The Best at their Best

[NotMcKenzie]

A magnificent performance indeed, but "unparalleled"? I've already mentioned Laker's 10 wickets in an innings when Australia played Surrey on the same tour. Prior to Laker's Old Trafford performance he took 5-58 and 6-55 in the previous test.

That is literally what I said.

And Kumble hasn't taken 19 in a match or 10 against the same touring side twice, but I guess that 'paralleled' is open to interpretation. I find the older eras more interesting, so I don't know as much about Kumble's record.

.

I agree with leaving things there, but beware that I am willing to carry on to eternity if necessary. I also never claimed to a definitive explantion of anything, but that you were trying to say that the pitch wasn't doctored and/or it didn't matter, and I gave evidence and reasoning to the contrary. Lock had picked up 7 wickets in the previous test, so he can't have been that easy to play. Also, I feel the Australian batsmen may have also been pinned to the crease a bit, one can see in the unedited footage how they are usually playing back: Bradman wrote a chapter in The Art of Cricket for dealing with an off-spinner, prompted directly by the poor showing of the Australian batsmen against Laker. Johnson does not seem to have the ability to make the hard judgements.

 

[the big bambino]

I agree with leaving things there,

Good.

but beware that I am willing to carry on to eternity if necessary.

It isn’t.

 

[TheJediBrah]

I'll put my vote in for eternity thx

 

[Line and Length]

Sorry Big Bambino

I can't let " ...you were trying to say that the pitch wasn't doctored and/or it didn't matter" go through to the keeper. In my initial post a wrote "allegedly 'doctored' pitch". This does not mean that I disagree with the allegations though other scribes have. For example, David Frith wrote: "Pitch preparation was never easy in this wet summer" and Peter West said, "I never met anyone before the test who said the wicket would be anything but good." The controversy arose after the game.
Perhaps I was ill-advised to use the word "allegedly" as this has given someone the impression that I'm suggesting otherwise.

Elsewhere I wrote, "Nowhere have I said that Laker didn't receive help from the pitch." Is that me saying the pitch didn't matter?

Eternity is a long time but I'll keep returning whatever is served up!

 

[NotMcKenzie]

By saying:

Claim's [sic] that the pitch was "doctored" or "cooked" abound but to put Laker's performance into context one needs to consider the performances of other spinners playing in that game

Australia had a couple of handy spinners in Ian Johnson and Richie Benaud.Both bowled 47 overs for 4-151 and 2-123 respectively.

Putting Laker's performance into perspective, we should consider that spinners Johnson, Benaud and Lock bowled a total of 163 overs in taking 7 for 380 on an allegedly "cooked" pitch.

you are very downplaying the role of the pitch by saying that it couldn't have been so bad because the other spinners performed fairly poorly. Sure, in perspective, Laker's performance is remarkable for the obvious reasons, but then there would be no need to mention the pitch whilst saying so.

Furthermore, the article I linked to shows that the Australians were unhappy with the pitch during the state of play, newspapers changing their predictions for how it would behave after the first day's play, and the controversy very much arising during the match itself.

Furthermore, pitch preparation difficulties there may be, but the selectors ordering the groundsman to shave off the grass that could protect it from breaking up so quickly, and against the groundsman's advice as well, is not something that is likely to lead to any improvement in the situation, particularly after the Australians had already been exposed against Laker's spin.

 

[Line and Length]

"Claim's [sic]" offending apostrophe now removed in original.

" ...the Australians were unhappy with the pitch during the state of play" When I wrote: "The controversy arose after the game." I should have said "... during and after the game."

"...but the selectors ordering the groundsman to shave off the grass " There have been conflicting reports about this. The usually reliable Ray Robinson reported an exchange between groundsman Bert Flack and Walter Robins. "Should I cut it again sir?" Flack is said to have asked. "No!" was the emphatic reply attributed to Robins. "If I were you I'd go and buy a packet of grass seed."
Another anecdote tells of 'Gubby' Allen's response to a Lancashire committee-man who asked if a further cutting was needed. "It wouldn't break my heart." Allen said. According to Ralph Barker: 'It was a flippant, unguarded aside, no more, and Allen was quick to remind the committee-man that the responsibility lay entirely with Lancashire. He doubted, in any case, whether a further mowing at that stage would make much difference, nor did he imagine for one moment that his remark might be taken seriously, but he lived to regret it.'

