-
Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.
You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.
New Cricket Trivia - 'SJS format'
- Thread starter JASON
- Start date
Question
(relates to All Rounders- Something Australia has lacked as Neil Harvey has repeatedly pointed out and England currently definitely has one in Andrew Flintoff although his batting has not come good as yet )
Who is Australia's leading Allrounder in the Ashes ? When did he play ? (just highlights Australia's lack of reliance on Allrounders ) How many wickets ? How many runs ? in the Ashes .
(relates to All Rounders- Something Australia has lacked as Neil Harvey has repeatedly pointed out and England currently definitely has one in Andrew Flintoff although his batting has not come good as yet )
Who is Australia's leading Allrounder in the Ashes ? When did he play ? (just highlights Australia's lack of reliance on Allrounders ) How many wickets ? How many runs ? in the Ashes .
archie mac
International Coach
I am not sure what the min. number of runs or wickets you are looking for. I will assume 1000 and 100. so I will go with Monty Noble. 1905 and 115 wickets.JASON said:
I have a book where they came up with a formula to rank the all-rounders, it was called 'index' and was achieved by dividing the batting average by the bowling average. for those players who took 50 W and made 1000 runs, Miller had the best index of 1.50 followed by Noble 1.24 and Armstrong 1.13.
Q1 Did this allrounder play before World War I ? YesSomerset said:
( Just highlights the lack of genuine Allrounders in Australian sides over consistently long periods, IMO !! )
The only all rounders on the threshold and not in current Test side are Symonds and Watson . Symonds's bowling possibly not worthy of Test level and Watson's bowling and batting not quite there yet, IMO !!
I will agree with that answer . Monty Noble 1905 runs in 39 Ashes Tests and 115 wickets.archie mac said:I am not sure what the min. number of runs or wickets you are looking for. I will assume 1000 and 100. so I will go with Monty Noble. 1905 and 115 wickets.
I have a book where they came up with a formula to rank the all-rounders, it was called 'index' and was achieved by dividing the batting average by the bowling average. for those players who took 50 W and made 1000 runs, Miller had the best index of 1.50 followed by Noble 1.24 and Armstrong 1.13.
(Thats at a batting average of 30.72 ) and almost 3 wickets a Test.
Warwick Armstrong 2172 runs in 42 tests at 35.03 and 74 wickets in the Ashes at less than 2 wickets per Ashes Test.
Keith Miller 1511 runs at 33.57 and 87 wickets in 29 tests ( at exactly 3 wickets a Test)
I can see why Miller was given a rating of 1.50 and Noble 1.24.
But I was using most Ashes runs and wickets combo as the criteria !!
Either way its your turn !!
archie mac
International Coach
Here is a nice cryptic one (Jason loves these) whick player is next on this list?
Laker, Lohmann, Briggs, Lawson, ?
Laker, Lohmann, Briggs, Lawson, ?
archie mac
International Coach
I know the Laker record was achieved in Ashes, but the player I am looking for did not achieve his record in Ashes Clashes.SJS said:
archie mac
International Coach
Yes you are right, Toshacks 5-2 is the answer.Steulen said:
Missed Harmison, that will teach me to use an old reference book
Your turn Steulen