Cricket stuff that doesn't deserve its own thread

[Chubb]

Really **** part-time spinners bowling the first over in T20s has been a thing for a while. Theory is you sneak a free over out of them while the batsmen are hesitant to go too hard. So if you get 0-6 it's a win.

Dom Sibley is actually pretty good at bowling the first over IIRC.

 

[TheJediBrah]

I've actually done it quite a few times, and I never bowl otherwise. It's weird how often your strike fast bowler will go 0-14 in the first over but a **** finger spinner will be more economical. An opening bat in the first over is more likely to punch a few boundaries through the field off the quick than take a big risk and go over the top off a spinner.

 

[karan_fromthestands]

Really **** part-time spinners bowling the first over in T20s has been a thing for a while. Theory is you sneak a free over out of them while the batsmen are hesitant to go too hard. So if you get 0-6 it's a win.

I don't think that's correct, accurate part timers who can bowl to a field are made to bowl an over or two in the power play. Can't get away with **** bowling in the power play if the level of cricket is good.

 

[cnerd123]

I don't think that's correct

should implement this phrase as an automatic template anytime anyone quotes TJB

 

[TheJediBrah]

I don't think that's correct, accurate part timers who can bowl to a field are made to bowl an over or two in the power play. Can't get away with **** bowling in the power play if the level of cricket is good.

Ffs obviously I don't mean **** bowling. I mean part time spinners like Joe Burns, Ben Dunk, Tim David, Nic Maddinson who can do a job for an over or 2 on a good day bit you're never going to bowl them in a red ball game, or rarely in a 50 over game. It's a tactic unique to T20s

should implement this phrase as an automatic template anytime anyone quotes TJB

You know as much about cricket as I did when I was 11, jog on

 

[Daemon]

I've actually done it quite a few times, and I never bowl otherwise. It's weird how often your strike fast bowler will go 0-14 in the first over but a **** finger spinner will be more economical. An opening bat in the first over is more likely to punch a few boundaries through the field off the quick than take a big risk and go over the top off a spinner.

Yeah this is legit.

Pace on the ball with batsmen eager to go at it and only 2 in the deep means they often go for runs early.

 

[StephenZA]

Its almost like there is a restriction in LO cricket that stops main bowlers from bowling more than a certain number of overs...

 

[Burgey]

Ffs obviously I don't mean **** bowling. I mean part time spinners like Joe Burns, Ben Dunk, Tim David, Nic Maddinson who can do a job for an over or 2 on a good day bit you're never going to bowl them in a red ball game, or rarely in a 50 over game. It's a tactic unique to T20s
You know as much about cricket as I did when I was 11, jog on

My loving this post is purely for the insult to cnunt.

 

[Spikey]

Its almost like there is a restriction in LO cricket that stops main bowlers from bowling more than a certain number of overs...

it is truly the worst rule

 

[chris.hinton]

Who proposed these suggestions?

Newspaper from Barbabos

 

[a massive zebra]

Ross Taylor scored 999 Test runs against both Australia and Pakistan.

 

[karan_fromthestands]

Has anyone seen Syed Rasel bowl? Bowled these very gentle out swingers along with the ones that just went straight on, had the keeper up from ball one. His left arm dibbly-dobblies would have the batsmen just stuck in the crease trying to fiddle with the ball. He was Nathan Bracken lite.

 

[ataraxia]

Ross Taylor scored 999 Test runs against both Australia and Pakistan.

He also bowled 99 test deliveries.

Unrelated Boss stat: no NZer has more test wickets (or runs) at a better average than him. Wonder who else has achieved that for their country.

 

[TheJediBrah]

Has anyone seen Syed Rasel bowl? Bowled these very gentle out swingers along with the ones that just went straight on, had the keeper up from ball one. His left arm dibbly-dobblies would have the batsmen just stuck in the crease trying to fiddle with the ball. He was Nathan Bracken lite.

Oh yeah remember him, very gentle. Not even close to international standard from what I recall, but you could say that about pretty much that whole team

 

[Burgey]

How come a stack of batsmen start off great and revert to mediocrity but it seems nowhere near as many bowlers do?

You see blokes like Mark Taylor, Jimmy Adams to name but two really obvious examples averaging really high levels after like 20 odd tests and they get worked out, which is understandable. It even happens with a lot of blokes who start mid-40s and revert.

But it seems to me far less bowlers go from kicking off at a say 23-26 level average after say 20 odd tests and have it blow out to 28-30 odd by the end of their career.

Thinking about Bumrah and he hasn't played that many tests (27), but am very confident saying he's going to end up a sub 25 average bowler. Same with Cummins (37 played). But with a batsman like Labushagne, I'd be astonished if his average doesn't decline to the point where it's mid-high 40s/ low 50s by the end of his career. Still very good obviously, but with batsmen you have to be wary of the sky rockets - they light up the sky all pretty at the start, but after a while a burnt out stick falls to the ground.

I don't think that happens as much with bowlers, or is it just a perception thing on my part? I'm not talking about a Boland or Axar situation where they play a handful, talking about half decent sample sizes.

 

[Burgey]

ok

 

[TheJediBrah]

How come a stack of batsmen start off great and revert to mediocrity but it seems nowhere near as many bowlers do?

You see blokes like Mark Taylor, Jimmy Adams to name but two really obvious examples averaging really high levels after like 20 odd tests and they get worked out, which is understandable. It even happens with a lot of blokes who start mid-40s and revert.

But it seems to me far less bowlers go from kicking off at a say 23-26 level average after say 20 odd tests and have it blow out to 28-30 odd by the end of their career.

Thinking about Bumrah and he hasn't played that many tests (27), but am very confident saying he's going to end up a sub 25 average bowler. Same with Cummins (37 played). But with a batsman like Labushagne, I'd be astonished if his average doesn't decline to the point where it's mid-high 40s/ low 50s by the end of his career. Still very good obviously, but with batsmen you have to be wary of the sky rockets - they light up the sky all pretty at the start, but after a while a burnt out stick falls to the ground.

I don't think that happens as much with bowlers, or is it just a perception thing on my part? I'm not talking about a Boland or Axar situation where they play a handful, talking about half decent sample sizes.

Jamieson

 

[ataraxia]

Maybe partly because 25 tests is often achieved in a significantly shorter timespan for batsmen than for bowlers, and form then comes into play.

 

[Burgey]

Yeah that may be a reason. Obviously Cummins' case is a bit different because of the gap between his first and second tests, but he didn't play any cricket at all in between really.

 

[ataraxia]

Jamieson

only 12 tests still sadly, so mostly irrelevant. But it will be interesting to see how his career turns out.