Unless either of us can add anything new to the history of this game, is there any point in going any further? You have made your points, I have corrected my "errors".

 

[NotMcKenzie]

I am more likely to trust accounts written nowadays based on my study of history (not that the Ashes is like WWII or Cricinfo like Ian Kershaw or Thomas Weber); I am particularly wary of dialogue quotations in anecdotes because these are often spurious: somebody is more likely to remember the general fact than a specific quotation. Neil Harvey recalled an England player telling him after Australia's 2nd test victory, 'That's the last pitch you'll get like that.' Does it indicate anything untoward, probably not, or nothing more than a piece of forsight based on one's pitch knowledge; did it even happen?. In this case, one has to play off anecdotes against each other, but the fact that newspapers got it wrong is interesting: several Australian papers quote Flack as saying that it would begin to break up towards the end of the third day or even later, even quoting him as saying it was to be, 'A real Australian wicket, as hard a a rock,' for at least the first couple of days, and Richardson's recollection is interesting to say the least. R. S. Whitington described the pitch as 'out of character' after the second day, Bill O'Reilly criticised the pitch after the first day. The newspaper accounts show controversy raging from the 2nd day onwards.

 

[Burgey]

Ponting's 156 at OT in 2005 was his magnum opus innings. Day five, wearing wicket, crazy-god attack and hostile crowd. Batted on a different deck to everyone else, to the point where by mid afternoon when Clarke then Warne were with him there was a realistic chance Australia could have chased down 422, which would have been the greatest chase in cricket history by a mile. Unbelievable knock. As good as any I have seen by an Aussie batsman since Kim Hughes in 1981

 

[Lillian Thomson]

Although it wasn't in adversity Viv was at his supreme best at Lords in 1980. 140 odd absolutely flawless.

 

[honestbharani]

There is this write up on Sachin's 1992 Perth effort by Peter Roebuck that is doing the rounds in Reddit. Its pretty good, even though the guy is the devil.

 

[subshakerz]

There is this write up on Sachin's 1992 Perth effort by Peter Roebuck that is doing the rounds in Reddit. Its pretty good, even though the guy is the devil.

I have always had difficulty in deciding Sachin best innings between Perth 92, Chennai 98 and Chennai 99.

 

[honestbharani]

I put it somewhere else here.. For me it goes:


1. Perth 1992
2. Bloemfontein 2001
3. RSA 2010-11 against the rampaging Steyn
4. Chennai 1999
5. Capetown 1996
6. Chennai 1998

The Chennai knock was awesome for its aggression but Warne was clearly below par and the rest of that attack was pretty poor too.

 

[subshakerz]

I put it somewhere else here.. For me it goes:


1. Perth 1992
2. Bloemfontein 2001
3. RSA 2010-11 against the rampaging Steyn
4. Chennai 1999
5. Capetown 1996
6. Chennai 1998

The Chennai knock was awesome for its aggression but Warne was clearly below par and the rest of that attack was pretty poor too.

No, Chennai 98 can't be that low. Warne bowled well in the first innings and even outdid Tendulkar. He was below par because Tendulkar eviscerated him on a spinning wicket in one of the best premeditated attacks seen in cricket.

Chennai 99 also should be higher, if India had won it would have been up there with Laras 153. And none of his innings against SA were better than his 116 against an all-time great Aussie attack in 99 in Australia when the rest of the lineup came short.

 

[AndrewB]

Sobers's is maybe the 254 he scored for RoW v Australia, though to show *all* his skills I guess he'd have to have taken wickets with about 4 different styles of bowling. (He did take 3 wickets and 3 catches in the game, so he wasn't just batting).

 

[Line and Length]

Sobers's is maybe the 254 he scored for RoW v Australia, though to show *all* his skills I guess he'd have to have taken wickets with about 4 different styles of bowling. (He did take 3 wickets and 3 catches in the game, so he wasn't just batting).

It was indeed a memorable performance from a true "great".

 

[TheJediBrah]

No, Chennai 98 can't be that low. Warne bowled well in the first innings and even outdid Tendulkar. He was below par because Tendulkar eviscerated him on a spinning wicket in one of the best premeditated attacks seen in cricket.

Chennai 99 also should be higher, if India had won it would have been up there with Laras 153. And none of his innings against SA were better than his 116 against an all-time great Aussie attack in 99 in Australia when the rest of the lineup came short.

Surely any thing done in Chennai is worth double points. You'd be constantly trying to hold on to the contents of your stomach.

