|
City Sam
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 5.5K,
Visits: 0
|
+xWhy did we drop Khawaja for only getting starts when none of the three openers have even done that? Why did we drop Burns? Literally got 180 the last match he played
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Keyboard Warrior
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 885,
Visits: 0
|
+x+xWhy did we drop Khawaja for only getting starts when none of the three openers have even done that? Why did we drop Burns? Literally got 180 the last match he played I don’t think he performed for Australia A in Pommyland.
|
|
|
|
|
Keyboard Warrior
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 885,
Visits: 0
|
Hope I don’t speak too soon, but the Aussie right handers look more solid.
|
|
|
|
|
Paddles
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 1.5K,
Visits: 0
|
Stuart Broad has to be the two most overrated cricketer I know of.
|
|
|
|
|
Decentric
|
|
Group: Awaiting Activation
Posts: 22K,
Visits: 0
|
+xStuart Broad has to be the two most overrated cricketer I know of. He has bowled pretty well in this Ashes series. He also has a huge number of Test wickets.
|
|
|
|
|
Decentric
|
|
Group: Awaiting Activation
Posts: 22K,
Visits: 0
|
+xHope I don’t speak too soon, but the Aussie right handers look more solid. Bit of luck there, but we have recovered to be 2 - 60 ish at lunch. Curran worried Smith, and Labu was lucky with one that went at catchable height though the slips cordon.
|
|
|
|
|
Decentric
|
|
Group: Awaiting Activation
Posts: 22K,
Visits: 0
|
I've just read that Mitch Marsh took 5-40 odd in the English first dig!
He was one of the best performed Shiled bowlers at Bellerive in the last two seasons.
Missed Buttler's innings, but he played some good shots.
|
|
|
|
|
Paddles
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 1.5K,
Visits: 0
|
|
|
|
|
|
Keyboard Warrior
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 885,
Visits: 0
|
+xOur top opening partnership is still only 13 runs in the 5th test. Abominable!
|
|
|
|
|
Decentric
|
|
Group: Awaiting Activation
Posts: 22K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+xOur top opening partnership is still only 13 runs in the 5th test. Abominable! Have we ever had worse performed openers over a Test series?
|
|
|
|
|
Decentric
|
|
Group: Awaiting Activation
Posts: 22K,
Visits: 0
|
+xengland with consecutive fours one from butler then curran.. thats more like it. kind of been batting a bit too conservative with singles Welcome to the forum, Deadline.
|
|
|
|
|
Decentric
|
|
Group: Awaiting Activation
Posts: 22K,
Visits: 0
|
463 wickets from 132 Tests, at 28 average and 57 strike rate is good. Not quite 4 wickets per Test, but good enough. In these Ashes he is one of the top wicket takers and ATM has 4 wickets per Test, 20 wickets, with nearly two entire innings to come. He has destroyed most of our left handers. Broad has been a tough adversary for Australia over a sustained period. Thanks for posting this list, Paddles. It is illuminating.
|
|
|
|
|
Paddles
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 1.5K,
Visits: 0
|
+x463 wickets from 132 Tests, at 28 average and 57 strike rate is good. Not quite 4 wickets per Test, but good enough. In these Ashes he is one of the top wicket takes and ATM has 4 wickets per Test, 20 wickets, with nearly two entire innings to come. He has destroyed most of our left handers. Broad has been a tough adversary for Australia. Broad has played 1 test less than Murali, and half about half the wickets. If you play 133 tests, you'll get some wickets. The total tally is a meaningless stat for for the Big 3. More so England, who play the most tests... Cook looked he would be the leading run scorer in the world before he fell away. He aint making an ATG 5th team. And we all know it. Pollock, Hobbes, Lara, Hutton, Gavaskar... we can keep going to Langer... 28 is good in Aus, its not that impressive in England on these pitches the world has seen in the last 6 years which are the most testing since the 1950's... at least in a batting run production viewpoint.... The funny thing is Herath, where is his love?
