Other Cricket
-
@nzzp said in Other Cricket:
The counter argument is that bowlers could switch off against the other end compared to Hadlee. You could just defend him, and look to score against the other bowlers.
I think it was Gower who said of Hadlee & Chatfield:
"It was like playing the World XI at one end and the Enfield 2nd XI at the other. But you soon discovered you weren't scoring that many runs against the Enfield second XI..."
-
@Victor-Meldrew said in Other Cricket:
@nzzp said in Other Cricket:
The counter argument is that bowlers could switch off against the other end compared to Hadlee. You could just defend him, and look to score against the other bowlers.
I think it was Gower who said of Hadlee & Chatfield:
"It was like playing the World XI at one end and the Enfield 2nd XI at the other. But you soon discovered you weren't scoring that many runs against the Enfield second XI..."
I think it was Gatting and Ilford. But, actually what is interesting is - I'd heard the first part of that quote many times, but never heard the second part after "but" before, ever. Changes context somewhat.
-
@Rapido said in Other Cricket:
@Victor-Meldrew said in Other Cricket:
@nzzp said in Other Cricket:
The counter argument is that bowlers could switch off against the other end compared to Hadlee. You could just defend him, and look to score against the other bowlers.
I think it was Gower who said of Hadlee & Chatfield:
"It was like playing the World XI at one end and the Enfield 2nd XI at the other. But you soon discovered you weren't scoring that many runs against the Enfield second XI..."
I think it was Gatting and Ilford. But, actually what is interesting is - I'd heard the first part of that quote many times, but never heard the second part after "but" before, ever. Changes context somewhat.
Whoever said it I get the point they were making.
Contrast that with the Windies, Joel Garner took 259 wickets in 58 tests at under 21 ( SERIOUSLY fucken world class average right there ) but got just the seven Michelles. Loads of bowlers got more than that, but few if any were better than him.
-
@Rapido said in Other Cricket:
@Victor-Meldrew said in Other Cricket:
@nzzp said in Other Cricket:
The counter argument is that bowlers could switch off against the other end compared to Hadlee. You could just defend him, and look to score against the other bowlers.
I think it was Gower who said of Hadlee & Chatfield:
"It was like playing the World XI at one end and the Enfield 2nd XI at the other. But you soon discovered you weren't scoring that many runs against the Enfield second XI..."
I think it was Gatting and Ilford. But, actually what is interesting is - I'd heard the first part of that quote many times, but never heard the second part after "but" before, ever. Changes context somewhat.
Quote is in the mists of time. I've lost my copy of Hadlee's book, but recall he was full of praise for Chatfield's support and ability to tie down an end
It'd be interesting to do some stats on the Hadlee/Chats partnership compared to other fast bowling duo's.
-
@MN5 said in Other Cricket:
@Rapido said in Other Cricket:
@Victor-Meldrew said in Other Cricket:
@nzzp said in Other Cricket:
The counter argument is that bowlers could switch off against the other end compared to Hadlee. You could just defend him, and look to score against the other bowlers.
I think it was Gower who said of Hadlee & Chatfield:
"It was like playing the World XI at one end and the Enfield 2nd XI at the other. But you soon discovered you weren't scoring that many runs against the Enfield second XI..."
I think it was Gatting and Ilford. But, actually what is interesting is - I'd heard the first part of that quote many times, but never heard the second part after "but" before, ever. Changes context somewhat.
Whoever said it I get the point they were making.
Contrast that with the Windies, Joel Garner took 259 wickets in 58 tests at under 21 ( SERIOUSLY fucken world class average right there ) but got just the seven Michelles. Loads of bowlers got more than that, but few if any were better than him.
I think I read that the first time Lillee's got more that 5 wickets in an innings was at the tail end of his career.
For me, he's the best fast bowler of all.
-
@Victor-Meldrew said in Other Cricket:
@MN5 said in Other Cricket:
@Rapido said in Other Cricket:
@Victor-Meldrew said in Other Cricket:
@nzzp said in Other Cricket:
The counter argument is that bowlers could switch off against the other end compared to Hadlee. You could just defend him, and look to score against the other bowlers.
I think it was Gower who said of Hadlee & Chatfield:
"It was like playing the World XI at one end and the Enfield 2nd XI at the other. But you soon discovered you weren't scoring that many runs against the Enfield second XI..."
