Personal Cricket Statutes

[Richard]

His average is skewed because his first 6 matches were awful, and he has still only played about 30.

After those 6, his average is around 30, which isn't brilliant, but is a start, and his Test career started similarly...

And those first 6 matches mean nothing?
They were an accurate summarisation of his ability. Also, if you take away the 3 Bangladesh ODIs his post-first-6-games average goes down a bit. Not to mention that he was lucky in WC2003 (out for 0 to an Akram no-ball, lbw twice and not given in the India match). He has always managed to produce something remotely good at a time when his runs of poor scores were building (VB Series and NatWest Series 2003), which has given his supporters the opportunity to pretend.

 

[Neil Pickup]

Personally I think it says far more about Pakistan's excuse for an attack. Shoaib Akhtar apart, it's a load of rubbish.

Mohammad Sami? Shabbir Ahmed?

You trying to get Amits' title back?

 

[Richard]

Sorry mate but thats ludicrous , anyone of those players (perhaps with the exception of Slater for ODI's & Bevan for tests [although if Rikki Clarke can do it.....]) would make the England side in both forms of the game , same goes really for most other test nations (except Haddin in some cases).

Just wondering , have you ever actually seen Haddin , Clark , Nash , Nicholson , Thornely , etc play , you know I mean actually watching them rather than just looking up their averages , its a lot harded to critisize them then.

Never seen Nash or Thornley play. I've heard plenty of detraction of Nash especially, more for his weight than his waywardness. Don't know much about Thornley, have heard him talked-up by some, will do a bit of looking at him.
Stuart Clark actually seems like a pretty decent bowler - not as good as Inness, McGrath and Gillespie, or quite in the Bichel, Kasprowicz, Angel etc. league, but not far short. I saw Matthew Nicholson at The MCG on his Test debut and he looked like an archtyepal semi-decent bowler. Of course, things can change in 5 years, but not much seems to have done judging by figures and the fact that he doesn't seem to have had much mention in the national side. Haddin seems like a decent 'keeper but to call him as good as Alec Stewart or Geirant Jones with the bat seems rather ludicrous to me. If you ask me Jones at his best would probably make all state sides bar WA and certainly most county sides purely as a batsman.

 

[Richard]

you have GOT TO BE KIDDING ME!!! plz tell me ur pretending to be dumb and ignorant! Lee has proven he is a world class ODI bowler...And Bracken's tour of india has shown he has potential (i'm not saying he's a world class bowler yet...but the guy is young,he WILL become a world class bowler...and he's not bad now either), I hate Macgill,but there's no denying he's a damn good bowler! Steven Waugh is unproven or proven OK??? Where have u been living for the last 16 years? His excellent economical bowling in 1986 won the world cup for australia...his brilliant 120* against SA in 99 won the world cup for australia again!He has won SOOO many matches for australia from nothing situations...He is a PROVEN match winner,and one of the BEST match winner's in the world...Katich is unproven on the international stage,but if you've ever seen him bat,you will see that he is a class act... Haddin is living in the shadow of Adam Gilchrist and Michael Clarke we all know is going 2 be a superstar

I think that you don't know much abou these players,and are just talking crap. I seriously doubt you've actually seen Katich,Haddin or even Bracken and Clarke at full flight... You are just going by figures, where katich and haddin have had very limited opportunity

this is a problem caused by the strength of the australian side...
Bracken,haddin,katich,swaugh,clarke,lee,macgill would all be walk up starts in the england team...theres' no denying it

You think slater was a half decent ODI batsman in his day...Funny that,coz the selectors considered him a test batsman, and he only ended up playing 42 ODI's!!!

Don't just join in any convo without actually knowing your stuff...It just makes u look ignorant!

I certainly never said Slater was a half-decent one-day-international batsman, he should never have played half the ODIs he did. I said he's a half-decent one-day batsman at best.
Stephen Waugh has an ODI average of less than 35. You can't judge batsmen on "number of match-winnings innings", first because that's an unreliable term, but even if you translated it into better terms, Lara would be better than Tendulkar which is, to be frank, ludicrous.
Stephen Waugh is, without doubt, an all-time great in Tests. In ODIs his record is disappointing compared to his domestic one-day record. He helped win WC87, yes, but he's hardly been an inspirational bowler in the last decade. He played one innings in WC99 (which, of course, wouldn't have happened but for Herschelle Gibbs' premature celebration) which turned-out crucial. However, it was his second ODI century of his career. In 13 years.
Haddin may be living in the shadow of Gilchrist but it's a fool who proclaims him a better player than Geirant Jones IMO. As for comparing him to Alec Stewart...
Michael Clarke may be a superstar in the one-day game, but we will simply wait and see. There is no gurantee of it. Nor is there any gurantee of his superstardom in the Test game. He has only looked that good in the First-Class game since last season. It would be rather amusing to see you talk him up as some sort of all-time great in the making - beyond a question - and him turn-out averaging about 35 in Test-cricket.
I tell you, I may have looked ignorant, but not quite as ignorant as you. What's more, you have been proven a homophobic fool and hence you have little respect from any quarters.