|
|
|
|
|
Decentric
|
|
Group: Awaiting Activation
Posts: 22K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x463 wickets from 132 Tests, at 28 average and 57 strike rate is good. Not quite 4 wickets per Test, but good enough. In these Ashes he is one of the top wicket takes and ATM has 4 wickets per Test, 20 wickets, with nearly two entire innings to come. He has destroyed most of our left handers. Broad has been a tough adversary for Australia. Broad has played 1 test less than Murali, and half about half the wickets. If you play 133 tests, you'll get some wickets. The total tally is a meaningless stat for for the Big 3. More so England, who play the most tests... Cook looked he would be the leading run scorer in the world before he fell away. He aint making an ATG 5th team. And we all know it. Pollock, Hobbes, Lara, Hutton, Gavaskar... we can keep going to Langer... 28 is good in Aus, its not that impressive in England on these pitches the world has seen in the last 6 years which are the most testing since the 1950's... at least in a batting run production viewpoint.... Given Broad is 7th on the all time wicket taking list, he is a great for mine. He has been effective at Test level for 12 years. To actually be selected in 132 Tests over 12 years is very impressive. It is preferable to taking 100 wickets in 20 tests and then fading out.
|
|
|
|
|
Paddles
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 1.5K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x463 wickets from 132 Tests, at 28 average and 57 strike rate is good. Not quite 4 wickets per Test, but good enough. In these Ashes he is one of the top wicket takes and ATM has 4 wickets per Test, 20 wickets, with nearly two entire innings to come. He has destroyed most of our left handers. Broad has been a tough adversary for Australia. Broad has played 1 test less than Murali, and half about half the wickets. If you play 133 tests, you'll get some wickets. The total tally is a meaningless stat for for the Big 3. More so England, who play the most tests... Cook looked he would be the leading run scorer in the world before he fell away. He aint making an ATG 5th team. And we all know it. Pollock, Hobbes, Lara, Hutton, Gavaskar... we can keep going to Langer... 28 is good in Aus, its not that impressive in England on these pitches the world has seen in the last 6 years which are the most testing since the 1950's... at least in a batting run production viewpoint.... Given Broad is 7th on the all time wicket taking list, he is a great for mine. He has been effective at Test level for 12 years. LoL! I'd drop him for Anderson if fit and TRJ both... I think he's totally overrated, and lucky to have played far too many tests than he deserved on form or merit... He averages 33.73 away from home. And you think he's great. Well he has played 77 tests at home. At 26.75. That's still not ATG material for those that played home and away in my book. But you can rate the total tally count if you like. They're not a stat, they're data :) Bog ordinary cricketer in my book. Flattered by playing for England who simply play so many tests. Broad is a major reason England cannot beat Pakistan nor NZ home or away in so many series lately. Let alone failing in Australia.... I have dual citizenship between UK and NZ both. But this England team is rubbish. And has been mostly rubbish since they lost in Australia in 2013/14 and the retirements and axings happened.
|
|
|
|
|
Decentric
|
|
Group: Awaiting Activation
Posts: 22K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x463 wickets from 132 Tests, at 28 average and 57 strike rate is good. Not quite 4 wickets per Test, but good enough. In these Ashes he is one of the top wicket takes and ATM has 4 wickets per Test, 20 wickets, with nearly two entire innings to come. He has destroyed most of our left handers. Broad has been a tough adversary for Australia. Broad has played 1 test less than Murali, and half about half the wickets. If you play 133 tests, you'll get some wickets. The total tally is a meaningless stat for for the Big 3. More so England, who play the most tests... Cook looked he would be the leading run scorer in the world before he fell away. He aint making an ATG 5th team. And we all know it. Pollock, Hobbes, Lara, Hutton, Gavaskar... we can keep going to Langer... 28 is good in Aus, its not that impressive in England on these pitches the world has seen in the last 6 years which are the most testing since the 1950's... at least in a batting run production viewpoint.... Given Broad is 7th on the all time wicket taking list, he is a great for mine. He has been effective at Test level for 12 years. LoL! I'd drop him for Anderson if fit and TRJ both... I think he's totally overrated, and lucky to have played far too many tests than he deserved on form or merit... He averages 33.73 away from home. And you think he's great. Well he has played 77 tests at home. At 26.75. That's still not ATG material for those that played home and away in my book. But you can rate the total tally count if you like. They're not a stat, they're data :) I'd surmise all those bowlers with less Test wickets would have like to have changed places with him, Paddles. Many players only play a few Tests, and some none at all! Longevity in Test cricket is an envied quality. In the entire history of NZ cricket, who has taken anywhere near as many Test wickets as Broad?
