Black Caps v Pakistan
-
-
@Snowy said in Black Caps v Pakistan:
@gt12 Holy shit, Mankad. One of the most famous names in cricket (for different reasons).
Unfairly maligned I think, nothing wrong with a mankad in my book. Up to the non striker to be timing his backing up properly.
-
The other thing to consider is that a double requires one massive effort in a single innings, whereas 10fers (almost always) require sustained excellence over 2 innings.
@Cyclops said in Black Caps v Pakistan:
The other thing to consider is that a double requires one massive effort in a single innings, whereas 10fers (almost always) require sustained excellence over 2 innings.
A double century is a set standard though. It usually means you have batted a day and a half, seen of one or two new balls and taken fresh spells from all the oppositions best bowlers without making an error (or in the case of Pakistan having them drop you five times on the way).
10fers vary so much in quality between the mix of tail enders, game situation etc. 10fers are more a function of luck and opportunity - which is why you have so many seriously average spin bowlers on that list with 10fers like Krezja, Steve O'Keefe, Craig, Michael Bevan, Allan Border (vs 1980s West Indies of all teams) etc
Jamieson's 10fer stood out because he gutted their top order twice - most 10fers rely on clearing the tail at least once if not twice.
-
@Snowy said in Black Caps v Pakistan:
@gt12 Holy shit, Mankad. One of the most famous names in cricket (for different reasons).
Unfairly maligned I think, nothing wrong with a mankad in my book. Up to the non striker to be timing his backing up properly.
@Cyclops said in Black Caps v Pakistan:
@Snowy said in Black Caps v Pakistan:
@gt12 Holy shit, Mankad. One of the most famous names in cricket (for different reasons).
Unfairly maligned I think, nothing wrong with a mankad in my book. Up to the non striker to be timing his backing up properly.
I agree with you. He just stopped a batsman cheating. Mankad sounds like an impressive player too.
"the MCC, the arbitrators of laws of cricket, have stressed that it is a legitimate dismissal and a "very necessary provision."
Even Bradman said this:
"For the life of me I cannot understand why the laws of cricket make it quite clear that the non-striker must keep within his ground until the ball has been delivered. If not, why is the provision there which enables the bowler to run him out?"That was after the Aussie press had a go at Mankad and "drew the line" as they are wont (yes that is the correct term) to do. They have a bit of a habit of shifting that line about "the spirit of the game" and "laws" to suit themselves.
-
@Cyclops said in Black Caps v Pakistan:
@Snowy said in Black Caps v Pakistan:
@gt12 Holy shit, Mankad. One of the most famous names in cricket (for different reasons).
Unfairly maligned I think, nothing wrong with a mankad in my book. Up to the non striker to be timing his backing up properly.
I agree with you. He just stopped a batsman cheating. Mankad sounds like an impressive player too.
"the MCC, the arbitrators of laws of cricket, have stressed that it is a legitimate dismissal and a "very necessary provision."
Even Bradman said this:
"For the life of me I cannot understand why the laws of cricket make it quite clear that the non-striker must keep within his ground until the ball has been delivered. If not, why is the provision there which enables the bowler to run him out?"That was after the Aussie press had a go at Mankad and "drew the line" as they are wont (yes that is the correct term) to do. They have a bit of a habit of shifting that line about "the spirit of the game" and "laws" to suit themselves.
@Snowy said in Black Caps v Pakistan:
@Cyclops said in Black Caps v Pakistan:
@Snowy said in Black Caps v Pakistan:
@gt12 Holy shit, Mankad. One of the most famous names in cricket (for different reasons).
Unfairly maligned I think, nothing wrong with a mankad in my book. Up to the non striker to be timing his backing up properly.
I agree with you. He just stopped a batsman cheating. Mankad sounds like an impressive player too.
"the MCC, the arbitrators of laws of cricket, have stressed that it is a legitimate dismissal and a "very necessary provision."
Even Bradman said this:
"For the life of me I cannot understand why the laws of cricket make it quite clear that the non-striker must keep within his ground until the ball has been delivered. If not, why is the provision there which enables the bowler to run him out?"That was after the Aussie press had a go at Mankad and "drew the line" as they are wont (yes that is the correct term) to do. They have a bit of a habit of shifting that line about "the spirit of the game" and "laws" to suit themselves.
Upvote for "wont"
-
@Snowy said in Black Caps v Pakistan:
@Cyclops said in Black Caps v Pakistan:
@Snowy said in Black Caps v Pakistan:
@gt12 Holy shit, Mankad. One of the most famous names in cricket (for different reasons).
Unfairly maligned I think, nothing wrong with a mankad in my book. Up to the non striker to be timing his backing up properly.
I agree with you. He just stopped a batsman cheating. Mankad sounds like an impressive player too.
"the MCC, the arbitrators of laws of cricket, have stressed that it is a legitimate dismissal and a "very necessary provision."
Even Bradman said this:
"For the life of me I cannot understand why the laws of cricket make it quite clear that the non-striker must keep within his ground until the ball has been delivered. If not, why is the provision there which enables the bowler to run him out?"That was after the Aussie press had a go at Mankad and "drew the line" as they are wont (yes that is the correct term) to do. They have a bit of a habit of shifting that line about "the spirit of the game" and "laws" to suit themselves.
