Prince EWS
Global Moderator
Looks like he was batting with a needle first dig and they had an opener at 5, might have just been a demotion based on form.Maybe they looking to score quicker in the 2nd dig
Looks like he was batting with a needle first dig and they had an opener at 5, might have just been a demotion based on form.Maybe they looking to score quicker in the 2nd dig
Hey that's all some of us have to work withLooks like he was batting with a needle
Was going to suggest that one, although I would have suggested that their best period was from 2009 through to mid 2012. I think they went rapidly downhill after that.England's best lower order is from about 10 years ago when they had Swann at 10 batting behind Bresnan and Broad. The best I can find on paper is the one we had for the Bangladesh tour in 2016 which had Woakes, Rashid, Batty and Broad making an 8-11 with 20 odd first class hundreds between them. Didn't make many runs in those tests though.
Yup, more than good enough.If we are talking Test cricket:
Shane Warne - 3,154 runs @ 17.32
Brett Lee - 1,451 runs @ 20.15
Jason Gillespie - 1,218 runs @ 18.73
Glenn McGrath - 641 runs @ 7.36
McGrath is obviously the weak link but collectively every single of them scored at least one Test 50, three of them scored multiple Test 50s and one of them scored a Test 100 (Gillespie - double hundred).
Not a bad batting lower order I think.
Murali probably the weak link in that line up. He just used to shut his eyes and swing the bat and hope for the best lol.Sri Lanka had (batting 8 - 11)
Vaas 2785 @ 25.6
Dharmasena 557 @ 18.6
Chandana 519 @ 24.7
Murali 1287 @ 11.9
Herath 1648 @ 14.5
Kulaskara 341 @ 14.5
Prasad 491 @ 12.6
as various combinations, with Vaas and Murali being ever present.
And it aches my eyes to see the batting of current SL bowlers. These old timers were pretty courageous batsmen who were prepared to take blows from faster bowlers, to off set their general lack of skill.
@TheJediBrahWas a great fielder though....
He had way better reflexes than McGrath and his swings tended to connect more than that of McGrath.Murali probably the weak link in that line up. He just used to shut his eyes and swing the bat and hope for the best lol.
Spot on.Really scraping the bottom now if we're comparing who was the better bat between Murali and McG
That 8-11 might actually be worse than the Caddick, Mullally, Tufnell and Giddins tail. Nine, ten and jack about the same. Caddick not as awful as Hogg. Madness.Not as bad as 1978/79 Ashes 4th Test. Border left stranded not out in both innings while the 5 combined for 34 runs in 1st innings and only 3 runs in the 2nd (4 ducks)
7. Maclean +
8. Hogg
9. Dymock
10. Higgs
11. Hurst
AUS vs ENG Cricket Scorecard, 4th Test at Sydney, January 06 - 11, 1979
Get cricket scorecard of 4th Test, AUS vs ENG, England tour of Australia 1978/79 at Sydney Cricket Ground dated January 06 - 11, 1979.www.espncricinfo.com
Really? surely notMcGrath at least improved his batting as his career progressed. First half he averaged 5, second half he averaged 10.
Murali definitely had more batting talent, but seemed to get worse as his career progressed.
Barrel scraped.
Haha. 2nd innings 7-11 0,0,0,3,0. Quality.That 8-11 might actually be worse than the Caddick, Mullally, Tufnell and Giddins tail. Nine, ten and jack about the same. Caddick not as awful as Hogg. Madness.
Those damn flat 00’s pitches. McGrath the huge beneficiary.Really? surely not
2 extremely mediocre test sides for a bicentennial match..Australia's 7 to11 for the one-off Bicentennial Test against England in 1988 was pretty strong.
Peter Sleep (FC 34, Tests 24)
Greg Dyer (FC 28, Tests 21)
Peter Taylor (FC 30, Tests 26)
Tony Dodemaide (FC 28, Tests 22)
Craig McDermott (FC 16, Tests 12).
*Also, No. 5 Mike Veletta that match had a lower Test average (18) than all but McDermott!