Other Cricket
-
@MN5 Five specialist bowlers?
While we are on it you can't include Dujon in any conversation about best keepers when he rarely kept to spinners
Lara was nowhere near as compelling to watch as the Master Blaster who basically wrote the script Lara followed.
I also think Sir Paddles wouldn't make an all time XI
@dogmeat said in Other Cricket:
@MN5 Five specialist bowlers?
While we are on it you can't include Dujon in any conversation about best keepers when he rarely kept to spinners
Lara was nowhere near as compelling to watch as the Master Blaster who basically wrote the script Lara followed.
I also think Sir Paddles wouldn't make an all time XI
How dare you come on a forum and not agree with my team 100%, who do you think you are ?
-
@Godder said in Other Cricket:
I don't have a problem with Kallis being on a greatest ever list somewhere, even if not top 5 or 10 in batting or bowling - his numbers and achievements are phenomenal. I'd put Sobers above him as an allrounder, though. I also don't think Kallis would make the all-time XI.
Me neither.
I would have two 100% shoe ins, Bradman and Sobers ( assuming it is the version of him that can bowl different varieties ).
One huge probable in Adam Gilchrist. ( but then so many people might argue such and such was a better pure "keeper" than he was, then the likes of Alan Knott, Jeff Dujon, Rod Marsh etc get a mention )
If a spinner is needed it's a toss up between Warnie and Murali. No one else comes close.
But then again I might assess the pitch and decide from my pool of ten quicks that I'd have to narrow down to about four which one gets a game.......( Paddles, Ambrose, Marshall, Garner, Lillee, McGrath, Waqar, Wasim, Steyn, Trueman ).
Is there room for another all rounder ? Imran Khan for me makes the biggest case with his absolutely amazing record.
Open with the old boys Hobbs and Sutcliffe........56 and 60 respectively as openers, fuck yeah......
Then assuming Bradman is a lock at 3 and Sobers is a lock at 6 we have room for just the two specialist batsmen out of Tendulkar, Lara, Richards, Ponting, Hammond, Kallis, Dravid, Sangakkara, Chappell, Barrington............plus more I can't think of......
.....and of course some of these guys might not be quite as good as their records indicate ( Sangakkara, possibly Kallis ) and some might be better than their records ( Botham, Gooch )
Crickets a funny game
@MN5 said in Other Cricket:
If a spinner is needed it's a toss up between Warnie and
Murali. No one else comes close.Edited to exclude chuckers
-
@MN5 said in Other Cricket:
If a spinner is needed it's a toss up between Warnie and
Murali. No one else comes close.Edited to exclude chuckers
@NTA said in Other Cricket:
@MN5 said in Other Cricket:
If a spinner is needed it's a toss up between Warnie and
Murali. No one else comes close.Edited to exclude chuckers
You’re such an Aussie.
His action was cleared at the time however dodgy it looked
-
@dogmeat said in Other Cricket:
@MN5 Five specialist bowlers?
While we are on it you can't include Dujon in any conversation about best keepers when he rarely kept to spinners
Lara was nowhere near as compelling to watch as the Master Blaster who basically wrote the script Lara followed.
I also think Sir Paddles wouldn't make an all time XI
How dare you come on a forum and not agree with my team 100%, who do you think you are ?
-
@NTA said in Other Cricket:
@MN5 said in Other Cricket:
If a spinner is needed it's a toss up between Warnie and
Murali. No one else comes close.Edited to exclude chuckers
You’re such an Aussie.
His action was cleared at the time however dodgy it looked
@MN5 said in Other Cricket:
@NTA said in Other Cricket:
@MN5 said in Other Cricket:
If a spinner is needed it's a toss up between Warnie and
Murali. No one else comes close.Edited to exclude chuckers
You’re such an Aussie.
His action was cleared at the time however dodgy it looked
The rules were changed to suit
-
@MN5 said in Other Cricket:
@NTA said in Other Cricket:
@MN5 said in Other Cricket:
If a spinner is needed it's a toss up between Warnie and
Murali. No one else comes close.Edited to exclude chuckers
You’re such an Aussie.
His action was cleared at the time however dodgy it looked
The rules were changed to suit
@NTA said in Other Cricket:
@MN5 said in Other Cricket:
@NTA said in Other Cricket:
@MN5 said in Other Cricket:
If a spinner is needed it's a toss up between Warnie and
Murali. No one else comes close.Edited to exclude chuckers
You’re such an Aussie.
His action was cleared at the time however dodgy it looked
The rules were changed to suit
Might be a bit late to reopen the investigation and have his 800 wickets expunged from the record books to be fair
-
@MN5 said in Other Cricket:
If a spinner is needed it's a toss up between Warnie and
Murali. No one else comes close.Edited to exclude chuckers
@NTA said in Other Cricket:
@MN5 said in Other Cricket:
If a spinner is needed it's a toss up between Warnie and
Murali. No one else comes close.Edited to exclude chuckers
do you exclude drug cheats too?
