Migara
International Coach
Numbers are numbers. However, numbers are good source of information. Opinions are rather flimsy mode of information.If numbers DONT change with time, then 7 wickets per match at 16.4!
Numbers are numbers. However, numbers are good source of information. Opinions are rather flimsy mode of information.If numbers DONT change with time, then 7 wickets per match at 16.4!
Again, you could also say the exact oppositeNumbers are numbers. However, numbers are good source of information. Opinions are rather flimsy mode of information.
no need of any battle with any one. just can't accept as such the credentials of those who achieved greatness thru unfair tactics .... it is that simple...epic battle between Migara and rtramdas in coming.
can wait
I played on mats as a kid, before syntho became mainstream. They were ****ing dangerous.M A T T I N G W I C K E T S
im not gonna pretend they weren't cricket but it's certainly something else than what it's played on now
Especially when it gets worn out. One comes at shin height and then next one cuts back and hits you on the chestI played on mats as a kid, before syntho became mainstream. They were ****ing dangerous.
Don't forget the ballsEspecially when it gets worn out. One comes at shin height and then next one cuts back and hits you on the chest
Marshall wasn't just part of the greatest pace attack, he was LEADER of that attack. To give you an idea, during his peak, he was averaging around 6 wickets a test while having all-stars around him.When you pick an ATG XI, the objective is to win matches
When you pick a ATG Top 10, the objective goes beyond that to also include color, character, contribution to the game…i.e what did they bring to the cricketing table
In this regard, the difference between Marshall and Barnes is stark
Marshall was fortunate to find himself in the midst of the greatest fast bowling attack the game has known. He came after Roberts, Holding, Garner, and before Ambrose, Walsh. He was surrounded by a supporting cast of superstars who passed along tips and techniques, tricks and tactics to torment and torture batsmen out.
Barnes stands alone, with but his wits and wiliness to winkle out batsmen one way or another.
Put another way, if Marshall did not exist, there were a plethora of pacers from within the W.Indies who would fill the void with barely a ripple.
If Barnes did not exist, the game would not be as rich as it is with his powerful performances and profound story.
And that’s why he has withstood the test of time, for over 100 years.
Synthetic wickets are a joke to play on. You can just sit back and cross bat everything, you don't really need to be good to make a **** load of runs. Some comps make up for it by using 2-piece balls though.I'd have liked to have a go on coir matting. Artificial grass on concrete is rubbish unless you only rely on bounce.
If only it were that easy... or I'm just really bad at battingYou can just sit back and cross bat everything, you don't really need to be good to make a **** load of runs.
They really are a joke. Surely there's some kind of reasonably cheap surface that's better. It really favours eye players and unless the bowling is quick they're used to the extra swing of the two-piece. Played a season on matting once and a team used to playing on turf got smashed every game by guys who didn't move their feet an inch. Very hard to bowl spin on too, unless you bowl unrealistically slow the ball just skids.Synthetic wickets are a joke to play on. You can just sit back and cross bat everything, you don't really need to be good to make a **** load of runs. Some comps make up for it by using 2-piece balls though.
I've seen the opposite a bit. Guy that has dominated on synthetic gets picked up for a season and turns out completely useless in real cricket.They really are a joke. Surely there's some kind of reasonably cheap surface that's better. It really favours eye players and unless the bowling is quick they're used to the extra swing of the two-piece. Played a season on matting once and a team used to playing on turf got smashed every game by guys who didn't move their feet an inch. Very hard to bowl spin on too, unless you bowl unrealistically slow the ball just skids.
That's the usual case. Was the club's dregs team put in too high a grade and encountered a lot of blokes who were bigger and much stronger hitters, but not willing to stump up to play on turf. It was miserable and a big part of why I quit playing. Kinda frustrating getting smashed when if the ball stayed lower and deviated once in a while I could've easily gotten them out. Also that these blokes were generally stronger and more athletic than most local third grade turf teams, potential going to waste because turf cricket is so expensive.I've seen the opposite a bit. Guy that has dominated on synthetic gets picked up for a season and turns out completely useless in real cricket.
Yes, yes, some incutters have "their" name engraved all over on them.Don't forget the balls
Who was best bowler in the world during Marshall's peak?Marshall wasn't just part of the greatest pace attack, he was LEADER of that attack. To give you an idea, during his peak, he was averaging around 6 wickets a test while having all-stars around him.