probably a player who played too many tests.
stephen
Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Honestly with less pressure on their test spot I think a number of those 45+ averaging shield batsmen would have done a lot better in tests. The problem was if they didn't immediately click in the mid 90s when they got picked, there were 5 batsmen who were waiting in line behind them.
Many of them would have been cursing their luck - born 5 years earlier they'd have got a long run like S Waugh and probably be considered an ATG.
As it is, Hayden basically didn't get a decent run until he was 30, nor did M Hussey. Love and Law didn't even get one.
stephen
Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Pretty much what I'd pick. Larkin wasn't very good outside his tiny purple patch.
GoodAreasShane
Cricketer Of The Year
Pretty solid team all in all, personally I would have Patto ahead of either Boland or Bird. Probably a touch biased but I think would make the attack a little less samey imo
Test_Fan_Only
First Class Debutant
Pattinson played 6 matches, only the last two were very good. I don't think being very good in two matches is enough for the team of the season. They have chosen the top 3 wicket takers and the 7th best wicket taker because he also had an excellent season with the bat. Jhye Richardson did not make the side despite his performances getting him into the test team and I think he should be there ahead of Pattinson. You could also argue Tremain and Steketee had better seasons than Pattinson.
GoodAreasShane
Cricketer Of The Year
Definitely did consider Jhye Richardson, that 8 for at the new Perth Stadium was some seriously impressive bowling.
Watched all of the first innings at Karen Rolton Oval, Patto was absolutely sensational, Tremain started off fairly indifferently, it took him taking a sharp catch at point to spark him into action.
Watched all of the first innings at Karen Rolton Oval, Patto was absolutely sensational, Tremain started off fairly indifferently, it took him taking a sharp catch at point to spark him into action.
Test_Fan_Only
First Class Debutant
It is not so much about who is the better bowler but who had the better season. Pattinson at his best, which he seems to be close to in his last performances, is definitely the best bowler. However because he is coming back from serious injury his season overall is not as good as other bowlers.
GotSpin
Hall of Fame Member
Ponting talks about it a lot in his book. Just immense pressure all the time to keep your place