Jump to content

Theme© by Fisana
 

Photo

Cricket World Cup Thread


  • Please log in to reply
3815 replies to this topic

#1761 zxb

zxb

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 4574 posts

Posted 05 September 2004 - 10:29 PM

Congrats. :)
  • 0

#1762 Agnostic

Agnostic

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 9978 posts

Posted 06 September 2004 - 03:48 AM

Locking the stable after the horse has bolted, but nonetheless a win. Dinesh Kaarthick the wicketkeeper impresses.:)
  • 0

#1763 Agnostic

Agnostic

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 9978 posts

Posted 08 September 2004 - 05:28 AM

We have good players, but we need a team.:(
  • 0

#1764 zxb

zxb

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 4574 posts

Posted 10 September 2004 - 04:31 PM

Well, you're still going to do better than the yanks. ;)
  • 0

#1765 traveller

traveller

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 620 posts

Posted 10 September 2004 - 05:03 PM

At least we got to 100! Who decided to put 'em in?:rolleyes:
  • 0

#1766 zxb

zxb

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 4574 posts

Posted 10 September 2004 - 10:53 PM

I wouldn't expect it to make much difference to Astle. ;)

Anyway, even if the USA flop magnificently, you can still back the ozzies. :D

You know, I was just reading about wierd matches. In the 1800's they used to play teams comprising of men with only 1 arm, against men with only 1 leg. War veterens mostly. It would be unthinkable now! If you desperately need to know the 1 legged men usually won. :eek:
  • 0

#1767 zxb

zxb

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 4574 posts

Posted 13 September 2004 - 02:57 PM

Well, the Yanks did snatch an impressive 65 runs off the oz bowlers. That is quite good. :cool:
  • 0

#1768 traveller

traveller

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 620 posts

Posted 13 September 2004 - 06:47 PM

Heroic effort that:D
  • 0

#1769 zxb

zxb

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 4574 posts

Posted 13 September 2004 - 07:07 PM

It is so true. :)
  • 0

#1770 Belrick

Belrick

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 782 posts

Posted 13 September 2004 - 11:46 PM

Bradman is so over rated.
Great batsman sure. But one among many.
But to compare to modern players is just darn silly.
Lets put it into perspective. For example:

How many teams did he play against? How many other players today have awesome records against one team yet were average to poor when stats are added from the rest?
  • 0

#1771 zxb

zxb

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 4574 posts

Posted 14 September 2004 - 12:47 AM

"How many teams did he play against? How many other players today have awesome records against one team yet were average to poor when stats are added from the rest"

He played against 4 countries I think. England, the West Indies, India and South Africa. Naturally most of his tests were played against England, and of course, England were the strongest opponent he played against.

Now against them he averaged 89.79 off 63 innings. 12 50's. 10 centuries. 6 double centuries and 2 triple centuries. A record to be very proud of, and, if he could do this to the strongest team around, Australia not withstanding, what did he do against the other touring teams?

Well, against the relatively weak West Indies he played 6 innings and came out with an average of 74.50 with 1 century and one double ton. So technically the matches he played against the WIndies drag his average down slightly.

However against a weak South Africa, he played in 5 innings and averaged just over 200 with 2 tons and 2 double tons including the 299*. :D

And against India he played 6 innings averaging over 178 with 1 50, 3 tons and 1 double ton.

In my view, averaging almost 90 against fairly strong England attacks is proof enough of his skill, however, if you think his overall average was greatly dragged up by the Africans and Indians, then an average of 79.35 can be calculated discluding the runs made against South Africa and India. And an average of almost 80 is still bloody good. Substantially more than anyone else with a long career.

As to comparing with modern players, well how can you? Someone once suggested that to compare a player in the '20s or before, with one today you may have to double his average, but it cannot be done with any degree of precision. Perhaps one indication would be that he still averaged well over 50 when faced with Larwood, Voce and bodyline. Something I doubt that many modern players could do, but again it can't be proven.

For myself, I think the stats are proof enough that 'Braddles' was the best batsman who ever lived. Probably his only flaw was a small tendancy to struggle on shoddy pitches but that affects most batsmen.
  • 0

#1772 Agnostic

Agnostic

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 9978 posts

Posted 15 September 2004 - 02:06 PM

The Don was as near to perfection as a batsman can hope to be, but I wouldn't compare him with our modern breed. Comparisons are truly odious.:)
  • 0

#1773 zxb

zxb

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 4574 posts

Posted 15 September 2004 - 08:13 PM

Well, thank god the minnows are out of the way. Mostly at least. It was just becoming embarrassing. :D Now we can start some serious matches. :)
  • 0

#1774 zxb

zxb

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 4574 posts

Posted 18 September 2004 - 12:47 AM

With all these rain delays, perhaps the tournament should be moved to India. :confused:
  • 0

#1775 Agnostic

Agnostic

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 9978 posts

Posted 18 September 2004 - 07:20 PM

More people would turn up to watch the matches.:D
  • 0

#1776 Agnostic

Agnostic

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 9978 posts

Posted 19 September 2004 - 05:34 PM

Imagine being trapped in a glasshouse with thousands of hornets buzzing angrily around you. Multiply that sound by several hundred decibels and the result approaches the colossal continuous hooting and honking at Edgbaston when India took on Pakistan with a semifinal berth at stake in the ICC Champions Trophy.



When did you last see 20,000 people watch a cricket match and a full 'ouse at Edgbaston?

The Windies blanked the Springboks too.:confused:
  • 0

#1777 zxb

zxb

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 4574 posts

Posted 19 September 2004 - 10:55 PM

Shame about your chaps. I thought you had a good chance when they were 6 down. At least the atmosphere was probably the best we will see in the tournament. Certainly none of the flatness of the minnow squashing games. :D

"One gent had a T-shirt stitched from a half each of Pakistan's green and India's blue"

So even handed. Preparing for any eventuality. ;)
  • 0

#1778 Agnostic

Agnostic

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 9978 posts

Posted 20 September 2004 - 02:51 PM

"One gent had a T-shirt stitched from a half each of Pakistan's green and India's blue"



before you Brits split us up.:D
  • 0

#1779 zxb

zxb

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 4574 posts

Posted 21 September 2004 - 01:03 PM

So we need 260 to hammer the ozzies into the dust. With 180 from Flinty we should just about do it. :D
  • 0

#1780 zxb

zxb

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 4574 posts

Posted 21 September 2004 - 06:34 PM

Amazing. A 6 wicket win. Time to break out the champagne. :)
  • 0




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Copyright © 2016 Pravda.Ru