Cricket - Best ever etc
-
-
@No-Quarter "padded" because he managed to drag the career average kicking and screaming to 40 at the end didn't he?
-
@mariner4life said in Modern batting averages:
@No-Quarter "padded" because he managed to drag the career average kicking and screaming to 40 at the end didn't he?
In his last innings if I remember right. Good on him, 40 is so much better than 39.....
Conversion rate was still pretty shite though. He also must have been a terrible bowler, in 111 tests he never turned the arm over once. Even Brendan Mccullum has a test wicket !
-
@MN5 said in Modern batting averages:
@mariner4life said in Modern batting averages:
@No-Quarter "padded" because he managed to drag the career average kicking and screaming to 40 at the end didn't he?
In his last innings if I remember right. Good on him, 40 is so much better than 39.....
Conversion rate was still pretty shite though.
lets face facts, he was a bit shit. Stylish means fuck all if there are no runs involved.
Still, he's hardly alone in that era's batting lineup. We really were a park cricket team there for a while.
And it's entirely likely we will return to that when we lose this team. These are days to be savoured.
-
@mariner4life said in Modern batting averages:
And it's entirely likely we will return to that when we lose this team. These are days to be savoured.
I think we're consistently producing more quality players though. We need about 1 international 'OK' player each year, and a standout every few years to have a competitive team. Given the size of the pyramid we have, I think we're starting to see that go as well as it can.
-
@mariner4life said in Modern batting averages:
@MN5 said in Modern batting averages:
@mariner4life said in Modern batting averages:
@No-Quarter "padded" because he managed to drag the career average kicking and screaming to 40 at the end didn't he?
In his last innings if I remember right. Good on him, 40 is so much better than 39.....
Conversion rate was still pretty shite though.
lets face facts, he was a bit shit. Stylish means fuck all if there are no runs involved.
Still, he's hardly alone in that era's batting lineup. We really were a park cricket team there for a while.
And it's entirely likely we will return to that when we lose this team. These are days to be savoured.
I think that’s pretty harsh. An average of 40 over 111 tests is very good, especially given the amount of dogshit teammates he had in his career ( seriously, some of his contemporaries have embarrassing records ).
I think the style he had made him look a bit careless just like David Gower and Mark Waugh.
But I definitely agree that we need to make the most of this team because the next wave of donkeys could only be 4-5 years away.
-
@nzzp said in Modern batting averages:
@mariner4life said in Modern batting averages:
And it's entirely likely we will return to that when we lose this team. These are days to be savoured.
I think we're consistently producing more quality players though. We need about 1 international 'OK' player each year, and a standout every few years to have a competitive team. Given the size of the pyramid we have, I think we're starting to see that go as well as it can.
I think this is right, early days I know but Jamieson looks likely to join what is far and away the best trio of fast bowlers we've ever had at the same time. Conway will be shoehorned into the test team either at the expense of Nicholls or when/if Taylor retires.
But fast forward a few years when KW ( especially ) Latham, Boult, Southee, Wagner, BJ, are all gone then we could potentially be in big trouble and struggle against the minnows again. .
-
@MN5 said in Modern batting averages:
@mariner4life said in Modern batting averages:
@MN5 said in Modern batting averages:
@mariner4life said in Modern batting averages:
@No-Quarter "padded" because he managed to drag the career average kicking and screaming to 40 at the end didn't he?
In his last innings if I remember right. Good on him, 40 is so much better than 39.....
Conversion rate was still pretty shite though.
lets face facts, he was a bit shit. Stylish means fuck all if there are no runs involved.
Still, he's hardly alone in that era's batting lineup. We really were a park cricket team there for a while.
And it's entirely likely we will return to that when we lose this team. These are days to be savoured.
I think that’s pretty harsh. An average of 40 over 111 tests is very good, especially given the amount of dogshit teammates he had in his career ( seriously, some of his contemporaries have embarrassing records ).
I think the style he had made him look a bit careless just like David Gower and Mark Waugh.
But I definitely agree that we need to make the most of this team because the next wave of donkeys could only be 4-5 years away.
it is harsh, i get that, but
he played an enormous amount of tests, batting in the top order, and for most of it his average was below 40. he hit 9 hundreds, which is 8th all time for NZ, but he played 111 tests! And how many as skipper?
Even in NZ, i think he's no better than the Hall of Not Bad level
-
@mariner4life said in Modern batting averages:
Even in NZ, i think he's no better than the Hall of Not Bad level
Hall of Tame
-
@mariner4life said in Modern batting averages:
@MN5 said in Modern batting averages:
@mariner4life said in Modern batting averages:
@MN5 said in Modern batting averages:
@mariner4life said in Modern batting averages:
@No-Quarter "padded" because he managed to drag the career average kicking and screaming to 40 at the end didn't he?
In his last innings if I remember right. Good on him, 40 is so much better than 39.....
Conversion rate was still pretty shite though.
lets face facts, he was a bit shit. Stylish means fuck all if there are no runs involved.
Still, he's hardly alone in that era's batting lineup. We really were a park cricket team there for a while.
And it's entirely likely we will return to that when we lose this team. These are days to be savoured.
I think that’s pretty harsh. An average of 40 over 111 tests is very good, especially given the amount of dogshit teammates he had in his career ( seriously, some of his contemporaries have embarrassing records ).
I think the style he had made him look a bit careless just like David Gower and Mark Waugh.
