The Ashes
-
@catogrande said in The Ashes:
@kiwipie The thing about Beefy was less about his overall stats and more what he did to change the course of a match in a particular spell, be it bowling or batting. He had some pretty dreary spells bowling and then out of nowhere came a devastating spell that just turned things on their head. His batting was also a bit hit and miss but there were quite a few times he was asked to go out there and swing hard. Looks great for a short while but buggers up your stats.
All rounders are harder to qualify IMO. Looking at the stats, you'd have to say Kallis is the man, but how many of those big innings were done at a pace that suited the match. Sobers stats do not compare that well with Kallis but I'd have him in the team every day over the Saffer - and over Botham too.
How do Sobers stats not compare with Kallis? They're extremely similar.
@mn5 More the longevity of Kallis and the sheer number of tons the bloke got. More test tons than most regular batsmen. Anyway, my point being (in relation to Botham's effectiveness), who had the most profound effect of the games played? A bit like Gilchrist, his stats don't bear comparison with Kallis but bloody hell he turned some matches for Aus.
-
@mn5 More the longevity of Kallis and the sheer number of tons the bloke got. More test tons than most regular batsmen. Anyway, my point being (in relation to Botham's effectiveness), who had the most profound effect of the games played? A bit like Gilchrist, his stats don't bear comparison with Kallis but bloody hell he turned some matches for Aus.
@catogrande said in The Ashes:
@mn5 More the longevity of Kallis and the sheer number of tons the bloke got. More test tons than most regular batsmen. Anyway, my point being (in relation to Botham's effectiveness), who had the most profound effect of the games played? A bit like Gilchrist, his stats don't bear comparison with Kallis but bloody hell he turned some matches for Aus.
I think Kalliss stats surpass his aura if that makes sense but fuck me he was one of the very best batsmen of his generation with the added bonus of being about as good as Chris Martin with the ball!
-
England's attack looking a bit pop-gun at the moment. Bowling tidily, keeping the scoring rate down but basically just waiting for a batsman error. The contrast with Starc and Hazelwood last night is noticeable. A lot of the commentators have been commenting that England are bowling too short and I agree - their tactic with Warner for example seems to be tying him down, a cover sweeper if they pitch a bit too short and hope he gets frustrated. In itself that isn't a bad tactic but only after you've tried to get him out with the new ball - but they never pitched the ball up enough to make him drive and find an edge.
As was noted, Starc's first delivery of the English innings (his loosener) was immediately the fastest ball of the match.
-
Trash. 143/7 in Adelaide? fucking hopeless. This should be all over by tomorrow.
-
That was a pearler by Anderson and so so close. The ball two deliveries later was a great one to that had Smith in no mans land.
