Cricket stuff that doesn't deserve its own thread

[cnerd123]

Siva captured no one's imagination unless you had a fetish for the head-dipped-in-a-bucket-of-oil look.

You guys suck. Mentioning Paul ****ing Strang and LSK when there are so many other leg spinners who were actually influential before and during Warne's career.

Paul Strang was gun you filthy casual

 

[Burgey]

I think he gets the point.

It's not wrong to say Warne was the most popular legspinner to ever play the game. He's arguably the greatest spinner of all time.

But to say he single-handedly revived a dying art when there were several influential Asian practitioners of it around before and during his era (We haven't even spoken of older bowlers like Siva, Chandra, Hirwani, Gupte, etc who captured the imagination of a whole generation of young Indian cricketers) is straight up disrespectful and narrow sighted.

Similarly, to say Bill O Reilly is the only post-war bowler who can compare to him...urgh

I don't know if anyone who wasn't around and watching cricket seriously in the 80s really has an idea about how big the fear was (out here at least, and I think in England too) that cricket was going to develop into a purely pace-based game, because the Windies at that time, and Australia to a large extent before them, had dominated with almost exclusively pace attacks.

There was serious talk among people who'd been watching and commentating on the game for a long time that the ICC would need to do things like mandate overs to be bowled by spin or even lengthen pitches to reduce the effectiveness of all out pace attacks, mostly because the West Indies were so damn good at it (will leave the motivations for that attitude aside).

It sounds stupid in hindsight because the two attacks which were based on all out pace were so good because they just had great bowlers, but it was genuinely seen as a worry by a number of pundits back then. Basically once they brought in mandatory over rates the issue sort of died away, but it had been a concern, so when Warne came along he was seen by some of those same pundits as a bit of a saviour of traditional cricket. It's probably no coincidence that one of the blokes who was most worried about the "death" of spin bowling was Bill O'Reilly himself, who was one of the leading cricket journos in the country almost right up til his death in late 1992.

It certainly ignores that there were other practitioners of leg spin around, but I think that context was no small part of Warne's mystique here, where we'd had the West Indies virtually every two years come over and pummel us with their quicks. There was a real feeling in the 80s that there was no answer to them or to the all pace attack. It's no excuse for Berry's hyperbole in this instance, but that was the context of the times.

 

[honestbharani]

Siva captured no one's imagination unless you had a fetish for the head-dipped-in-a-bucket-of-oil look.

You guys suck. Mentioning Paul ****ing Strang and LSK when there are so many other leg spinners who were actually influential before and during Warne's career.

Speak for yourself... Maybe you didn't watch the 1996 WC or the 1985 WCC. The fact that both of them turned out to be **** has no bearing on the fact that they were exciting promising exuberant leg spinners who captured the attention of viewers.

 

[honestbharani]

I don't know if anyone who wasn't around and watching cricket seriously in the 80s really has an idea about how big the fear was (out here at least, and I think in England too) that cricket was going to develop into a purely pace-based game, because the Windies at that time, and Australia to a large extent before them, had dominated with almost exclusively pace attacks.

There was serious talk among people who'd been watching and commentating on the game for a long time that the ICC would need to do things like mandate overs to be bowled by spin or even lengthen pitches to reduce the effectiveness of all out pace attacks, mostly because the West Indies were so damn good at it (will leave the motivations for that attitude aside).

It sounds stupid in hindsight because the two attacks which were based on all out pace were so good because they just had great bowlers, but it was genuinely seen as a worry by a number of pundits back then. Basically once they brought in mandatory over rates the issue sort of died away, but it had been a concern, so when Warne came along he was seen by some of those same pundits as a bit of a saviour of traditional cricket. It's probably no coincidence that one of the blokes who was most worried about the "death" of spin bowling was Bill O'Reilly himself, who was one of the leading cricket journos in the country almost right up til his death in late 1992.

It certainly ignores that there were other practitioners of leg spin around, but I think that context was no small part of Warne's mystique here, where we'd had the West Indies virtually every two years come over and pummel us with their quicks. There was a real feeling in the 80s that there was no answer to them or to the all pace attack. It's no excuse for Berry's hyperbole in this instance, but that was the context of the times.