|
|
|
|
|
Paddles
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 1.5K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x463 wickets from 132 Tests, at 28 average and 57 strike rate is good. Not quite 4 wickets per Test, but good enough. In these Ashes he is one of the top wicket takes and ATM has 4 wickets per Test, 20 wickets, with nearly two entire innings to come. He has destroyed most of our left handers. Broad has been a tough adversary for Australia. Broad has played 1 test less than Murali, and half about half the wickets. If you play 133 tests, you'll get some wickets. The total tally is a meaningless stat for for the Big 3. More so England, who play the most tests... Cook looked he would be the leading run scorer in the world before he fell away. He aint making an ATG 5th team. And we all know it. Pollock, Hobbes, Lara, Hutton, Gavaskar... we can keep going to Langer... 28 is good in Aus, its not that impressive in England on these pitches the world has seen in the last 6 years which are the most testing since the 1950's... at least in a batting run production viewpoint.... Given Broad is 7th on the all time wicket taking list, he is a great for mine. He has been effective at Test level for 12 years. LoL! I'd drop him for Anderson if fit and TRJ both... I think he's totally overrated, and lucky to have played far too many tests than he deserved on form or merit... He averages 33.73 away from home. And you think he's great. Well he has played 77 tests at home. At 26.75. That's still not ATG material for those that played home and away in my book. But you can rate the total tally count if you like. They're not a stat, they're data :) I'd surmise all those bowlers with less Test wickets would have like to have changed places with him, Paddles. Many players only play a few Tests, and some none at all! In the entire history of NZ cricket, who has taken anywhere near as many Test wickets as Broad? Noone. But NZ is ranked 2nd. And England is ranked 4th. So if Broad is much better than NZ's bowlers, why they sucking? But if you really think Broad is a better bowler than Boult, Cowie, Bond - let alone Hadlee - this conversation won't go far. Broad is ordinary as heck. He has just played more tests. I am not a stats school teacher, so if you don't understand stats, I am not able to help you. I sense some of opinions are personally upsetting you. I have dual citizenship with UK and NZ. This is a rubbish England team. Rubbish. Has been since 2013/14. But Archer, he will be a superstar if he stays fit.
|
|
|
|
|
City Sam
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 5.5K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x463 wickets from 132 Tests, at 28 average and 57 strike rate is good. Not quite 4 wickets per Test, but good enough. In these Ashes he is one of the top wicket takes and ATM has 4 wickets per Test, 20 wickets, with nearly two entire innings to come. He has destroyed most of our left handers. Broad has been a tough adversary for Australia. Broad has played 1 test less than Murali, and half about half the wickets. If you play 133 tests, you'll get some wickets. The total tally is a meaningless stat for for the Big 3. More so England, who play the most tests... Cook looked he would be the leading run scorer in the world before he fell away. He aint making an ATG 5th team. And we all know it. Pollock, Hobbes, Lara, Hutton, Gavaskar... we can keep going to Langer... 28 is good in Aus, its not that impressive in England on these pitches the world has seen in the last 6 years which are the most testing since the 1950's... at least in a batting run production viewpoint.... Given Broad is 7th on the all time wicket taking list, he is a great for mine. He has been effective at Test level for 12 years. LoL! I'd drop him for Anderson if fit and TRJ both... I think he's totally overrated, and lucky to have played far too many tests than he deserved on form or merit... He averages 33.73 away from home. And you think he's great. Well he has played 77 tests at home. At 26.75. That's still not ATG material for those that played home and away in my book. But you can rate the total tally count if you like. They're not a stat, they're data :) I'd surmise all those bowlers with less Test wickets would have like to have changed places with him, Paddles. Many players only play a few Tests, and some none at all! Longevity in Test cricket is an envied quality. In the entire history of NZ cricket, who has taken anywhere near as many Test wickets as Broad? NZ don't play anywhere near as many tests though.
