WI were obviously very good, and early on in his career so were Aus. But late 80s/early 90s, his average really ramped up. Combination of knowing how game better and facing - relatively - easier attacks.
Was there a particular reason for this? Seems an odd time to walk away when the side was winning series in Eng and Aus.
I said 400 and beyond, we should get as many runs as we can before declaring, I wasn't banking on Blundell playing a rare good knock.
You lost 4-1 to this bunch of wimps lmao
his average after 40 games was just over 30. Did not know that, pretty weird curve for a top order batsman - usually they have a big mid-career peak and then a gradual or sudden taper as their eye goes.
Craig McMillan is worse with those "straight up" calls. I don't pay attention unless he asks "who's under it?/who wants it?"
I always imagined if this Indian team lost at home it would be one of those sneaky 1-0 two match series win where one match is rained out and the second is a freak batting collapse.
I just don't think cricket was his main focus at the time. He was an accountant or a lawyer, and I think he focused on that for a time.
test cricket has been kind of revived this year. starting from the windies victory at the gabba
Do I really have to explain this to you? If you declare you are NOT getting as many runs as you can.
1) Ashwin and Jadeja sadly washed.
Tried too hard with the new ball maybe, probably expected/hoped the spinners would turn the screws from the first over itself. Latham and Conway’s brisk start was pretty crucial.
They don't need the lead to be anywhere near 400. Unless NZ drop half a dozen chances they have enough already.
Edgar scored a great ton in the infamous underarm match, it should have been a match winning knock.