Which has been most of our point in this thread. That contextualizing what Warne has done is very much Australia-England centric. In the 1980 itself we had two leggies capturing bags on their debuts in India. Put it this way, Warne revived leg spin "across the cricketing world" as much as MS Dhoni and India made "T20s famous". Its a popular albeit nonfactual biased myth and to write about it with such certainty means he brought the criticism on to himself.

In other words, if mr2 had accepted that and proceeded to argue, as you have done, that Warne's impact was huge in Australia and by extension, in England, there won't have been an argument from anyone here, I would think.

 

[TheJediBrah]

and you learn to understand the context while posting.

I'd ask what on earth you're referring to here but it really wouldn't be worth the drama

Keep doing your thing just keep me out of it

 

[Burgey]

Anyway, back to the big tour. Hampton School today. Looks a decent joint from the pics.

 

[honestbharani]

I'd ask what on earth you're referring to here but it really wouldn't be worth the drama

Keep doing your thing just keep me out of it

 

[Red]

**** Warne

MacGill > Warne anyhow.

 

[Red]

2nd Test: Pakistan v Australia at Faisalabad, Mar 6-11, 1980 | Cricket Scorecard | ESPN Cricinfo

Anyone know or remember who kept wickets in this test while Marsh bowled 10 overs?

 

[Burgey]

Probably TOTAB. He did everything else in the 80s.

Lads had a loss last night apparently. 35 over game. Pitch was pretty slow according to reports, our blokes made 137 or so, and got passed easily only two down. Dropped about six catches which will **** the young bloke plenty. He made 20 batting at six, with the order being moved around a bit (fair enough too - you don't tip $5K plus into a trip for your kid only for them to never have a hit). They're off to Bath tomorrow for a couple of games then Cardiff, Bristol and back to London.

Apparently not raining in England in July, much like June.

 

[honestbharani]

Proper Q here folks.. how do you go about playing big shots on slow wickets? When I was playing seriously I hated those wickets. Usually our strategy was to run hard and gets loads of 1s, 2s and 3s through the middle innings and we figured out it was better if we ensured we nurdled ball into the gaps and ran hard than try big shots to score at > 6 RPO at the slog.

 

[Burgey]

Well, the obvious thing is anything short just gets hammered, so you can sweat on that. But if a team is bowling well and sets a good field, it is hard to score, especially off the front foot. I suppose you can try and muck around with a bowler's length by batting a long way out of your crease, then go back in the crease, etc. But otherwise I think what you've said is probably right. You basically need to hit gaps and run hard.

 

[harsh.ag]

I used to come down the pitch twice every over and try and hit it for six. Can only do that so often before you get caught though. Since we only played 30 over cricket back in the day, it was acceptable.

 

[honestbharani]

Yeah.. short balls are fun but again, even when they come that slow sometimes you mistime it and they always had 3-5 men in the deep on the leg side. At the level of school cricket and U15 which was the last time I played serious cricket, it was surprisingly hard to loft over the offside as well.

 

[cnerd123]

I used to come down the pitch twice every over and try and hit it for six. Can only do that so often before you get caught though. Since we only played 30 over cricket back in the day, it was acceptable.

somehow this feels very consistent with your modding so far

 

[honestbharani]

U r giving too much credit to his modding, really.

 

[Shri]

I used to come down the pitch twice every over and try and hit it for six. Can only do that so often before you get caught though. Since we only played 30 over cricket back in the day, it was acceptable.

Coming down the pitch is useless. So hard to middle anything or even put bat on ball unless you get lucky.

 

[cnerd123]

Coming down the pitch is useless. So hard to middle anything or even put bat on ball unless you get lucky.

spot the tailender

 

[harsh.ag]

Coming down the pitch is useless. So hard to middle anything or even put bat on ball unless you get lucky.

Not really. It's more difficult than with regular pitches, but effective if you can get under the ball well, and the acceleration gives your shot more power. I used to hit exclusively straight back above the bowler, so there was less risk.

 

[Shri]

spot the tailender

Nah, if a bowler is even a little bit quicker than everyone else you are facing in a game, it ****s with the shot timing, regardless of the kind of bowler they are. And if you make your move too soon, the bowler can easily get you stumped(I know I can) and making your move just after release is really ****ing hard.