But I definitely agree that we need to make the most of this team because the next wave of donkeys could only be 4-5 years away.
it is harsh, i get that, but
he played an enormous amount of tests, batting in the top order, and for most of it his average was below 40. he hit 9 hundreds, which is 8th all time for NZ, but he played 111 tests! And how many as skipper?
Even in NZ, i think he's no better than the Hall of Not Bad level
We're not Australia. 40 is a very good return for a kiwi. The fact he got it there indicates he got better as his career progressed unlike so many cricketers.
Yep, very few hundreds over that period but the average shows there were enough decent scores there. Plus he was extremely highly regarded as a skipper.
If we'd had this chat 10 years ago I'd have him in discussions for an all time XI. Obviously KW and Rossco keep him out now though.
-
-
@mariner4life said in Modern batting averages:
@MN5 said in Modern batting averages:
discussions for an all time XI
over who?
Back then I would have had Jones and Crowe, now only the late MD makes it. Turner and Wright or Sutcliffe open.....but then would I pick Martin Donnelly ?
This is a good article in the other thread which you may have missed. I think my issue with the old boys who I never saw play was the fact they played fuck all tests......but Fleming did.....and our history isn't exactly full of genuine World Class performers.
-
The most frustrating thing about Fleming was he never looked out of his depth even against the very best in the world. Where our other players barely looked like they could get bat on ball he looked comfortable playing some world class shots. Until he got to about 30 then he'd be out.
-
Also in some defense of his home average he played in a time where we purposely made our pitches very seam friendly. The roads we have produced in recent years are night and day compared to what he was batting on.
-
-
@Godder said in Modern batting averages:
I'd put Fleming in the second or third XI. 7000 runs at 40 isn't great by world standards, but it's probably top 10 here.
Seriously ?
For me that would be guys like McMillan, Astle, Coney etc.
Out of our top ten test all time run scorers five average 40 or over and of these KW is over 50. So I think we’re kidding ourselves if Fleming isn’t in the conversation. Personally I’d have KW/Crowe/Rossco at 3-5, Fleming MAY get a chance at six ( not his preferred position ) but then again depending on the balance of the side that goes to Cairns, Watling or BMac ( if he’s considered as a keeper ). So Fleming probably walks into a 2nd XI and captains it too.
I don’t actually disagree with any of the criticisms on here about him and his batting but NZ hardly has the legacy of legends that other countries do.
-
@MN5 said in Modern batting averages:
@Godder said in Modern batting averages:
I'd put Fleming in the second or third XI. 7000 runs at 40 isn't great by world standards, but it's probably top 10 here.
Seriously ?
For me that would be guys like McMillan, Astle, Coney etc.
Out of our top ten test all time run scorers five average 40 or over and of these KW is over 50. So I think we’re kidding ourselves if Fleming isn’t in the conversation. Personally I’d have KW/Crowe/Rossco at 3-5, Fleming MAY get a chance at six ( not his preferred position ) but then again depending on the balance of the side that goes to Cairns, Watling or BMac ( if he’s considered as a keeper ). So Fleming probably walks into a 2nd XI and captains it too.
I don’t actually disagree with any of the criticisms on here about him and his batting but NZ hardly has the legacy of legends that other countries do.
Depends on whether the selection is just stuff them in or it's aiming for some sort of specialisation. Wouldn't pick him to open in the first or second XI since I think we have 4 better test openers (Wright, Turner, Richardson, T Latham), and he's not making number 4 ahead of Taylor or M Crowe, or 3 ahead of Williamson. Maybe he gets selected at 3 ahead A Jones, but I wouldn't. If we are also selecting number 5 and 6 from this collection rather than specialists, he probably gets into the second XI, but it would be easy to select a second XI without him because of balance, particularly of keeper and bowlers.
-
@Godder said in Modern batting averages:
@MN5 said in Modern batting averages:
@Godder said in Modern batting averages:
I'd put Fleming in the second or third XI. 7000 runs at 40 isn't great by world standards, but it's probably top 10 here.
Seriously ?
For me that would be guys like McMillan, Astle, Coney etc.
Out of our top ten test all time run scorers five average 40 or over and of these KW is over 50. So I think we’re kidding ourselves if Fleming isn’t in the conversation. Personally I’d have KW/Crowe/Rossco at 3-5, Fleming MAY get a chance at six ( not his preferred position ) but then again depending on the balance of the side that goes to Cairns, Watling or BMac ( if he’s considered as a keeper ). So Fleming probably walks into a 2nd XI and captains it too.
I don’t actually disagree with any of the criticisms on here about him and his batting but NZ hardly has the legacy of legends that other countries do.
Depends on whether the selection is just stuff them in or it's aiming for some sort of specialisation. Wouldn't pick him to open in the first or second XI since I think we have 4 better test openers (Wright, Turner, Richardson, T Latham), and he's not making number 4 ahead of Taylor or M Crowe, or 3 ahead of Williamson. Maybe he gets selected at 3 ahead A Jones, but I wouldn't. If we are also selecting number 5 and 6 from this collection rather than specialists, he probably gets into the second XI, but it would be easy to select a second XI without him because of balance, particularly of keeper and bowlers.
I hear that, but it’s not like we’re gonna pick Crowe at four then pick Astle/McMillan/Coney over Taylor because they batted there more than he did ! If a player is class he gets shoehorned in.
