World Test Championship
-
@Catogrande Early Botham was some player. Before he got fat and generally bought his wickets. All bar 2 of his 13 wickets were recognised batsmen plus England were 57-5 when he came in. Great performance.
-
@dogmeat said in World Test Championship:
@Catogrande Early Botham was some player. Before he got fat and generally bought his wickets. All bar 2 of his 13 wickets were recognised batsmen plus England were 57-5 when he came in. Great performance.
Yeah Imrans overall stats remained better so I think history will judge him the better player......but Beefy was a deadset legend from about 1977 to 1982.
Ashwin is some cricketer though, him and Jadeja are both terrific all rounders, more so than the overrated Stokes.
-
@MN5 said in World Test Championship:
@dogmeat said in World Test Championship:
@Catogrande Early Botham was some player. Before he got fat and generally bought his wickets. All bar 2 of his 13 wickets were recognised batsmen plus England were 57-5 when he came in. Great performance.
Yeah Imrans overall stats remained better so I think history will judge him the better player......but Beefy was a deadset legend from about 1977 to 1982.
highlights the issue of trying to pick all time greats. Consistency vs incredible peaks; it's the Howlett vs Caucaunibuca discussion
-
@nzzp said in World Test Championship:
@MN5 said in World Test Championship:
@dogmeat said in World Test Championship:
@Catogrande Early Botham was some player. Before he got fat and generally bought his wickets. All bar 2 of his 13 wickets were recognised batsmen plus England were 57-5 when he came in. Great performance.
Yeah Imrans overall stats remained better so I think history will judge him the better player......but Beefy was a deadset legend from about 1977 to 1982.
highlights the issue of trying to pick all time greats. Consistency vs incredible peaks; it's the Howlett vs Caucaunibuca discussion
Yeah from the sounds of it Imran either bowled OR batted well in a test but rarely both ?
-
@MN5 The thing about Botham though, even when he'd become a lardarse and lost a yard or two of pace was that he could mender through a game and then turn it round on a sixpence. The number of times, even later on in his career when he made the difference was extraordinary.
I really liked Imran as a player but stats do not tell the whole story. Going by stats you would have to argue that Kallis was the greatest all rounder but few seem to think so. Put the stats up against the magic that say Sobers showed and I'd say no contest. -
@Catogrande said in World Test Championship:
@MN5 The thing about Botham though, even when he'd become a lardarse and lost a yard or two of pace was that he could mender through a game and then turn it round on a sixpence. The number of times, even later on in his career when he made the difference was extraordinary.
I really liked Imran as a player but stats do not tell the whole story. Going by stats you would have to argue that Kallis was the greatest all rounder but few seem to think so. Put the stats up against the magic that say Sobers showed and I'd say no contest.Oh I love Beefy, his aura alone was bloody impressive for a young fella like me watching. In fact him and his mate Viv Richards both exceed stats ( which are already impressive enough )
Kallis does get a bit forgotten but I'd still say he's South Africas greatest cricketer. One of the very best batsman of all time with the bowling ability of......say Chris Martin thrown in too.
-
@booboo said in World Test Championship:
@Stockcar86 said in World Test Championship:
I don't even care if that's made up or real
Definitely looks made up, to me.
-
-
@Chris-B said in World Test Championship:
Beefy was a player of two halves.
After his first 51 tests he averaged 38.8 with the bat and 23 with the ball.
In his second 51 tests he averaged 28.8 with the bat and 36.5 with the ball.
The first is peak Sir Paddles.
The second is Mitch Santner.
hmmmmmmm, don't think Paddles ever batted that well.
but you could compare the second to either Mitch, Santner or Marsh.
-
@MN5 said in World Test Championship:
Kallis does get a bit forgotten but I'd still say he's South Africas greatest cricketer. One of the very best batsman of all time with the bowling ability of......say Chris Martin thrown in too.
Hadlee rated Clive Rice as the best all-rounder of his era. It's just unfortunate that Rice's career was restricted to first class cricket.
-
@scribe said in World Test Championship:
The Root LBW decision in the last over of the day was an absolute shocker. More plumb than a plumby thing. How DRS contrived that outcome I do not know. Even Root was wearing a sheepish grin afterwards.
Generally they have done a good job sorting out DRS. The remaining problems are always down to 'umpires call'.
It just creates inconsistency. If the ump says 'out' and the bat refers then umps call decisions go against the bat yet if the bowler refers a howler the exact same information produces the opposite result.
DRS is there to enhance the umpiring not to say 'too hard to tell, let's go back to the decision that caused players to question the correctness'.
What happened to the 'half the ball on tracking' concept. That had faults too but not as bad as when 3/4s of the ball shows as probably hitting (or in line) and the decision goes back to the ump. -
-
@Bovidae said in World Test Championship:
@MN5 said in World Test Championship:
Kallis does get a bit forgotten but I'd still say he's South Africas greatest cricketer. One of the very best batsman of all time with the bowling ability of......say Chris Martin thrown in too.