Upvote for "wont"
-
Okay, had some time to look over the stats for 10fers and double tons, and it confirms what we were thinking before, that doubles have got easier and 10fers have got harder. Wasn't 100% sure where to split the years, but these felt about right.
The early period 10fers come every 2.5 games, while doubles are only 1 in 27 - more than 10 times as often. More or less as expected with uncovered pitches.
It's interesting that the double rate drops so dramatically in the interwar period; I'd attribute this, in the most, to the Don. The 30s in particular were the pinnacle of his career, and he accounts for more than a quarter of the doubles scored in this time period.
From the end of WWII to 2000 doubles get harder. I split out the 80s and 90s, since that felt a bit different; I think the 80s in particular look like a bit of an outlier, and I'd attribute that to the great fast bowlers that were around then.
There's an a significant increase in frequency since 2000 - presumably this is the result of flat pitches we've come to expect. Sehwag, Tendulkar, Sangakkara, Jayawardene, Ponting, Kohli and Younis Khan are all in the top 10 all time double century makers. It's interesting because 3 (+ Kohli if he keeps performing at his current level) of them would be strong contenders for the all time first XI, while 3 of them are great test players, but a step down from that level. So maybe not entirely down to flatter wickets. Also interesting that the rate of 10fers has actually been fairly consistent since the 20s onwards.
-
Okay, had some time to look over the stats for 10fers and double tons, and it confirms what we were thinking before, that doubles have got easier and 10fers have got harder. Wasn't 100% sure where to split the years, but these felt about right.
The early period 10fers come every 2.5 games, while doubles are only 1 in 27 - more than 10 times as often. More or less as expected with uncovered pitches.
It's interesting that the double rate drops so dramatically in the interwar period; I'd attribute this, in the most, to the Don. The 30s in particular were the pinnacle of his career, and he accounts for more than a quarter of the doubles scored in this time period.
From the end of WWII to 2000 doubles get harder. I split out the 80s and 90s, since that felt a bit different; I think the 80s in particular look like a bit of an outlier, and I'd attribute that to the great fast bowlers that were around then.
There's an a significant increase in frequency since 2000 - presumably this is the result of flat pitches we've come to expect. Sehwag, Tendulkar, Sangakkara, Jayawardene, Ponting, Kohli and Younis Khan are all in the top 10 all time double century makers. It's interesting because 3 (+ Kohli if he keeps performing at his current level) of them would be strong contenders for the all time first XI, while 3 of them are great test players, but a step down from that level. So maybe not entirely down to flatter wickets. Also interesting that the rate of 10fers has actually been fairly consistent since the 20s onwards.
-
@Chris-B said in Black Caps v Pakistan:
Jayasuriya has a triple century and 9 wickets!
One of my favourite cricketers of all-time. His ODI hitting was something else. I was at the SCG back in 2003 when he smacked the Aussie bowlers to all corners and he and Atapattu put on 230 opening partnership. Some of the cleanest hitting I’ve seen live.
Backed that century up with another one a few nights later against the Poms.
-
A useful article summarising what needs to happen for NZ to play in the World Test Championship final at Lords.
-
@Chris-B said in Black Caps v Pakistan:
Jayasuriya has a triple century and 9 wickets!
One of my favourite cricketers of all-time. His ODI hitting was something else. I was at the SCG back in 2003 when he smacked the Aussie bowlers to all corners and he and Atapattu put on 230 opening partnership. Some of the cleanest hitting I’ve seen live.
Backed that century up with another one a few nights later against the Poms.
@ACT-Crusader said in Black Caps v Pakistan:
@Chris-B said in Black Caps v Pakistan:
Jayasuriya has a triple century and 9 wickets!
One of my favourite cricketers of all-time. His ODI hitting was something else. I was at the SCG back in 2003 when he smacked the Aussie bowlers to all corners and he and Atapattu put on 230 opening partnership. Some of the cleanest hitting I’ve seen live.
Backed that century up with another one a few nights later against the Poms.
He's a favourite of mine too! I remember that game you're talking about, and I think he backed the century up by taking a few wickets too.
Attapattu was a funny one. Had a worse start to test cricket than Ken Rutherford (5 ducks in his first 6 innings including, I think, a king pair) but ended up with a very impressive career, but always seemed to be in the shade of Jayasuriya and the rest.
-
So we're at three right? Shakib, Holder Botham. Which is the same as 100/10 in the same match (Botham, Shakib and Imran Khan). Dunno which is the tougher achievement.
@Cyclops said in Black Caps v Pakistan:
So we're at three right? Shakib, Holder Botham. Which is the same as 100/10 in the same match (Botham, Shakib and Imran Khan). Dunno which is the tougher achievement.