|
|
|
|
|
Paddles
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 1.5K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+x463 wickets from 132 Tests, at 28 average and 57 strike rate is good. Not quite 4 wickets per Test, but good enough. In these Ashes he is one of the top wicket takes and ATM has 4 wickets per Test, 20 wickets, with nearly two entire innings to come. He has destroyed most of our left handers. Broad has been a tough adversary for Australia. Broad has played 1 test less than Murali, and half about half the wickets. If you play 133 tests, you'll get some wickets. The total tally is a meaningless stat for for the Big 3. More so England, who play the most tests... Cook looked he would be the leading run scorer in the world before he fell away. He aint making an ATG 5th team. And we all know it. Pollock, Hobbes, Lara, Hutton, Gavaskar... we can keep going to Langer... 28 is good in Aus, its not that impressive in England on these pitches the world has seen in the last 6 years which are the most testing since the 1950's... at least in a batting run production viewpoint.... Given Broad is 7th on the all time wicket taking list, he is a great for mine. He has been effective at Test level for 12 years. LoL! I'd drop him for Anderson if fit and TRJ both... I think he's totally overrated, and lucky to have played far too many tests than he deserved on form or merit... He averages 33.73 away from home. And you think he's great. Well he has played 77 tests at home. At 26.75. That's still not ATG material for those that played home and away in my book. But you can rate the total tally count if you like. They're not a stat, they're data :) I'd surmise all those bowlers with less Test wickets would have like to have changed places with him, Paddles. Many players only play a few Tests, and some none at all! Longevity in Test cricket is an envied quality. In the entire history of NZ cricket, who has taken anywhere near as many Test wickets as Broad? NZ don't play anywhere near as many tests though. Exactly. Never will. What's NZ got to do with it, though? Broad is ordinary as heck. He just plays a lot of games. As you rightly point out.
|
|
|
|
|
Decentric
|
|
Group: Awaiting Activation
Posts: 22K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+x463 wickets from 132 Tests, at 28 average and 57 strike rate is good. Not quite 4 wickets per Test, but good enough. In these Ashes he is one of the top wicket takes and ATM has 4 wickets per Test, 20 wickets, with nearly two entire innings to come. He has destroyed most of our left handers. Broad has been a tough adversary for Australia. Broad has played 1 test less than Murali, and half about half the wickets. If you play 133 tests, you'll get some wickets. The total tally is a meaningless stat for for the Big 3. More so England, who play the most tests... Cook looked he would be the leading run scorer in the world before he fell away. He aint making an ATG 5th team. And we all know it. Pollock, Hobbes, Lara, Hutton, Gavaskar... we can keep going to Langer... 28 is good in Aus, its not that impressive in England on these pitches the world has seen in the last 6 years which are the most testing since the 1950's... at least in a batting run production viewpoint.... Given Broad is 7th on the all time wicket taking list, he is a great for mine. He has been effective at Test level for 12 years. LoL! I'd drop him for Anderson if fit and TRJ both... I think he's totally overrated, and lucky to have played far too many tests than he deserved on form or merit... He averages 33.73 away from home. And you think he's great. Well he has played 77 tests at home. At 26.75. That's still not ATG material for those that played home and away in my book. But you can rate the total tally count if you like. They're not a stat, they're data :) I'd surmise all those bowlers with less Test wickets would have like to have changed places with him, Paddles. Many players only play a few Tests, and some none at all! In the entire history of NZ cricket, who has taken anywhere near as many Test wickets as Broad? Noone. But NZ is ranked 2nd. And England is ranked 4th. So if Broad is much better than NZ's bowlers, why they sucking? But if you really think Broad is a better bowler than Boult, Cowie, Bond - let alone Hadlee - this conversation won't go far. Broad is ordinary as heck. He has just played more tests. I am not a stats school teacher, so if you don't understand stats, I am not able to help you. We will have to agree to disagree, but I'm astonished you think anyone ranked as highly in Test history can be ordinary. Durability and efficacy are admirable qualities.