I think it was Gatting and Ilford. But, actually what is interesting is - I'd heard the first part of that quote many times, but never heard the second part after "but" before, ever. Changes context somewhat.
Whoever said it I get the point they were making.
Contrast that with the Windies, Joel Garner took 259 wickets in 58 tests at under 21 ( SERIOUSLY fucken world class average right there ) but got just the seven Michelles. Loads of bowlers got more than that, but few if any were better than him.
I think I read that the first time Lillee's got more that 5 wickets in an innings was at the tail end of his career.
For me, he's the best fast bowler of all.
Well no, he got one on debut.
I love cricinfo and it's ability to settle arguements
Lillee was a legend by the sounds of things though, our own Paddles freely admits to stealing all his ideas and methodologies.
Hmmmmmm, at a guess my top ten fast bowlers in no particular order would comprise Paddles, Imran, Waqar, Wasim, Curtly, Marshall, Garner, Donald, Steyn, McGrath.
Can't have Bond, he didn't play enough.
I'm only picking guys I saw play quite a bit and who are genuine greats of their eras.
-
@Victor-Meldrew said in Other Cricket:
@Rapido said in Other Cricket:
@Victor-Meldrew said in Other Cricket:
@nzzp said in Other Cricket:
The counter argument is that bowlers could switch off against the other end compared to Hadlee. You could just defend him, and look to score against the other bowlers.
I think it was Gower who said of Hadlee & Chatfield:
"It was like playing the World XI at one end and the Enfield 2nd XI at the other. But you soon discovered you weren't scoring that many runs against the Enfield second XI..."
I think it was Gatting and Ilford. But, actually what is interesting is - I'd heard the first part of that quote many times, but never heard the second part after "but" before, ever. Changes context somewhat.
Quote is in the mists of time. I've lost my copy of Hadlee's book, but recall he was full of praise for Chatfield's support and ability to tie down an end
It'd be interesting to do some stats on the Hadlee/Chats partnership compared to other fast bowling duo's.
Chatfield's economy rate was 2.29. In comparison, Vettori was 2.59 & McGrath 2.49. Curtley Ambrose was an insane 2.30
-
Hadlee said Lillee was the best he ever saw. When in a fix, he used to ask himself "What would Lillee do". Like Hadlee, Lillee dropped his speed for accuracy and got even better. As an aside, Dicke Bird spoke highly of him both as a player and a friend - and said the bad boy image was wrong.
For me it's Curtley Ambrose, Hadlee, Lillee & McGrath. By all accounts Trueman was up there as well.
-
@Victor-Meldrew said in Other Cricket:
@Victor-Meldrew said in Other Cricket:
@Rapido said in Other Cricket:
@Victor-Meldrew said in Other Cricket:
@nzzp said in Other Cricket:
The counter argument is that bowlers could switch off against the other end compared to Hadlee. You could just defend him, and look to score against the other bowlers.
I think it was Gower who said of Hadlee & Chatfield:
"It was like playing the World XI at one end and the Enfield 2nd XI at the other. But you soon discovered you weren't scoring that many runs against the Enfield second XI..."
I think it was Gatting and Ilford. But, actually what is interesting is - I'd heard the first part of that quote many times, but never heard the second part after "but" before, ever. Changes context somewhat.
Quote is in the mists of time. I've lost my copy of Hadlee's book, but recall he was full of praise for Chatfield's support and ability to tie down an end
It'd be interesting to do some stats on the Hadlee/Chats partnership compared to other fast bowling duo's.
Chatfield's economy rate was 2.29. In comparison, Vettori was 2.59 & McGrath 2.49. Curtley Ambrose was an insane 2.30
Chatfield complimented Hadlee so well, he's a guy that is the epitome of an unsung hero of that era.
-
@Victor-Meldrew said in Other Cricket:
Hadlee said Lillee was the best he ever saw. When in a fix, he used to ask himself "What would Lillee do". Like Hadlee, Lillee dropped his speed for accuracy and got even better. As an aside, Dicke Bird spoke highly of him both as a player and a friend - and said the bad boy image was wrong.
For me it's Curtley Ambrose, Hadlee, Lillee & McGrath. By all accounts Trueman was up there as well.
I can't pick Lillee as I never saw him play much. Even in my top ten there's still some bloody good players who miss out like Walsh, Pollock, Beefy, Bishop etc.