-
@MN5 said in Other Cricket:
@NTA said in Other Cricket:
@MN5 said in Other Cricket:
If a spinner is needed it's a toss up between Warnie and
Murali. No one else comes close.Edited to exclude chuckers
You’re such an Aussie.
His action was cleared at the time however dodgy it looked
The rules were changed to suit
@NTA said in Other Cricket:
@MN5 said in Other Cricket:
@NTA said in Other Cricket:
@MN5 said in Other Cricket:
If a spinner is needed it's a toss up between Warnie and
Murali. No one else comes close.Edited to exclude chuckers
You’re such an Aussie.
His action was cleared at the time however dodgy it looked
The rules were changed to suit
fair play - they found when they tested that actions that looked clean actually had significant flex/bend.
Murali could bowl his arsenal in a cast. I'm good with that.
-
@NTA said in Other Cricket:
@MN5 said in Other Cricket:
If a spinner is needed it's a toss up between Warnie and
Murali. No one else comes close.Edited to exclude chuckers
do you exclude drug cheats too?
@nzzp said in Other Cricket:
@NTA said in Other Cricket:
@MN5 said in Other Cricket:
If a spinner is needed it's a toss up between Warnie and
Murali. No one else comes close.Edited to exclude chuckers
do you exclude drug cheats too?
You'll remember he DID actually serve time.
-
@NTA said in Other Cricket:
@MN5 said in Other Cricket:
@NTA said in Other Cricket:
@MN5 said in Other Cricket:
If a spinner is needed it's a toss up between Warnie and
Murali. No one else comes close.Edited to exclude chuckers
You’re such an Aussie.
His action was cleared at the time however dodgy it looked
The rules were changed to suit
fair play - they found when they tested that actions that looked clean actually had significant flex/bend.
Murali could bowl his arsenal in a cast. I'm good with that.
@nzzp said in Other Cricket:
@NTA said in Other Cricket:
@MN5 said in Other Cricket:
@NTA said in Other Cricket:
@MN5 said in Other Cricket:
If a spinner is needed it's a toss up between Warnie and
Murali. No one else comes close.Edited to exclude chuckers
You’re such an Aussie.
His action was cleared at the time however dodgy it looked
The rules were changed to suit
fair play - they found when they tested that actions that looked clean actually had significant flex/bend.
Murali could bowl his arsenal in a cast. I'm good with that.
Muralis record is absolutely fucken ridiculous on paper. He took TWENTY TWO ten wicket hauls.
Quite a number of great bowlers didn’t take one ( Joel Garner, Bob Willis, Jeff Thomson among others )
-
@nzzp said in Other Cricket:
@NTA said in Other Cricket:
@MN5 said in Other Cricket:
If a spinner is needed it's a toss up between Warnie and
Murali. No one else comes close.Edited to exclude chuckers
do you exclude drug cheats too?
You'll remember he DID actually serve time.
@NTA said in Other Cricket:
@nzzp said in Other Cricket:
@NTA said in Other Cricket:
@MN5 said in Other Cricket:
If a spinner is needed it's a toss up between Warnie and
Murali. No one else comes close.Edited to exclude chuckers
do you exclude drug cheats too?
You'll remember he DID actually serve time.
Punishment by the same organisation that allowed Murali to play. So Murali's ok as well then?
It is fascinating to see people's response to him - he is a classic wedge issue; you're either on one side or t'other.
Ridiculous bowler. His flexibility was nuts - there was a photo of him holding his own forearm. -
@NTA said in Other Cricket:
@nzzp said in Other Cricket:
@NTA said in Other Cricket:
@MN5 said in Other Cricket:
If a spinner is needed it's a toss up between Warnie and
Murali. No one else comes close.Edited to exclude chuckers
do you exclude drug cheats too?
You'll remember he DID actually serve time.
Punishment by the same organisation that allowed Murali to play. So Murali's ok as well then?
It is fascinating to see people's response to him - he is a classic wedge issue; you're either on one side or t'other.
Ridiculous bowler. His flexibility was nuts - there was a photo of him holding his own forearm.@nzzp said in Other Cricket:
@NTA said in Other Cricket:
@nzzp said in Other Cricket:
@NTA said in Other Cricket:
@MN5 said in Other Cricket:
If a spinner is needed it's a toss up between Warnie and
Murali. No one else comes close.Edited to exclude chuckers
do you exclude drug cheats too?
You'll remember he DID actually serve time.
Punishment by the same organisation that allowed Murali to play. So Murali's ok as well then?
It is fascinating to see people's response to him - he is a classic wedge issue; you're either on one side or t'other.
Ridiculous bowler. His flexibility was nuts - there was a photo of him holding his own forearm.Would you pick him over Warne in a team ?