Hadlee rated Clive Rice as the best all-rounder of his era. It's just unfortunate that Rice's career was restricted to first class cricket.
This bloke was a handy South African too.....batting and bowling of 36 and 19 at first class level. Brilliant.
Ravi Jadeja has a funny old career, a more than worthy batting average of 36 but just the one century in 51 tests ? an absolutely world class return of 220 wickets at 24 as a spinner but if his first class batting average ( 47 ) was his test average would he be regarded as the GOAT as an all rounder ?
-
@Crucial said in World Test Championship:
@scribe said in World Test Championship:
The Root LBW decision in the last over of the day was an absolute shocker. More plumb than a plumby thing. How DRS contrived that outcome I do not know. Even Root was wearing a sheepish grin afterwards.
Generally they have done a good job sorting out DRS. The remaining problems are always down to 'umpires call'.
It just creates inconsistency. If the ump says 'out' and the bat refers then umps call decisions go against the bat yet if the bowler refers a howler the exact same information produces the opposite result.
DRS is there to enhance the umpiring not to say 'too hard to tell, let's go back to the decision that caused players to question the correctness'.
What happened to the 'half the ball on tracking' concept. That had faults too but not as bad as when 3/4s of the ball shows as probably hitting (or in line) and the decision goes back to the ump.Is this still the case? I thought a change had been made that reduces the scope of umpires call, exactly what you described. 3/4s of the ball hitting is no longer umpires call, as it was originally, that is now over-ruled and goes with the technology. Correct?
(I haven't seen the Root DRS yet)
-
@Chris-B said in World Test Championship:
@MN5No - he didn't. A bit of poetic license.
But in the second half of his career (43 tests) Paddles averaged 32.3 with the bat and 19.6 with the ball.
About the same power ranking as Beefy Mk 1.
Paddles possibly suffered ( relatively speaking ) by having a bit of a wild and crazy start to his test career before he shortened the run and became the sultan of swing that we all know.
-
@Rapido said in World Test Championship:
@Crucial said in World Test Championship:
@scribe said in World Test Championship:
The Root LBW decision in the last over of the day was an absolute shocker. More plumb than a plumby thing. How DRS contrived that outcome I do not know. Even Root was wearing a sheepish grin afterwards.
Generally they have done a good job sorting out DRS. The remaining problems are always down to 'umpires call'.
It just creates inconsistency. If the ump says 'out' and the bat refers then umps call decisions go against the bat yet if the bowler refers a howler the exact same information produces the opposite result.
DRS is there to enhance the umpiring not to say 'too hard to tell, let's go back to the decision that caused players to question the correctness'.
What happened to the 'half the ball on tracking' concept. That had faults too but not as bad as when 3/4s of the ball shows as probably hitting (or in line) and the decision goes back to the ump.Is this still the case? I thought a change had been made that reduces the scope of umpires call, exactly what you described. 3/4s of the ball hitting is no longer umpires call, as it was originally, that is now over-ruled and goes with the technology. Correct?
(I haven't seen the Root DRS yet)
This series is so fascinating to watch from the comfort of knowing our team is already in the final.
Surely India can't fuck up from here.
-
No, maybe I'm wrong?
Umpires call
Impact. (if playing a shot): Some part of the ball was inside the Impact Zone, but the centre of the ball
was outside the Impact Zone.Hitting: The ball was hitting the wicket, but the centre of the ball was not inside the
Wicket Zone -
@Rapido said in World Test Championship:
No, maybe I'm wrong?
Umpires call
Impact. (if playing a shot): Some part of the ball was inside the Impact Zone, but the centre of the ball
was outside the Impact Zone.Hitting: The ball was hitting the wicket, but the centre of the ball was not inside the
Wicket ZoneIn the Root case, I (along with the commentators) could see the off stump at the point the ball hit the pad.
-
@scribe said in World Test Championship:
@Rapido said in World Test Championship:
No, maybe I'm wrong?
Umpires call
Impact. (if playing a shot): Some part of the ball was inside the Impact Zone, but the centre of the ball
was outside the Impact Zone.Hitting: The ball was hitting the wicket, but the centre of the ball was not inside the
Wicket ZoneIn the Root case, I (along with the commentators) could see the off stump at the point the ball hit the pad.
So it is actually a 50% rule. That's ok then but quite obviously then only positive errors from ball tracking help bowlers while negative errors help bats.
Take Kohli's referral last night. Looked like going over the top (jumped on him) and an umpiring error, yet ball tracking flattened the trajectory and had only about 25% of the ball clipping the bail. Decision went against the batsman when the error could just have easily been the other way. -
If "benefit of the doubt goes to the batsman" is still a thing, I'd change umpire's call to not out, but the review is retained. Since that's in the batting team's favour, perhaps their reviews could be reduced to 2, while the bowling team still has 3.
Botham was clearly great for at least part of his career, he was the world record holder for most test wickets before Hadlee. Very much a career of two halves as others have said.
Mike Procter - Wikipedia
