Big Cricket Thread

Remove this Banner Ad

Status
Not open for further replies.

Log in to remove this ad.

Surely you just cop that as part of the game, in the unlikely event a quick gets concussed and your replacement is a spinner (or vice versa).

It's more not wanting to "game" the system.

I.e pitch is turning sideways Day 4/5. Oh no, Boland has delayed concussion symptoms better sub him out and the only bowler is a spinner.
 
It's more not wanting to "game" the system.

I.e pitch is turning sideways Day 4/5. Oh no, Boland has delayed concussion symptoms better sub him out and the only bowler is a spinner.
It's the inherent problem with any substitution rule that has an injury stipulation. Is cricketers staying on the field with a concussion enough of a problem to warrant this rule, and opening up the gaming angle?
 
Agar has become a Mitch Marsh. Except I think Bison performed at shield level.

Carey unlike a lot of the keepers before him is a great batsmen so I think it’s worth moving him to 6 and bat him a but higher up the order like some other keepers around the world are starting to do
 
Agar has become a Mitch Marsh. Except I think Bison performed at shield level.

Carey unlike a lot of the keepers before him is a great batsmen so I think it’s worth moving him to 6 and bat him a but higher up the order like some other keepers around the world are starting to do

The influence Adam Gilchrist had on the way a wicketkeepers role is viewed in world cricket is nuts

Back when I was a boy, Rod Marsh and Allan Knott (England) were the best keepers and were both handy batsmen. Without looking it up I’d guess they averaged mid 20’s for their careers and would come in at No. 7. At that time it wasn’t unusual for a keeper to come in at 8,9 or even 10 for some sides. Batting ability was secondary to keeping, especially for sub-continent sides

Jeffrey Dujon from the Windies was the first keeper I remember whose batting was a genuine strength and I think he averaged in the 30’s. Healy became similar for Australia

Then Gilchrist came and now if you’re not capable of being a No.6 batsman you’re not getting picked as a keeper for most countries
 
The influence Adam Gilchrist had on the way a wicketkeepers role is viewed in world cricket is nuts

Back when I was a boy, Rod Marsh and Allan Knott (England) were the best keepers and were both handy batsmen. Without looking it up I’d guess they averaged mid 20’s for their careers and would come in at No. 7. At that time it wasn’t unusual for a keeper to come in at 8,9 or even 10 for some sides. Batting ability was secondary to keeping, especially for sub-continent sides

Jeffrey Dujon from the Windies was the first keeper I remember whose batting was a genuine strength and I think he averaged in the 30’s. Healy became similar for Australia

Then Gilchrist came and now if you’re not capable of being a No.6 batsman you’re not getting picked as a keeper for most countries
It makes sense tho. You just don’t want a guy there for his keeping ability. Tim Paine was a very good batsmen too but wasn’t as dominant with bat in hand at Test level.


Speaking of keepers, Risbah Pant is hospitalised after a car crash. Don’t think it’s super serious tho
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Knott had a higher averse than I thought - 32.8

Marsh I was about right - 26.5

Dujon lower than I thought - 31.6

Healy also lower - 27.5

Was surprised to see that despite an average of 32.63, Tim Paine never made a test century

Brad Haddin under rated as well as the successor to Gilchrist, 32.99 average
 
Was surprised to see that despite an average of 32.63, Tim Paine never made a test century

Brad Haddin under rated as well as the successor to Gilchrist, 32.99 average
Paine only has three first class hundreds, and only had one when he was made test captain. Haddin had 17 and Gilly 30 for comparison.
 
Paine only has three first class hundreds, and only had one when he was made test captain. Haddin had 17 and Gilly 30 for comparison.

At an average of nearly 33 and with 35 Tests, though, you'd expect maybe a century or two. Almost 50 players with averages below 23 have made a Test ton.

 
Renshaw’s inclusion hopefully means he’s leapfrogging Harris, who they didn’t even want fielding in Melbourne.

Agar is a bad selection call, he doesn’t even merit Shield selection for WA these days (but still gets it). Hardie and Murphy were the more logical squad inclusions for me.

I’m more surprised that they didn’t recall Neser, he’s bowled very well for QLD in Shield and is a pretty solid bat as well.
 
Knott had a higher averse than I thought - 32.8

Marsh I was about right - 26.5

Dujon lower than I thought - 31.6

Healy also lower - 27.5

Keys, I too remember Knott well, not only was he a very handy bat and ( there are no stats for this ) but he was a player who paced massive importance on his wicket, he was a thorn in the side of many an attack as he didn't just score runs by going the slog, he dug in and made the bowler have to pry him out.

He was the epitome of the Stubborn British Bulldog.

He was a fine English Cricketer who is often under appreciated, as he was one of Englands finest ever glovemen.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top