 

[honestbharani]

No, Chennai 98 can't be that low. Warne bowled well in the first innings and even outdid Tendulkar. He was below par because Tendulkar eviscerated him on a spinning wicket in one of the best premeditated attacks seen in cricket.

Chennai 99 also should be higher, if India had won it would have been up there with Laras 153. And none of his innings against SA were better than his 116 against an all-time great Aussie attack in 99 in Australia when the rest of the lineup came short.

I am going strictly by the batsmanship and skill displayed int he knock. Like I said, Chennai was a truly great knock, both times and that Melbourne knock was good too but just feel the kind of batsmanship he displayed in the other knocks and on much tougher tracks for an Indian batsman to play in, was more amazing. And mate, Warne was ordinary that series. Sidhu was smashing him before Sachin did and so did Azhar later. I am not diluting the quality of the knock, just pointing out there were better ones he played, and with lesser support from hs team mates, against better attacks in more trying conditions. That is all.

Surely any thing done in Chennai is worth double points. You'd be constantly trying to hold on to the contents of your stomach.

Nah, that is what people do when they read your posts.

 

[pardus]

Viv Richard's performances against Pak in 1980-81 Test series.

As far as batsmen are concerned - to me - it is about a couple of things - performing against a great attack, and thriving in conditions where rest of one's teammates have wilted away
Blanket stats like for example average against Aus in Aus etc. don't mean much to me unless I know what the exact conditions were & who the individuals were in the opposition.
For example, if we compare Viv Richard's first Test series in Australia in 1975-76 with his last Test series in Australia in 1988-89.
On paper, Viv scored 426 runs @ average of 39 in 1975-76, and 446 runs @ average of 56 in 1988-89.
Although on paper Viv's performance in 88-89 Aus series was much better, to me there is no comparison.
I'd put his performance in 75-76 series (particularly in the last 4 Test matches of the series) way above his 88-89 series, simply because batting was far tougher for West Indies in 75-76.
In his last 4 Test matches of the 75-76 series, against Lillee & Thommo in their prime, Viv scored 402 runs @ average of 50.25 and at a strike rate of 80 runs per 100 balls (unheard of - in those days).
In those 4 matches, he scored nearly 100 runs more than the next best batsman. And that was just the second away Test tour of Viv's career.

Coming to Viv's 80-81 Test series against Pak, few things stand out. West Indies innings total never reached 300 in the entire series.
Viv scored 364 runs at an average of 73. Next best batting average was tailender Sylvester Clarke with avg of 34.
No other West Indian batsman averaged above 30.

These figures however do not do justice to the visual impact of Viv's performances, especially in Multan Test.
Imran tore through the West Indian top order, but Viv just went after him. It was incredible watching a great batsman going after a great fast bowler in Test match cricket.
Viv went on to score an unbeaten 120, next highest score was Larry Gomes who chipped in with 30+ runs.

In Faisalabad, Viv scored twin 50s in both the innings while, none of his teammates (and practically the entire opposition too) crossed 50 in both the innings.

As far as West Indian batting was concerned, Viv was the only reason West Indies squeezed through that series with Pak.

 

[stephen]

Steve Smith at Brisbane in 2017 was utterly magnificent. Probably one of the most memorable Smith innings' (though there are plenty to choose from). The deck was not conductive to scoring runs, batsmen were collapsing around him and he just stayed composed and ground out his slowest century. It set the tone for both the match and the series. It was a match winning knock and a career defining one.

Though his return twin hundreds in 2019 probably topped even that hundred, given the context of his ban. That 2019 series was just crazy though. I've never seen a more dominant display in a series by any batsman before (though Pujara 2018/19 comes close).

 

[ImpatientLime]

kevin pietersen's 2012 was good fun where he casually smashed 3 atg knocks in amongst a load of nonsense

151 v sl at colombo. striking at 91 on a turner v herath where the top rr for an innings was 3.01. bonkers innings.
149 v sa at headingley, swatting steyn and morkel off the back foot like they were club bowlers. that look on steyn's face when kp casually smoked him over his head for 6, lol.
and then the pièce de résistance where he just he just casually takes out the fact he's playing on a bunsen vs ashwin, harby and ojha and demolishes them for 186. on a pitch where panesar and swann (admittedly a solid and great finger spinner) ran riot.

he wasn't a consistent great but his ceiling was other than lara the highest i've seen.