The Ashes
-
@barbarian said in The Ashes:
Don't get me wrong fellas, I love S Waugh I just don't know if he's an absolute automatic pick.
His Ashes record is bloody good though. Averages over 60 from memory.
He does indeed. Over 70 in England ....
Remember many times Australia made over 600 and he was around 170 not out at the end
-
-
-
-
-
Can some cricket nerd get Walter Hammonds average in ashes cricket? I can't fathom him not being in there somewhere.
33 matches, 2852 runs at 51.85, 9 hundreds, 36 wickets at 44.77, 43 catches. Useful .....
Definitely but judging by that he obviously boosted the overall test average to 58 by flogging shit teams like NZ. I stand corrected, Tugga and Captain Grumpy are better options.
-
-
Can some cricket nerd get Walter Hammonds average in ashes cricket? I can't fathom him not being in there somewhere.
33 matches, 2852 runs at 51.85, 9 hundreds, 36 wickets at 44.77, 43 catches. Useful .....
Definitely but judging by that he obviously boosted the overall test average to 58 by flogging shit teams like NZ. I stand corrected, Tugga and Captain Grumpy are better options.
Just because he once averaged 563 in a 2 match series v NZ in 1933?
-
Can some cricket nerd get Walter Hammonds average in ashes cricket? I can't fathom him not being in there somewhere.
33 matches, 2852 runs at 51.85, 9 hundreds, 36 wickets at 44.77, 43 catches. Useful .....
Definitely but judging by that he obviously boosted the overall test average to 58 by flogging shit teams like NZ. I stand corrected, Tugga and Captain Grumpy are better options.
Just because he once averaged 563 in a 2 match series v NZ in 1933?
Was that the same series NZ got bowled out for 26?
-
-
-
-
-
@MN5 Correct. Set NZ cricket fans up nicely for the tour of England later that year - which we lost 3-0. Modern fans moan about inconsistent Black Caps. I remember when we were all too consistent. Lose to everyone Home and away which is why those two victories in the 70's sit large in my memory. Plus got of geography to listen to the cricket in 74 and sat in front of TV with a few beers for the England victory
@Kiwipie I'm a traditionalist - restricted myself to Test cricket
-
-
Beefy makes the team based on one incredible ashes. How did he go in others?
( again, I can't access that info on a smartphone )
He was always a bit hit and miss with the bat - but with the ball there were 2 phases to his career. A superb, fast medium swing bowler until his back went and then a chubby trundler afterwards who could still bowl the odd jaffa (and had the mentality that he was still a hostile quick)
After that 1981 series he had 87 wickets against Australia at 22.67. From then on it was 61 wickets at 34.77.
-
Beefy makes the team based on one incredible ashes. How did he go in others?
( again, I can't access that info on a smartphone )
He was always a bit hit and miss with the bat - but with the ball there were 2 phases to his career. A superb, fast medium swing bowler until his back went and then a chubby trundler afterwards who could still bowl
the odd jaffabatsmen out with his stock ball; a long hop outside off, that surprised them into a false shot because they couldn't believe how crap he was (and had the mentality that he was still a hostile quick)After that 1981 series he had 87 wickets against Australia at 22.67. From then on it was 61 wickets at 34.77.
Amended to better reflect my memories of Beefy post 81
-
Beefy makes the team based on one incredible ashes. How did he go in others?
This is the eternal question for these 'best XI' though. Is it a flash of brilliance, or consistency that gets rewarded. Are you picking someone for a career, or at their best for a single game? And what about partnerships - we know Warne and McGrath were great together -- like Langer and Hayden. Do you pick an opening partnership, or two great openers.