|
|
|
|
|
City Sam
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 5.5K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+x+x463 wickets from 132 Tests, at 28 average and 57 strike rate is good. Not quite 4 wickets per Test, but good enough. In these Ashes he is one of the top wicket takes and ATM has 4 wickets per Test, 20 wickets, with nearly two entire innings to come. He has destroyed most of our left handers. Broad has been a tough adversary for Australia. Broad has played 1 test less than Murali, and half about half the wickets. If you play 133 tests, you'll get some wickets. The total tally is a meaningless stat for for the Big 3. More so England, who play the most tests... Cook looked he would be the leading run scorer in the world before he fell away. He aint making an ATG 5th team. And we all know it. Pollock, Hobbes, Lara, Hutton, Gavaskar... we can keep going to Langer... 28 is good in Aus, its not that impressive in England on these pitches the world has seen in the last 6 years which are the most testing since the 1950's... at least in a batting run production viewpoint.... Given Broad is 7th on the all time wicket taking list, he is a great for mine. He has been effective at Test level for 12 years. LoL! I'd drop him for Anderson if fit and TRJ both... I think he's totally overrated, and lucky to have played far too many tests than he deserved on form or merit... He averages 33.73 away from home. And you think he's great. Well he has played 77 tests at home. At 26.75. That's still not ATG material for those that played home and away in my book. But you can rate the total tally count if you like. They're not a stat, they're data :) I'd surmise all those bowlers with less Test wickets would have like to have changed places with him, Paddles. Many players only play a few Tests, and some none at all! Longevity in Test cricket is an envied quality. In the entire history of NZ cricket, who has taken anywhere near as many Test wickets as Broad? NZ don't play anywhere near as many tests though. Exactly. Never will. What's NZ got to do with it, though? Broad is ordinary as heck. He just plays a lot of games. As you rightly point out. I'm not as against Broad as you are though, i think he has had some very poor periods of form in his career but as well a lot of times where he has been very good.
|
|
|
|
|
Paddles
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 1.5K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+x+x463 wickets from 132 Tests, at 28 average and 57 strike rate is good. Not quite 4 wickets per Test, but good enough. In these Ashes he is one of the top wicket takes and ATM has 4 wickets per Test, 20 wickets, with nearly two entire innings to come. He has destroyed most of our left handers. Broad has been a tough adversary for Australia. Broad has played 1 test less than Murali, and half about half the wickets. If you play 133 tests, you'll get some wickets. The total tally is a meaningless stat for for the Big 3. More so England, who play the most tests... Cook looked he would be the leading run scorer in the world before he fell away. He aint making an ATG 5th team. And we all know it. Pollock, Hobbes, Lara, Hutton, Gavaskar... we can keep going to Langer... 28 is good in Aus, its not that impressive in England on these pitches the world has seen in the last 6 years which are the most testing since the 1950's... at least in a batting run production viewpoint.... Given Broad is 7th on the all time wicket taking list, he is a great for mine. He has been effective at Test level for 12 years. LoL! I'd drop him for Anderson if fit and TRJ both... I think he's totally overrated, and lucky to have played far too many tests than he deserved on form or merit... He averages 33.73 away from home. And you think he's great. Well he has played 77 tests at home. At 26.75. That's still not ATG material for those that played home and away in my book. But you can rate the total tally count if you like. They're not a stat, they're data :) I'd surmise all those bowlers with less Test wickets would have like to have changed places with him, Paddles. Many players only play a few Tests, and some none at all! In the entire history of NZ cricket, who has taken anywhere near as many Test wickets as Broad? Noone. But NZ is ranked 2nd. And England is ranked 4th. So if Broad is much better than NZ's bowlers, why they sucking? But if you really think Broad is a better bowler than Boult, Cowie, Bond - let alone Hadlee - this conversation won't go far. Broad is ordinary as heck. He has just played more tests. I am not a stats school teacher, so if you don't understand stats, I am not able to help you. We will have to agree to disagree, but I'm astonished you think anyone ranked as highly in Test history can be ordinary. Durability and efficacy are admirable qualities. He's not durable. He got dumped from limited overs for a good reason. Against his will. And he hardly done the years yet of the likes of Hadlee nor Murali...let alone Anderson... Efficacy? Is England ranked 4th (soon 5th if Aus overtake) some version of efficacy I don't understand? You sure you got the right word here, seriously.... I find Broad overrated because people like yourself, look at his wicket tally and tell me he is great. I look at his stats, and his bowling and say - no - he may have more wicket that Waqar, Wasim, Khan, Lillee, Marshall, Holding, Garner, Donald, Steyn and Hadllee (and many more - Ambrose, Bishop, Trueman... et al) - but he is not even close them!
|
|
|
|
|
Keyboard Warrior
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 885,
Visits: 0
|
2-59 is looking much better than 2-14.
