New Zealand v Bangladesh Test #2
-
@Chris-B said in New Zealand v Bangladesh Test #2:
If it's not Richardson as an opener, then it's probably Turner and Sutcliffe - unless it is someone even older - but I doubt CSD would qualify.
Tailenders could be anyone, but probably people who often batted higher - how about Lance Cairns and Martin Snedden?
Turner
Sutcliffe
The Mariner 7
Cairns, L
SneddenCorrect thinking. Openers are done - just 10 and 11 to go and neither has been mentioned so far.
-
@KiwiPie said in New Zealand v Bangladesh Test #2:
@Chris-B said in New Zealand v Bangladesh Test #2:
If it's not Richardson as an opener, then it's probably Turner and Sutcliffe - unless it is someone even older - but I doubt CSD would qualify.
Tailenders could be anyone, but probably people who often batted higher - how about Lance Cairns and Martin Snedden?
Turner
Sutcliffe
The Mariner 7
Cairns, L
SneddenCorrect thinking. Openers are done - just 10 and 11 to go and neither has been mentioned so far.
I was trying to work out how Dempster missed out as one of the openers, but then I see he batted #4 in the last of his 10 tests.
-
-
-
Hmm would tuffey or pocock happen to have a decent 10 or 11 average?
-
@Cyclops said in New Zealand v Bangladesh Test #2:
It wasn't the two Blairs (Hartland and Pocock) was it? Not sure if they played enough games though. They were bad enough that Bryan Young was considered a reliable opener for a period though.
Pocock is a YES - Hartland is poised on 9 games though with the outstanding average of 16.83
-
For openers would the guy who lost a tooth in England be a contender? Cant recall his name right now
-
@Paekakboyz said in New Zealand v Bangladesh Test #2:
Hmm would tuffey or pocock happen to have a decent 10 or 11 average?
Sorry it isn't them
-
@KiwiPie said in New Zealand v Bangladesh Test #2:
@Cyclops said in New Zealand v Bangladesh Test #2:
It wasn't the two Blairs (Hartland and Pocock) was it? Not sure if they played enough games though. They were bad enough that Bryan Young was considered a reliable opener for a period though.
Pocock is a YES - Hartland is poised on 9 games though with the outstanding average of 16.83
Trevor Franklin then? I remember being shocked by his average given the reverence that he and John Wright get as an opening pair (not that it's undeserved, shows how much the game has changed, and probably also how much our standards have risen)
-
@Paekakboyz said in New Zealand v Bangladesh Test #2:
For openers would the guy who lost a tooth in England be a contender? Cant recall his name right now
Daniel Flynn? Not sure if he opened the batting much, think he played more at 3 and 5.
-
@Cyclops said in New Zealand v Bangladesh Test #2:
@KiwiPie said in New Zealand v Bangladesh Test #2:
@Cyclops said in New Zealand v Bangladesh Test #2:
It wasn't the two Blairs (Hartland and Pocock) was it? Not sure if they played enough games though. They were bad enough that Bryan Young was considered a reliable opener for a period though.
Pocock is a YES - Hartland is poised on 9 games though with the outstanding average of 16.83
Trevor Franklin then? I remember being shocked by his average given the reverence that he and John Wright get as an opening pair (not that it's undeserved, shows how much the game has changed, and probably also how much our standards have risen)
Good call. Franklin it is. So just a 10 and 11 to name. Neither of them played this century if that helps ....
-
@KiwiPie said in New Zealand v Bangladesh Test #2:
@Cyclops said in New Zealand v Bangladesh Test #2:
@KiwiPie said in New Zealand v Bangladesh Test #2:
@Cyclops said in New Zealand v Bangladesh Test #2:
It wasn't the two Blairs (Hartland and Pocock) was it? Not sure if they played enough games though. They were bad enough that Bryan Young was considered a reliable opener for a period though.
Pocock is a YES - Hartland is poised on 9 games though with the outstanding average of 16.83
Trevor Franklin then? I remember being shocked by his average given the reverence that he and John Wright get as an opening pair (not that it's undeserved, shows how much the game has changed, and probably also how much our standards have risen)
Good call. Franklin it is. So just a 10 and 11 to name. Neither of them played this century if that helps ....
What about Dion Nash at 10?
Edit: maybe Simon '97 test wickets' Doull at 11?
-
@KiwiPie said in New Zealand v Bangladesh Test #2:
@Cyclops said in New Zealand v Bangladesh Test #2:
It wasn't the two Blairs (Hartland and Pocock) was it? Not sure if they played enough games though. They were bad enough that Bryan Young was considered a reliable opener for a period though.