-
@NTA said in Other Cricket:
@nzzp said in Other Cricket:
@NTA said in Other Cricket:
@MN5 said in Other Cricket:
If a spinner is needed it's a toss up between Warnie and
Murali. No one else comes close.Edited to exclude chuckers
do you exclude drug cheats too?
You'll remember he DID actually serve time.
Punishment by the same organisation that allowed Murali to play. So Murali's ok as well then?
It is fascinating to see people's response to him - he is a classic wedge issue; you're either on one side or t'other.
Ridiculous bowler. His flexibility was nuts - there was a photo of him holding his own forearm.@nzzp said in Other Cricket:
Punishment by the same organisation that allowed Murali to play. So Murali's ok as well then?
Of course he is. Just that he'll never be as good in my eyes as any non-chucker.
Do I think he was good? Sure.
Do I think the ICC is run by the subcontinent to suit themsleves? Absolutely.
Do I get tired of certain members of world cricket screaming "RACIST!!!" whenever they don't like something? Fkn oath. -
NZ triple centurions are on odd bunch. Sutcliffe and Turner obviously class. I know bugger all about Roger Blunt. Mark Richardson and Devon Conway, both good, on the cusp of great. But then you have Ken Rutherford, Dean Brownie, Peter Fulton, Michael Papps and now Tom Bruce. All decent players, but none really set the world alight when given the chance at higher honours.
-
NZ triple centurions are on odd bunch. Sutcliffe and Turner obviously class. I know bugger all about Roger Blunt. Mark Richardson and Devon Conway, both good, on the cusp of great. But then you have Ken Rutherford, Dean Brownie, Peter Fulton, Michael Papps and now Tom Bruce. All decent players, but none really set the world alight when given the chance at higher honours.
@Cyclops said in Other Cricket:
NZ triple centurions are on odd bunch. Sutcliffe and Turner obviously class. I know bugger all about Roger Blunt. Mark Richardson and Devon Conway, both good, on the cusp of great. But then you have Ken Rutherford, Dean Brownie, Peter Fulton, Michael Papps and now Tom Bruce. All decent players, but none really set the world alight when given the chance at higher honours.
I'd say the biggest factor there is 4-day FC cricket.
4 of them in the 90 odd years when NZ domestic FC was 3 days. Then 6 in 40 years since it became 4 layers.
Then consider, since about late 90s or 2000 the blackcap schedule that the top batsmen never play Plunket Shield. So it is the more fringe players dominating these fixtures.
Lastly. Quantity of oportunity. Sutcliffe played a Plunket Shield season of only 3 games each. Papps, Brownie etc plated 10 game seasons.
-
NZ triple centurions are on odd bunch. Sutcliffe and Turner obviously class. I know bugger all about Roger Blunt. Mark Richardson and Devon Conway, both good, on the cusp of great. But then you have Ken Rutherford, Dean Brownie, Peter Fulton, Michael Papps and now Tom Bruce. All decent players, but none really set the world alight when given the chance at higher honours.
@Cyclops said in Other Cricket:
NZ triple centurions are on odd bunch. Sutcliffe and Turner obviously class. I know bugger all about Roger Blunt. Mark Richardson and Devon Conway, both good, on the cusp of great. But then you have Ken Rutherford, Dean Brownie, Peter Fulton, Michael Papps and now Tom Bruce. All decent players, but none really set the world alight when given the chance at higher honours.
Tom Bruce has the kind of record that should have got him capped in the longer form by now. What gives ?
A triple ton is still rare as all hell though, only 32 in test history. NONE scored between Lawrence Rowe getting 302 in 1974 until Graham Gooch got 333 in 1990.
It is a massive effort.
-
BLUNT, ROGER CHARLES, who died in London on June 22, aged 65, played in nine Test matches for New Zealand between 1929 and 1931, seven against England and two against South Africa. Beginning his career as a leg-break bowler, he developed into a very fine batsman. Against A. H. H. Gilligan's England team in New Zealand in 1929, he headed his country's Test bowling averages with nine wickets for 19 runs each. In the opening Test of that tour, which marked the entry of New Zealand into the top rank of cricket, he not only gained a match analysis of five wickets for 34 runs but, with 45 not out, was top scorer in first innings of 112.
In England in 1931, his 96 helped New Zealand to a highly creditable draw with England at Lord's after being 230 in arrears on the first innings. Until B. Sutcliffe surpassed his 7,769 runs in 1953, he was the highest-scoring New Zealand batsman in first-class cricket. In a dazzling display for Otago against Canterbury at Christchurch in 1931-32, he hit 338 not out, then the highest score ever achieved by a New Zealand cricketer, though Sutcliffe many years later made 355 and 385. Well-known in business circles in England and New Zealand, he was awarded the M.B.E. in 1965.
https://www.espncricinfo.com/story/roger-blunt-155462
Seems a handy player. I wouldn't put Rigor or Conway anywhere near great.
-
