Is Collingwood good enough to be a regular Test batsman?

[Richard]

Hitting the ball onto his stumps? Hitting the ball so it misses his stumps by milimetres? Unlucky (and lucky) for sure are these going to be counted, the difficulty of the catch?

The thing is, it's something that's impossible to put one value on. Many people will say "he's lucky" if an inside-edge misses the stumps; those same people will then say "he's unlucky" if it hits them.

This is quite unlike a catch - no-one can possibly claim you're unlucky because a fielder has had the nerve to take a catch. A missed chance is lucky for the batsman; a caught catch is justice done.

Whereas it can be worked-up as an injustice either way with an inside-edge. The simple fact of the matter is, you've got to take it as it comes. If you edge one onto the stumps, that's the way it is; if you edge one past them, it's the same as edging one short of a slip-fielder; a bit lucky, but nowhere near as lucky as if you edge one to a slip and he drops it.

Will it include freak catches that only a handful of fielders in the entire world could have feasibly landed?

If the fielder is good enough to reach the catch, he is; if he's not, he's not. However, once hands are made to it, anyone with the remotest of decency in their hands should catch it. A catch, once taken, cannot be revoked; a missed chance remains a missed chance (a missed chance, however, obviously doesn't include something that brushes the fingertips).

 

[BoyBrumby]

FCA come into the worst three of Richard's pet topics for mine, together with Hayden is crap and Ireland should join forces with England.

Bangladesh aren't test standard > Ireland should join forces with England, for mine. Finger spinners are useless on tracks that don't turn > Ireland should join forces with England as well TBH.

Surely it would have to be Craig White's a better bowler than McGrath and/or McGrath's an incredibly lucky bowler?

Honourable mentions to I know Flintoff's bowling better than Flintoff & Graeme Smith is the best batsman since Bradman tho.

 

[Swervy]

Surely it would have to be Craig White's a better bowler than McGrath and/or McGrath's an incredibly lucky bowler?

Honourable mentions to I know Flintoff's bowling better than Flintoff & Graeme Smith is the best batsman since Bradman tho.

dont forget Ashley Giles putting 74 revs on the ball per second, exactly. (bolded type signifies that these are merely random names and numbers)

 

[Sanz]

What are Hobbs, Bradman, Compton, Boycott, Viv Richards, Tendulkar and Ponting FCA?

A nice cross section there from across the ages to compare.

Bradman's FCA was 15. Crap batsman. Not calling him 'Sir Don' again.

 

[Richard]

Surely it would have to be Craig White's a better bowler than McGrath and/or McGrath's an incredibly lucky bowler?

Honourable mentions to I know Flintoff's bowling better than Flintoff & Graeme Smith is the best batsman since Bradman tho.

None of which I ever said or even approached. Naturally, there were those who tried to twist words so as to respond to what they wanted me to have said rather than what I did.

 

[steds]

dont forget Ashley Giles putting 74 revs on the ball per second, exactly. (bolded type signifies that these are merely random names and numbers)

 

[Richard]

Hahaha. Hahaha. Hahaha. I can barely contain my hysterics.

 

[shortpitched713]

And it'd be a project I'm sure Bill Frindall would be fascinated with - it's too difficult for someone who's not a full-time statistician though. Some of the required data would be almost unobtainable.

Tbh, doing it for just 6 or 7 random batsmen from today would lend a lot more credibility to this statistic. People disparage it because its rarely ever calculated, and theres no way to compare it with that of other players.

While I must say it is quite inconvenient to calculate, it is something that could be done, and if a person or group of persons were to start at a certain point its not inconceivable that such statistics could be maintained for all players.

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

Except that it would hardly be worth the time and the effort. The present statistics are fine enough. It just requires someone who's not totally biased or a total idiot to be able to use them without indulging in the pedantry of first-chance average.

 

[silentstriker]

Yes, he is definitely good enough.

 

[Richard]

Except that it would hardly be worth the time and the effort. The present statistics are fine enough.

They may have their merits, but they're inferior to first-chance records.

It just requires someone who's not totally biased or a total idiot to be able to use them without indulging in the pedantry of first-chance average.

But "indulging in the pedantry of a first-chance average" gives an even better picture to these non-idiots\non-totally-biased-people.

 

[BoyBrumby]

None of which I ever said or even approached. Naturally, there were those who tried to twist words so as to respond to what they wanted me to have said rather than what I did.

Hmmm.

 

[Sanz]

Hmmm.

 

[Richard]

Hmmm.

Try again Einstein.

 

[BoyBrumby]

Try again Einstein.

Nah. That'll do:

I can prove quite clearly that I know more about his bowling in Test-match cricket than he does - if indeed he thinks the turnaround happened in the Bridgetown game, and I've done so God-knows-how-many times.

 

[GIMH]

 

[Richard]

Nah. That'll do:

It won't, though. What I said there was completely different to what you were suggesting (or at least appeared to be) that I'd said - ie, that I know the mechanics of Flintoff's bowling-action better than him, which I clearly don't.

I do, however, know as well as he or anyone else who's watched (at least with an open mind, rather than the usual he's-got-good-figures-so-he-must-have-bowled-well mindset) how well he bowled on a given day.

 

[GIMH]

Richard and Brumby about to go at it; we could be in for the long haul here folks. Pull up a chair.

 

[Richard]

Brumbers is always out to make me look foolish; that's common knowledge I'd have thought.























(I guess THIS POST WAS TO AN EXTENT IN JEST!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!)

 

[Swervy]

Brumbers is always out to make me look foolish

BB is just good at pointing out the obvious I guess