 

[Richard]

umm im not really sure what exactly your talking about. lets have a look at some of these players

steve waugh - great batsman, good fielder and useful bowler

Mark Waugh - opened for Australia for a long time, class batsman and fielder

Macgill - 6 wickets @ 17.5 in ODIs, list A SR 28.5

Brett Lee - OSI 137 wickets @ 21.43 - SR just 27.4 world class feilder

McGrath - best pace bowler in the world

Bracken - 28 wickets @ 19.71 in ODI's 30.4 SR eco 3.88 - good OD bowler - unproven in the longer version

Clarke - ODI performance thus far - 327 runs @ 65, 8 wickets @ 24.5. Great OD batsman, fantastic fielder and descant part time bowler - just signed by Hampshire, should benifit alot from the experience

Katich - always been a class batsman, had a couple fo off seasons, hasn't looked back after being picked a 2nd time for the test side, scored a couple of hundreds in ING cup this season, started bowling more last season with good sucess

Bevan - rated the best ODI bat in the world and with good reason

Slater - never performed in ODI's or OD games domestically and doesn't play in a full strength NSW OD side (and hes not playing this weekend with S Waugh and Katich missing)

dunno how you can not rate some of these players, particularly in OD games - particularly as you 'know more than everyone else about cricket' a full strength NSW side is hell strong at the moment, and i also wanna see your best XI's for those countries


that and what marc said

So Stephen Waugh is a great batsman with an average of less than 35, now? And you're still trying to hide behind strike-rates, when they are all but irrelevant in the one-day game? To describe either Clarke or Stephen Waugh as their bowling coming into the equation is very silly, as it doesn't. Katich has played 1 ODI and didn't bat, his List-A average is good, but so are many other batsmen in Australia, Maher included, and we've seen what an average ODI player he really is. There is no denying Bracken's record but I'd like to have seen the TVS Cup. And I'd certainly like to see him hammered all over The 'Gabba tomorrow, just to show-up the decision to pick for Tests on ODIs.
And if you try to use a completely not-serious comment as serious, you are certainly running-out of ammo.

 

[Richard]

Mohammad Sami? Shabbir Ahmed?

You trying to get Amits' title back?

Don't rate Sami as he usually gets hammered around the park and whenever I've seen him he's got wickets through bad batting rather than good bowling. Never seen Shabbir bowl but he does seem to be better than he was in his previous sabbatical in ODI-cricket, 3 leg-side wides that shot to the boundary and a wicket in his opening over.

 

[Richard]

And what if he's on the back foot because of good bowling?

You've never satisfactorily answered how a bowler doesn't deserve a wicket for a superb spell where the batsman survives, then gets out to a planned wider ball or similar.

Because even if it's "planned", 1 the bowler can't prove it and 2 it's still a bad ball or not a good one.
No decent batsman should premeditate a stroke, if he's got a load of short-balls he should always be ready for a full one etc.
I'm sorry if that's not satisfactory for you but it's satisfactory for me - what has gone before is irrelevant. It is the ball that takes the wicket that matters, not the last 50.

 

[Richard]

1) ok whatever
2) Did you read what I wrote at all? Read marcs post below mine.
3) Can't be stuffed arguing this. How is Hayden overated in Tests?
4) OK, you're assessing by stats. I would like you to go back and revise that list, taking away all the teams whose stats weren't as good as the current Aus team. NOW look.
6) Righto but he performed against the better teams.
9) O...K....:rolleyes:

So you would prefer to be chasing 161 then 121? Also it can mean bowling conditions are easier, but it doesnt always say that. And how does it show that your bowlers have bowled better? 10 wickets compared to none is surely in favour of the bowlers who took all ten?

2) I have already replied to marc.
3) Hayden is overrated because he has been very lucky in the last year - apparently lbw first ball in the 380, undoubtedly very lucky in The Ashes and the preceding Pakistan series. He had some luck in the preceding summer but I don't deny he played 3 or 4 good innings', nor that he batted well in India the previous summer again.
4) I've done that sometimes but not in exact detail. It will take ages so I'll try to remember to tell you when I've done it.
6) Yes, sure he did. England smashed him all over the park and West Indies let him get a couple of bursts of wickets but Lara especially, and Chanderpaul too, made him look a complete fool most of the time. It remains to be seen whether he'll even play against India but if he does I expect him to get hammered yet again.

