• 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.

***Official*** Australia in South Africa

S

SamSawnoff

U19 Vice-Captain
8ankitj said:
Umm, me asking the question or Australia's batting? :unsure:
Click to expand...
Definitely the Aussie batting. Pretty much cautious ****e all-round which you can cope with from batsmen that are trying to rebuild but when people who actually can and do slog do it as well, it's time to bring out the tazers.
 
Cabinet96

Cabinet96

Hall of Fame Member
Morkel's accuracy and consistency has gone through the roof. Remember when he used to give it away with a couple of 4 balls each other. Those days seem long, long ago...

Brilliant spell today.
 
Top_Cat

Top_Cat

Request Your Custom Title Now!
Just watching highlights now, Jesus how well was Warner tagging them early? Flat deck it was but geez.
 
howardj

howardj

International Coach
I never really counted the first ODI, effected by rain as it was.

Last night's game was really the first hit out, for mine.

Hopefully on friday night we can redress the gap between the teams evidenced in last night's game.
 
stephen

stephen

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
akilana said:
He wasn't absolute awful against McWarne.. He was averaging 45 in Australia when SA were getting beaten repeatedly. It's his average against them in SA which is awful but SA was/is the place where good bowlers thrive.. If you look at statistics for SA batsmen, most of their batsmen average higher away from home..

Donald and Pollock were great but their attack weren't that great because they had two fill-in bowlers and as an attack failed against Australia for more than a decade. Anybody who wore baggy cap would have scored runs because Australia had wood on them for a long time. Even Martyn was successful against SA attack.. woulndn't call him a better batsman than Kallis.

Btw, I don't know why you picked England and SL in your that you made earlier as teams with great bowlers.. SL had Murali only but Kallis hasn't played them for a decade(?).. and England hardly had great bowlers.. He was very successful against Pakistan, WI and India.. He was also very good against the England attack that conquered Australia in 2005.

edit : If you disagree, it's fine. Will continue another time.. gtg
Click to expand...
Kallis wasn't awful against Warne, I'll give you that. He averaged 35 against him, which is not great, but it's not too bad. What is awful is his average of 10 vs McGrath. He'd probably be in my team of the last two decades, but he'd be picked behind Lara, Tendulkar and Ponting.

Team of the last 20 years:

Hayden
Sehwag
Ponting (c)
Tendulkar
Lara
Kallis
Gilchrist (wk)
Warne
Wasim
Ambrose
McGrath

12th Sangakkara
 
Last edited:
Prince EWS

Prince EWS

Global Moderator
stephen said:
Kallis wasn't awful against Warne, I'll give you that. He averaged 35 against him, which is not great, but it's not too bad. What is awful is his average of 10 vs McGrath.
Click to expand...
What StatsGuru provides on this matter is pretty useless in general. Even if one does belong to the school of thought that suggests it's better to get dismissed by some random **** **** for 5 and score a ton against an all-time great than the other way around, StatsGuru won't actually give you his "average against McGrath". What's been quoted is his average when dismissed by McGrath. If you played three Tests against teams containing McGrath, got out for 10 in the first innings of the first Test to McGrath and then proceeded to peel off five consecutive hundreds before being dismissed by Gillespie each time - in all of which you smash McGrath around the park and make him look like a fool - then your "average against McGrath" according to StatsGuru would be .. 10. All it shows is that when McGrath happened to get Kallis out it was for a low score, and that he wasn't vulnerable to him once he was set.
 
Last edited:
stephen

stephen

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Prince EWS said:
What StatsGuru provides on this matter is pretty useless in general. Even if one does belong to the school of thought that suggests it's better to get dismissed by some random **** **** for 5 and score a ton against an all-time great than the other way around, StatsGuru won't actually give you his "average against McGrath". What's been quoted is his average when dismissed by McGrath. If you played three Tests against teams containing McGrath, got out for 10 in the first innings of the first Test to McGrath and then proceeded to peel off five consecutive hundreds before being dismissed by Gillespie each time - in all of which you smash McGrath around the park and make him look like a fool - then your "average against McGrath" according to StatsGuru would be .. 10. All it shows is that when McGrath happened to get Kallis out it was for a low score, and that he wasn't vulnerable to him once he was set.
Click to expand...
Fair enough I stand corrected.

I still think that Kallis is one notch below the best batsmen of his generation though, on the same level as Dravid.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Top