Labu has scored more quickly than Smith in this innings.
|
|
|
|
|
Decentric
|
|
Group: Awaiting Activation
Posts: 22K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x463 wickets from 132 Tests, at 28 average and 57 strike rate is good. Not quite 4 wickets per Test, but good enough. In these Ashes he is one of the top wicket takes and ATM has 4 wickets per Test, 20 wickets, with nearly two entire innings to come. He has destroyed most of our left handers. Broad has been a tough adversary for Australia. Broad has played 1 test less than Murali, and half about half the wickets. If you play 133 tests, you'll get some wickets. The total tally is a meaningless stat for for the Big 3. More so England, who play the most tests... Cook looked he would be the leading run scorer in the world before he fell away. He aint making an ATG 5th team. And we all know it. Pollock, Hobbes, Lara, Hutton, Gavaskar... we can keep going to Langer... 28 is good in Aus, its not that impressive in England on these pitches the world has seen in the last 6 years which are the most testing since the 1950's... at least in a batting run production viewpoint.... Given Broad is 7th on the all time wicket taking list, he is a great for mine. He has been effective at Test level for 12 years. LoL! I'd drop him for Anderson if fit and TRJ both... I think he's totally overrated, and lucky to have played far too many tests than he deserved on form or merit... He averages 33.73 away from home. And you think he's great. Well he has played 77 tests at home. At 26.75. That's still not ATG material for those that played home and away in my book. But you can rate the total tally count if you like. They're not a stat, they're data :) I'd surmise all those bowlers with less Test wickets would have like to have changed places with him, Paddles. Many players only play a few Tests, and some none at all! In the entire history of NZ cricket, who has taken anywhere near as many Test wickets as Broad? Noone. But NZ is ranked 2nd. And England is ranked 4th. So if Broad is much better than NZ's bowlers, why they sucking? But if you really think Broad is a better bowler than Boult, Cowie, Bond - let alone Hadlee - this conversation won't go far. Broad is ordinary as heck. He has just played more tests. I am not a stats school teacher, so if you don't understand stats, I am not able to help you. We will have to agree to disagree, but I'm astonished you think anyone ranked as highly in Test history can be ordinary. Durability and efficacy are admirable qualities. He's not durable. He got dumped from limited overs for a good reason. Against his will. Efficacy? Is England ranked 4th (soon 5th if Aus overtake) some version of efficacy I don't understand? You sure you got the right word here, seriously.... You can't seriously debase the 7th top wicket taker in Test cricket history ( the ultimate challenge in cricket), for not being selected in a far less taxing form of cricket - limited overs? I rest my case!