 

[Mr. P]

Because even if it's "planned", 1 the bowler can't prove it and 2 it's still a bad ball or not a good one.
No decent batsman should premeditate a stroke, if he's got a load of short-balls he should always be ready for a full one etc.
I'm sorry if that's not satisfactory for you but it's satisfactory for me - what has gone before is irrelevant. It is the ball that takes the wicket that matters, not the last 50.

1/ Why would the bowler need, or in any case bother, to prove it. If hes bowled well hes bowled well.
2/ You haven't read what me or marc have written, have you?

You must realise Richard, that if Brett Lee is sending down 150km bouncers at your head, then chances are, you will be on the back foot. At the same goes for all pace bowlers, or in fact any bowler who bowls a number of short ones.

 

[Mr. P]

2) I have already replied to marc.
3) Hayden is overrated because he has been very lucky in the last year - apparently lbw first ball in the 380, undoubtedly very lucky in The Ashes and the preceding Pakistan series. He had some luck in the preceding summer but I don't deny he played 3 or 4 good innings', nor that he batted well in India the previous summer again.
4) I've done that sometimes but not in exact detail. It will take ages so I'll try to remember to tell you when I've done it.
6) Yes, sure he did. England smashed him all over the park and West Indies let him get a couple of bursts of wickets but Lara especially, and Chanderpaul too, made him look a complete fool most of the time. It remains to be seen whether he'll even play against India but if he does I expect him to get hammered yet again.

2/ And i replied to that
3/ yes you have to be very 'lucky' to score a thousand runs in a calender year. what a fluke!:rolleyes:
4/ You do that
6/ Ill put this on standby, as you may be correct. Ill check his stats.

 

[Richard]

OK then, money where your mouth is.

Name your XIs for each of those 4 nations.

England - hard to say now but 3 years ago it would have been this:
Ramprakash
Knight
Hick
Fairbrother
Alleyne
Stewart
Thorpe
Hussain
Ealham
Caddick
Gough
----------
Mullally
Croft
Pakistan 6 months ago:
Anwar
Afridi
Elahi
Inzamam-Ul-Haq
Youhana
Moin Khan
Akram
Waqar Younis
Saqlain Mushtaq
Mushtaq Ahmed
Shoaib Akhtar
Most of this team is still available but Akram, Younis and Anwar are kind of irreplaceable. I guess Hameed's getting somewhere, but the W's aren't quite so easy and the Mushtaqs haven't exactly distinguished themselves recently, either.
West Indies:
Campbell
Gayle
W. Hinds
Lara
Chanderpaul
Sarwan
Jacobs
Nagamootoo, for the simple fact that there is no-one better
Dillon
Lawson (quite a decent one-day bowler by the looks of things)
From some information King and McLean are nothing like the bowlers they were 2 years ago, so I haven't included them. Who the other bowler is I'm not sure.
New Zealand:
Horne
Astle
McMillan
Fleming
Vincent \ Styris
Cairns
Harris
R. Hart
Walker
Bond
Again, can't think of a final bowler.

 

[Richard]

1/ Why would the bowler need, or in any case bother, to prove it. If hes bowled well hes bowled well.
2/ You haven't read what me or marc have written, have you?

You must realise Richard, that if Brett Lee is sending down 150km bouncers at your head, then chances are, you will be on the back foot. At the same goes for all pace bowlers, or in fact any bowler who bowls a number of short ones.

So why do batsmen have the nerve to keep failing to gift Lee wickets because they're surprised at a full ball after 150 kph Bouncers at their heads? Decent batsmen aren't worried by what's gone before, they forget it and concentrate on the next ball.
The bowler needs to prove that bad bowling is good because it has got a wicket. Or rather, the bowler's supporters do.

3/ yes you have to be very 'lucky' to score a thousand runs in a calender year. what a fluke!

Yep, he was, very, very lucky indeed:
Dropped on the return by Kaneria, ended-up with nearly 90 more than he should have had.
Dropped again sometime in the next Test, got another century? Can't remember the exact details.
Got a 197, dropped off absolute sitters twice (Vaughan and Hoggard) and caught on the fine-leg boundary and given not-out.
Got a 103, fair does, good innings.
Got a 46, still managed to be dropped twice.
Got a century at The MCG, missed 1st ball when a fielder was standing exactly where he wasn't told to stand.
That's quite a bit of luck!

 

[Mr. P]

Brett Lee (Tests)

Against Zim:

Bowl Average: 34 (Two Tests)

Against Bangla:

Bowl Average: 31 (Two Tests)*

Against WI:

Bowl Average 29 (Four Tests)*

Against Eng:

Bowl Average 35 (Three Tests)**



* Best Aussi Strike Rate During Series
** Just returned from injury

---------------------------------------------------

Whilst these figures are, i agree, not brilliant, he did well in the West Indes and he was far from his best when playing England. He did take wickets in most of these matches however, just his economy took his average the wrong way.