When I throw up the names I have perhaps it puts NZs current pace trio ( sorry Jamieson, I'll add you, quartet ) in perspective. As has been mentioned loads it's the fact they're all playing at the same time that is their best strength. Best of all time has to be Holding, Marshall, Roberts and Garner though ( with Croft in there too, his career was brief but outstanding )
-
Just looked up Truman. First to 300 wickets and only Allan Donald, Malcolm Marshall, Waqar Younis and Dale Steyn have a better strike rate than him (49.4). Only Curtly Ambrose and Marshall have a lower average than Trueman's 21.57.
Way up there.
-
@Victor-Meldrew said in Other Cricket:
Just looked up Truman. First to 300 wickets and only Allan Donald, Malcolm Marshall, Waqar Younis and Dale Steyn have a better strike rate than him (49.4). Only Curtly Ambrose and Marshall have a lower average than Trueman's 21.57.
Way up there.
Definitely.
From a kiwi perspective it's a shame Paddles had a ( relatively ) poor start to his career, I'm sure he averaged in the high teens in the second half of it.
-
From some stats site:
"Although his Test career average of 22.29 is impressive, he was lethal from 1978 to 1988, when he picked up 330 wickets at an enviable average of 19.57. He took fifer a whopping 32 times during the period.
Insane
Hadlee averaged an unreal 13.06 with a strike-rate of 33.5 in Tests which New Zealand won by picking up 173 wickets.
Even more insane.
Far more lethal on the sub-continent than other greats as well.
-
I always rated Marshall as the best of the West Indian quicks and it is a pretty high bar. At this peak in the early 80s, he really had everything a fast bowler needed, great control, ability to move the ball around and a lethal bouncer which took players by surprise. A decent batsman as well.
-
@KiwiPie said in Other Cricket:
I always rated Marshall as the best of the West Indian quicks and it is a pretty high bar. At this peak in the early 80s, he really had everything a fast bowler needed, great control, ability to move the ball around and a lethal bouncer which took players by surprise. A decent batsman as well.
Yeah I think he probably was the best of that bunch but fuck he certainly had some competition ( which probably helped the competitiveness )
10 fifties as well, that’s handy.
-
@Victor-Meldrew said in Other Cricket:
From some stats site:
"Although his Test career average of 22.29 is impressive, he was lethal from 1978 to 1988, when he picked up 330 wickets at an enviable average of 19.57. He took fifer a whopping 32 times during the period.
Insane
Hadlee averaged an unreal 13.06 with a strike-rate of 33.5 in Tests which New Zealand won by picking up 173 wickets.
Even more insane.
Far more lethal on the sub-continent than other greats as well.
Will be interesting to see if KW usurps Paddles as our GOAT when he retires. He still has some work to do.
-
-
@Snowy said in Other Cricket:
@MN5 said in Other Cricket:
Will be interesting to see if KW usurps Paddles as our GOAT when he retires. He still has some work to do.
What would that take? An average of 55? Maybe 60?
Net entirely sure. The latter would probably be a bridge too far but finishing in 5-6 years time with a test batting average of 55 is definitely doable. It should be noted that recent greats like Tendulkar, Ponting and Lara saw their stats dip a bit in their twilight years though.
-
@MN5 said in Other Cricket:
@Snowy said in Other Cricket:
@MN5 said in Other Cricket:
Will be interesting to see if KW usurps Paddles as our GOAT when he retires. He still has some work to do.
What would that take? An average of 55? Maybe 60?
Net entirely sure. The latter would probably be a bridge too far but finishing in 5-6 years time with a test batting average of 55 is definitely doable. It should be noted that recent greats like Tendulkar, Ponting and Lara saw their stats dip a bit in their twilight years though.
High 50s puts him with Sanga, Sobers, Hammond but still 10 ahead of that (I don't count a few - careers too short. Voges Bus change for example).
Paddles has heaps ahead of him, average wise, but most of them are ancient history, played fuck all tests too. The first 8 were all pre first world war.
-
I don't think it is simply his final average that will define KW's career. He probably needs to make a defining set of big scores in Australia, South Africa, England or India to be honest. His average there is 41.11 (9 tests), 21.16 (4), 30.87 (4), 35.46 (7) respectively.
