Commiserations to everyone else I guess.Congratz on customtitlehood btw
Commiserations to everyone else I guess.Congratz on customtitlehood btw
Indeed.Either way you've got some work to put in
Ack, yes it is. Platinum Lounge entry was at 30,000 wasn't itThought it was 25000. Maybe mistaken.
I think my lurking informs me that it's one more post than @trundler has.Ack, yes it is. Platinum Lounge entry was at 30,000 wasn't it
Too much loser vibes for 90s England for him to succeed. He ends up dropped after the first bad series for Caddick.Glenn McGrath playing for England probably averages under 20 in his Test career and probably racks up 150 Test wickets at Lords alone.
He would have done okay, though possibly not toooo much better than McCormick - I don't think he would have been ending up with an average of 25.00. He would have had only half the test opportunities, and much less first-class cricket to build up that stamina you mentioned. I still doubt he would have ended up with a better record.I know but Larwood 1932/33 at 28 years may well be the greatest bowler to ever bowl in Australian Soil. Worth remembering he didn’t have anything the stamina in 28/29 that he later possessed. Given he was just 28 when being virtually forced to retire, I think he could have finished up with lot better stats plus ofc no Bradman. With O’Reilly, Grimmett that would have been a hell of a Bowling Lineup.
Disagree, the volume of test matches that England play in the 90's and early 00's makes it close to impossible for a truly great bowler to not get enough opportunity no matter how bad a few series go.Too much loser vibes for 90s England for him to succeed. He ends up dropped after the first bad series for Caddick.
He wouldn't have had the terrible 1930 Ashes stats (4 wickets @ 73 due to Bradman) damaging his average so much.He would have done okay, though possibly not toooo much better than McCormick - I don't think he would have been ending up with an average of 25.00. He would have had only half the test opportunities, and much less first-class cricket to build up that stamina you mentioned. I still doubt he would have ended up with a better record.
That would certainly help. But conversely, it should be mentioned the Australian wickets of the mid-late twenties were horrible for fast bowling. And he might well have picked up the foot injury he did during 32/33 Ashes earlier. But on the other hand, he would have had a smaller workload (would've needed to find a job though, no pros in those days).He wouldn't have had the terrible 1930 Ashes stats (4 wickets @ 73 due to Bradman) damaging his average so much.
Its not like he was blitzing through the other Aussie batsmen either though. And the English had a quality batting lineup too.He wouldn't have had the terrible 1930 Ashes stats (4 wickets @ 73 due to Bradman) damaging his average so much.
Larwood wouldn’t have been as remembered as now though where I think he is among very small no. of quick to reach the immortal level and arguably no.1 in the immortal list. I see him ending up better stats in Australia though, somewhere around 25.He would have done okay, though possibly not toooo much better than McCormick - I don't think he would have been ending up with an average of 25.00. He would have had only half the test opportunities, and much less first-class cricket to build up that stamina you mentioned. I still doubt he would have ended up with a better record.
This is a joke rightToo much loser vibes for 90s England for him to succeed. He ends up dropped after the first bad series for Caddick.
Yes sir.This is a joke right
2015-16 against RSA were the worst. Nothing post 2019 was as bad as that, not even the pitch where Australia won last year.the sandpit's india started producing at home post 2019.