Pocock is a YES - Hartland is poised on 9 games though with the outstanding average of 16.83
I suspect Hartland won't get to add to that tally of 9 games.
-
@Cyclops said in New Zealand v Bangladesh Test #2:
@KiwiPie said in New Zealand v Bangladesh Test #2:
@Cyclops said in New Zealand v Bangladesh Test #2:
@KiwiPie said in New Zealand v Bangladesh Test #2:
@Cyclops said in New Zealand v Bangladesh Test #2:
It wasn't the two Blairs (Hartland and Pocock) was it? Not sure if they played enough games though. They were bad enough that Bryan Young was considered a reliable opener for a period though.
Pocock is a YES - Hartland is poised on 9 games though with the outstanding average of 16.83
Trevor Franklin then? I remember being shocked by his average given the reverence that he and John Wright get as an opening pair (not that it's undeserved, shows how much the game has changed, and probably also how much our standards have risen)
Good call. Franklin it is. So just a 10 and 11 to name. Neither of them played this century if that helps ....
What about Dion Nash at 10?
Edit: maybe Simon '97 test wickets' Doull at 11?
No and no. Older than them.
-
-
@Cyclops said in New Zealand v Bangladesh Test #2:
@KiwiPie said in New Zealand v Bangladesh Test #2:
@Cyclops said in New Zealand v Bangladesh Test #2:
It wasn't the two Blairs (Hartland and Pocock) was it? Not sure if they played enough games though. They were bad enough that Bryan Young was considered a reliable opener for a period though.
Pocock is a YES - Hartland is poised on 9 games though with the outstanding average of 16.83
Trevor Franklin then? I remember being shocked by his average given the reverence that he and John Wright get as an opening pair (not that it's undeserved, shows how much the game has changed, and probably also how much our standards have risen)
Before I became such a stats nerd Trevor Franklin was always one of my favourites, not sure why cos he was no Davey Warner in terms on getting the run rate going....
-
@MN5 said in New Zealand v Bangladesh Test #2:
@Cyclops said in New Zealand v Bangladesh Test #2:
@KiwiPie said in New Zealand v Bangladesh Test #2:
@Cyclops said in New Zealand v Bangladesh Test #2:
It wasn't the two Blairs (Hartland and Pocock) was it? Not sure if they played enough games though. They were bad enough that Bryan Young was considered a reliable opener for a period though.
Pocock is a YES - Hartland is poised on 9 games though with the outstanding average of 16.83
Trevor Franklin then? I remember being shocked by his average given the reverence that he and John Wright get as an opening pair (not that it's undeserved, shows how much the game has changed, and probably also how much our standards have risen)
Before I became such a stats nerd Trevor Franklin was always one of my favourites, not sure why cos he was no Davey Warner in terms on getting the run rate going....
He did his best to survive the new ball in the late 80's, I'm thinking that was probably a good reason why
-
@Donsteppa said in New Zealand v Bangladesh Test #2:
@MN5 said in New Zealand v Bangladesh Test #2:
@Cyclops said in New Zealand v Bangladesh Test #2:
@KiwiPie said in New Zealand v Bangladesh Test #2:
@Cyclops said in New Zealand v Bangladesh Test #2:
It wasn't the two Blairs (Hartland and Pocock) was it? Not sure if they played enough games though. They were bad enough that Bryan Young was considered a reliable opener for a period though.
Pocock is a YES - Hartland is poised on 9 games though with the outstanding average of 16.83
Trevor Franklin then? I remember being shocked by his average given the reverence that he and John Wright get as an opening pair (not that it's undeserved, shows how much the game has changed, and probably also how much our standards have risen)
Before I became such a stats nerd Trevor Franklin was always one of my favourites, not sure why cos he was no Davey Warner in terms on getting the run rate going....
He did his best to survive the new ball in the late 80's, I'm thinking that was probably a good reason why
His cricinfo bio is hardly full of praise for the poor bugger
Lanky New Zealand opener Trevor Franklin knew only one way to play, and it didn't involve too many horizontal-bat shots. In 21 Tests he scored his runs at a rate of 27 runs per 100 balls. That equates to 1.6 runs per over, and makes him slower than those great blockers Chris Tavaré (33) and Jimmy Adams (38). But despite boring spectators and bowlers into submission Franklin was a popular figure, mainly because he was so unlucky with injuries. Most famously, he had his leg shattered when he was run over by a luggage trailer at Gatwick Airport in 1986, and he didn't play a Test for nearly two years. He wasn't endowed with good luck. On that tour he also broke a thumb, and in 1991-92 had his forearm smashed by David Lawrence. Even though it did take seven hours, his first and only Test hundred, against England at Lord's in 1990, was extremely well received