 

[marc71178]

Personally I think it says far more about Pakistan's excuse for an attack. Shoaib Akhtar apart, it's a load of rubbish.

*cough* Sami *cough*

He is quick, OK, not as quick as Shoaib, but he is very accurate, and picking up a LOT of wickets cheaply.

 

[deeps]

I certainly never said Slater was a half-decent one-day-international batsman, he should never have played half the ODIs he did. I said he's a half-decent one-day batsman at best.
Stephen Waugh has an ODI average of less than 35. You can't judge batsmen on "number of match-winnings innings", first because that's an unreliable term, but even if you translated it into better terms, Lara would be better than Tendulkar which is, to be frank, ludicrous.
Stephen Waugh is, without doubt, an all-time great in Tests. In ODIs his record is disappointing compared to his domestic one-day record. He helped win WC87, yes, but he's hardly been an inspirational bowler in the last decade. He played one innings in WC99 (which, of course, wouldn't have happened but for Herschelle Gibbs' premature celebration) which turned-out crucial. However, it was his second ODI century of his career. In 13 years.
Haddin may be living in the shadow of Gilchrist but it's a fool who proclaims him a better player than Geirant Jones IMO. As for comparing him to Alec Stewart...
Michael Clarke may be a superstar in the one-day game, but we will simply wait and see. There is no gurantee of it. Nor is there any gurantee of his superstardom in the Test game. He has only looked that good in the First-Class game since last season. It would be rather amusing to see you talk him up as some sort of all-time great in the making - beyond a question - and him turn-out averaging about 35 in Test-cricket.
I tell you, I may have looked ignorant, but not quite as ignorant as you. What's more, you have been proven a homophobic fool and hence you have little respect from any quarters.

I never said that haddin is as good as or better than stewart or jones...i said that he's a good batsman,or something along those lines.

If lara has played more match winning innings than lara,then lara be the better batsman... There's no point in making centuries when your team doesn't need it... You need centuries when your team needs em...Sure,tendulkar may play perfect strokes,and have a beatiful technique and billions of runs to his name.... But IMO, the runs that came under pressure are the ones that count the most

Yeah,Waugh has an ODI avg of less than 35...But you see, waugh comes in at number 5,and sometimes at 6 or so...Very often during the last 10 overs or so... Or else he comes in very early,and has to do a rescue mission... Either way,he doesn't have time to play a proper innings... You say that the 120* was because of gibbs' premature celebration... Well,in the case, Abdul Razzaq dropped Tendulkar in the World cup... I'm sure Lara was dropped somewhere in his 375* and MOST big innings would have had a chance,or a turned down LBW appeal or watever... The fact of the matter is that the catch was dropped,and waugh was able to capitalise...

And waugh's bowling was excellent during the 80's and early 90's... The problem being now that he gets alot of injuries when he bowls...He still bowls well,during the rare occasions he does roll the arm over now.

 

[marc71178]

And those first 6 matches mean nothing?

I've never said that, but the fact is, he's scoring a lot of runs at Test level, and looking a much better player in ODI's

Had he played the number of games a lot of players who've been Internationals as long as he has have, then those 6 games would not be skewing his average so much.

 

[marc71178]

Because even if it's "planned", 1 the bowler can't prove it and 2 it's still a bad ball or not a good one.

So a bowler who intentionally aims to pitch one a foot outside off to tempt the batsman and getting it spot on where he wanted is now bowling badly? I wish I could bowl that badly that I can putit exactly where I am aiming.

It is the ball that takes the wicket that matters, not the last 50.

Utter. Rubbish.

 

[marc71178]

Don't rate Sami as he usually gets hammered around the park and whenever I've seen him he's got wickets through bad batting rather than good bowling.

65 wickets @ 22.98 and an Eco of 4.63.

I'd hate to be hammered around so much as he is!

Have you ever seen him play?

 

[marc71178]

England - hard to say now but 3 years ago it would have been this:
Ramprakash
Knight
Hick
Fairbrother
Alleyne
Stewart
Thorpe
Hussain
Ealham
Caddick
Gough

Oh dear, and you really expect anyone to take you seriously if you name that sort of eleven for England at any time?

 

[marc71178]

England - hard to say now

Right so you say:

They would, I hope, comfortably beat the current New Zealand, Pakistan, England and West Indies sides. But not my best XIs for them.

then when challenged to pick your current England XI you say that:

England - hard to say now

Hope you didn't cause yourself too much pain when you shot yourself in the foot then!