Top-ranked team vs Rest of the World XI

[marc71178]

I think Fleming is batting well enough with the bat anyway.
In recent times he's hit 274* & 193 & he's also scored a couple of good ODI centuries.

I feel he needs to carry on the run a bit longer to justify his selection without captaincy, especially when you look at his scores in the interim period aside from those 2 knocks - 165 in 9 innings.

 

[Tim]

Yes thats the problem with Fleming, he goes about 5 or 6 innings scoring very little & then gets a good score.

 

[Richard]

It's a real shame - if he got more 20s instead of all the single-figure scores he'd be averaging in the mid-40s - IMO that would be a far better reflection of his ability.

 

[Richard]

Likewise there are plenty of batsmen who could do a "good" job.

The difference is that Fleming is a superb captain, far better than his peers, so you can easily sacrifice 10 runs per innings in batting when you get someone that much better.

And you know as well as anyone that the difference between 39 and 57 is far more than just 18 runs per innings.

 

[marc71178]

It's a real shame - if he got more 20s instead of all the single-figure scores he'd be averaging in the mid-40s - IMO that would be a far better reflection of his ability.

That's a new one, artificially increasing the average of a player that you like.

If he gets so many small scores, how can a higher average be a better reflection of his ability?

 

[marc71178]

And you know as well as anyone that the difference between 39 and 57 is far more than just 18 runs per innings.

I have absolutely no clue as to what this post is about. Can you explain please?

 

[Neil Pickup]

Partnerships.

 

[raju]

That's a new one, artificially increasing the average of a player that you like.

Standard practice amongst some...as is disregarding some innings that were not very good. Many use these methods to illustrate that they are wrong.
Why use real facts when you can make them up yourself? It's a lot cheaper, saves time and lets anyone have any average you want.
By using this myself Craig White got a triple century and 10 wickets in the same test match, Matthew Maynard played a 100 times for England (with a 40+ average I may add) and Mark Ramprakash got a couple of test centuries.

 

[Craig]

Ah but Ramps did get a couple of Test tons.

 

[Richard]

That's a new one, artificially increasing the average of a player that you like.

If he gets so many small scores, how can a higher average be a better reflection of his ability?

I did mention that it would be a better reflection of his ability in my opinion.
When did I suggest increasing the average? Of all the ludicrousies you've attempted to put into my mouth, that one takes the gong so far.

 

[Richard]

Standard practice amongst some...as is disregarding some innings that were not very good. Many use these methods to illustrate that they are wrong.
Why use real facts when you can make them up yourself? It's a lot cheaper, saves time and lets anyone have any average you want.
By using this myself Craig White got a triple century and 10 wickets in the same test match, Matthew Maynard played a 100 times for England (with a 40+ average I may add) and Mark Ramprakash got a couple of test centuries.

And of all the ludicrousies you've attempted to put into my mouth to denegrate the validity of my genuine points, this too takes the gong.