|
|
|
|
|
Paddles
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 1.5K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x463 wickets from 132 Tests, at 28 average and 57 strike rate is good. Not quite 4 wickets per Test, but good enough. In these Ashes he is one of the top wicket takes and ATM has 4 wickets per Test, 20 wickets, with nearly two entire innings to come. He has destroyed most of our left handers. Broad has been a tough adversary for Australia. Broad has played 1 test less than Murali, and half about half the wickets. If you play 133 tests, you'll get some wickets. The total tally is a meaningless stat for for the Big 3. More so England, who play the most tests... Cook looked he would be the leading run scorer in the world before he fell away. He aint making an ATG 5th team. And we all know it. Pollock, Hobbes, Lara, Hutton, Gavaskar... we can keep going to Langer... 28 is good in Aus, its not that impressive in England on these pitches the world has seen in the last 6 years which are the most testing since the 1950's... at least in a batting run production viewpoint.... Given Broad is 7th on the all time wicket taking list, he is a great for mine. He has been effective at Test level for 12 years. LoL! I'd drop him for Anderson if fit and TRJ both... I think he's totally overrated, and lucky to have played far too many tests than he deserved on form or merit... He averages 33.73 away from home. And you think he's great. Well he has played 77 tests at home. At 26.75. That's still not ATG material for those that played home and away in my book. But you can rate the total tally count if you like. They're not a stat, they're data :) I'd surmise all those bowlers with less Test wickets would have like to have changed places with him, Paddles. Many players only play a few Tests, and some none at all! In the entire history of NZ cricket, who has taken anywhere near as many Test wickets as Broad? Noone. But NZ is ranked 2nd. And England is ranked 4th. So if Broad is much better than NZ's bowlers, why they sucking? But if you really think Broad is a better bowler than Boult, Cowie, Bond - let alone Hadlee - this conversation won't go far. Broad is ordinary as heck. He has just played more tests. I am not a stats school teacher, so if you don't understand stats, I am not able to help you. We will have to agree to disagree, but I'm astonished you think anyone ranked as highly in Test history can be ordinary. Durability and efficacy are admirable qualities. He's not durable. He got dumped from limited overs for a good reason. Against his will. Efficacy? Is England ranked 4th (soon 5th if Aus overtake) some version of efficacy I don't understand? You sure you got the right word here, seriously.... You can't seriously debase the 7th top wicket taker in Test cricket history ( the ultimate challenge in cricket), for not being selected in a far less taxing form of cricket - limited overs? I rest my case! You never had a case. You're not a lawyer. I am much more the lawyer than you (seriously am) - and this still isn't a case. And you brought up durability. I said he isn't. You do know what durability means? durable/ˈdjʊərəb(ə)l/  Learn to pronounceadjective- able to withstand wear, pressure, or damage; hard-wearing."porcelain enamel is strong and durable"
| synonyms: | long-lasting, hard-wearing, heavy-duty, tough, resistant, strong, sturdy, stout, sound, substantial, imperishable, indestructible, made to last, well made, strongly made More |
He wasn't durable, nor was Anderson, so they got dropped from pyajama cricket to extend their test careers. He is the 7th highest wicket taker cos he has played 132 tests. Not because he is a great. England play more tests each year than anyone else. Everyone else. Even India. Seeing you want to be obstinate, Root has more test runs than Smith, Kohli and Williamson. Is Root the best batsman of the four?
Or did he just play more tests?Cos he has the worst average.... But has played the most tests...
|
|
|
|
Brew
|
|
Group: Banned Members
Posts: 271,
Visits: 0
|
Labuschagne has been such a find this series.
And to think he was overlooked, until Smith was injured.
|
|
|
|
|
Decentric
|
|
Group: Awaiting Activation
Posts: 22K,
Visits: 0
|
+xLabuschagne has been such a find this series. And to think he was overlooked, until Smith was injured. Labu has been very consistent. Labu's 42 NO from a total of 73 is impressive - yet again. Australia has a lot to thank Archer for - felling Smith!
|
|
|
|
|
Decentric
|
|
Group: Awaiting Activation
Posts: 22K,
Visits: 0
|
So far in this innings, Curran has worried our batters too with his left arm swing.
I wonder what the rationale was for his non-selection?
|
|
|
|
Brew
|
|
Group: Banned Members
Posts: 271,
Visits: 0
|
Did you see that cover drive from Smith?
What a shot!
It was hit so hard for 4.
|
|
|
|
|
Paddles
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 1.5K,
Visits: 0
|
+xSo far in this innings, Curran has worried our batters too with his left arm swing. I wonder what the rationale was for his non-selection? Curran was competing with Woakes for the second seam allrounder spot. Curran has often been in a battle with Woakes after Stokes for the 4th seamer role. Curran's ultimate selection this test is that Stokes won't be bowling due to injury - he may bowl later but chances are he won't as well. As I understand it - technically, Stokes as a batsman replaces Roy, and Curran or Woakes comes in for the injured non bowling Stokes (who is now batsman only), and the other replaces Overton to extend the batting. England did play 6 bowlers in SL last year, but given most teams debate between 4 and 5, 6 is excessive, especially for a team that sucks at batting like England does... Assuming Stokes doesn't bowl, England have picked a 5 bowling sqaud. That still bats to 8. Which they always like. They have even batted to 9 before with Ali, Woakes and Curran all.
|
|
|
|