Holder is some player. Unfortunately his 10 teammates are various degrees of shit which is why he suffered two innings defeats in a row
-
https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/sport/434199/black-caps-need-away-series-win-to-achieve-greatness-bidwell
Bidwell is a bit heavy handed on the negativity - our series win over Pakistan in the UAE was a couple of years ago now, but they were a seriously impressive team on a real tear at the time. And I this Pakistan side have been made to look worse than they are by some very good performances by our lot.
That said, I think it's fair that we missed a opportunity to make the rest of the world pay attention with the Aussie tour. Even a 3-0 loss where every match was competitive into the 5th day would have been enough I think (and if we'd done that we probably would have snuck at least one). Getting to Lords for this final would be a chance for partial redemption.
-
https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/sport/434199/black-caps-need-away-series-win-to-achieve-greatness-bidwell
Bidwell is a bit heavy handed on the negativity - our series win over Pakistan in the UAE was a couple of years ago now, but they were a seriously impressive team on a real tear at the time. And I this Pakistan side have been made to look worse than they are by some very good performances by our lot.
That said, I think it's fair that we missed a opportunity to make the rest of the world pay attention with the Aussie tour. Even a 3-0 loss where every match was competitive into the 5th day would have been enough I think (and if we'd done that we probably would have snuck at least one). Getting to Lords for this final would be a chance for partial redemption.
@Cyclops said in Black Caps v Pakistan:
That said, I think it's fair that we missed a opportunity to make the rest of the world pay attention with the Aussie tour.
eh, it wasn't important enough to spend time in the country acclimatising, or starting with a familiar red ball. Nah, we'll just start with a pink ball in perth and see what happens yo.
Also, the leadup to that was shocking. Picking Mitchell and hten dropping him for a prayer with Ferguson was abysmal selection
-
https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/sport/434199/black-caps-need-away-series-win-to-achieve-greatness-bidwell
Bidwell is a bit heavy handed on the negativity - our series win over Pakistan in the UAE was a couple of years ago now, but they were a seriously impressive team on a real tear at the time. And I this Pakistan side have been made to look worse than they are by some very good performances by our lot.
That said, I think it's fair that we missed a opportunity to make the rest of the world pay attention with the Aussie tour. Even a 3-0 loss where every match was competitive into the 5th day would have been enough I think (and if we'd done that we probably would have snuck at least one). Getting to Lords for this final would be a chance for partial redemption.
@Cyclops That Australian tour was one where nothing went right - from Boult being out, losing the toss in Perth, to Ferguson breaking down....and on and on it went.
And we were partially the architects of our own demise in agreeing to the schedule as @nzzp points out. And I think we were shell-shocked by what the Aussie pace men produced in Perth, which was genuinely frightening.
But, there is no escaping that the final result was a complete humiliation. So while it's great that the numbers add up to us being No. 1, I think it comes with a big asterisk labelled Australia.
-
@Cyclops That Australian tour was one where nothing went right - from Boult being out, losing the toss in Perth, to Ferguson breaking down....and on and on it went.
And we were partially the architects of our own demise in agreeing to the schedule as @nzzp points out. And I think we were shell-shocked by what the Aussie pace men produced in Perth, which was genuinely frightening.
But, there is no escaping that the final result was a complete humiliation. So while it's great that the numbers add up to us being No. 1, I think it comes with a big asterisk labelled Australia.
@Chris-B said in Black Caps v Pakistan:
But, there is no escaping that the final result was a complete humiliation. So while it's great that the numbers add up to us being No. 1, I think it comes with a big asterisk labelled Australia.
I'd say the asterisk is more that we got plenty of home series. Reality is, winning away is really hard. Australia have only won in India once - 2004 - and got thumped plenty of times. Winning at home is kind of expected.
I still think we bowled exceptionally well at Smith and Loos Bus Change in Perth ... they were just good enough to deal with it and not get out. Fair play to the, but doesn't make the bowling attack (with an injury) suddenly bad. After 5 sessions, getting their quicks with a swinging ball was just too much, and we struggled to recover.
Also, those quicks. Goddamn. They mowed through India, and their lineup is something special. Amazing group of bowlers
-
@Chris-B said in Black Caps v Pakistan:
But, there is no escaping that the final result was a complete humiliation. So while it's great that the numbers add up to us being No. 1, I think it comes with a big asterisk labelled Australia.
I'd say the asterisk is more that we got plenty of home series. Reality is, winning away is really hard. Australia have only won in India once - 2004 - and got thumped plenty of times. Winning at home is kind of expected.
I still think we bowled exceptionally well at Smith and Loos Bus Change in Perth ... they were just good enough to deal with it and not get out. Fair play to the, but doesn't make the bowling attack (with an injury) suddenly bad. After 5 sessions, getting their quicks with a swinging ball was just too much, and we struggled to recover.
Also, those quicks. Goddamn. They mowed through India, and their lineup is something special. Amazing group of bowlers
@nzzp said in Black Caps v Pakistan:
Also, those quicks. Goddamn. They mowed through India, and their lineup is something special. Amazing group of bowlers
Yeah - they are. They've got three guys the size of Big Kyle and they all bowl 5-10 clicks faster than him. And then they've got Lyon vs Santner.
Even with us playing at home, I wouldn't put any money on us beating Australia.
