SillyCowCorner1
Moooo
I think I've just witnessed the fastest stumping in cricket
Just like star wars. Kill off your favourite characters (normal cricket) and replace them with new ones that no one likes (the 100)It is the easiest way to alienate your existing fan base, for sure.
I looked at the scorecard on crapinfo and my eyes just glazed over when reading the little information button that explained the changes of ends and things like that.I get trying to get more people to enjoy the game, but WTF and it's WAY more confusing than anything. Let's assume someone does understand this (which seems more complicated anyway), they'll surely have a difficult time understanding the actual cricket, which anyway has a bunch of different set of rules. Just stupid ass **** tbh.
That’s a lot of Singh’s.
More than outweighed by the flat wickets thoughI do certainly rate Bird, but you have to say the calibre of domestic batting is a looooong way off where it was in the golden era Bichel played in
Would have more than Anderson, thats for sureGoes missing on flat wickets. But I guess a lot of bowlers do. If Bird was English he might have 300 Test wickets
As starfighter mentioned though, there have been some very spicy Hobart wickets in his time that might have driven down that average. This was during the peak Luke Butterworth (FC bowling average of 24) and James Faulkner (FC bowling average of 24.8) years.Yeah it's just that his bowling stats stand out like a sore thumb. Not even Lillee averaged under 23. You have to go back as far a Davidson and Lindwall to find shield bowlers who averaged under 22 and took a lot of wickets.
Bird really only went missing in that one MCG test where Cook scored his double on what had to be one of the flattest decks you will ever see. Deserved way more chances than he has had, particularly when Starc has been garbage for long periods.
Of course, it does.Matt Roller in the article linked above said:Like so many tales about promising English cricketers, Harrison's story starts in South Africa.