Out of the batch of talented young batsmen coming though (Smith, Root, Kohli, etc.), I think Kane Williamson may be the most talented of them all. He's lovely to watch, and a class above anyone else in his side.
Out of the batch of talented young batsmen coming though (Smith, Root, Kohli, etc.), I think Kane Williamson may be the most talented of them all. He's lovely to watch, and a class above anyone else in his side.
I watched him last night between 55 and about 110, and he was just bloody wonderful to watch. A couple of the cover drives were of the Cowdrey variety.
Here's a question, who bats 3-6 in the current World XI? A golden era for those sorts of players. Not many openers around, conversely. Or keepers.
Anyone watching the "All Stars" game?
Think I will wait until after and download it from ESPN as I missed the start.
I gave up when I saw where it was being played.
I watched 1 ball with Ponting needing 7 off 17 and Sachin chucking down some pies.
Looked a disgrace.
Meanwhile I see Pietersen has been going ballistic in the Biltong Bash
Normal service resumed in OD then
Apparently such days are the price we pay for the exciting brand of cricket that England now play. Give me Trott grinding us to 234 any day.
We'll still make 350.
We do actually bat to 10 here. Willey to Topley is probably the biggest 10 to 11 dropoff in cricket history.
Also Pakistan are the worst chasers of a target going. And we have Woakes. We can't fail.
I started doing some digging, and I think if you take the metric to be average when coming in at 10/11 (6+ innings), the biggest drop off might be Brett Lee (39) down to Glenn McGrath (7).Originally Posted by Jimmy Floyd
I realise this is answering a question nobody asked, but that's what cricket statistics are for.
With all due respect to Brett Lee, which is a lot, how on earth did he average 39 over that long a career?
Mind blown.
http://www.espncricinfo.com/australi...ayer/6278.html
Oh wait, he didn't. And did he even bat at 10?
Computer also says no to that (majority seems to be 8/9)
Yeah, I wasn't sure how to filter it, so I went with "average when batting at 10", and made the cutoff to be more than five matches. Maybe I should have put it much higher in retrospect. He batted there eight times. It's not the perfect metric, but I wasn't in the mood to pore through scorecards from the 1950's, either.
Pretty good recovery. Taylor and his biceps are the future.
In terms of long-term 10s, it looks like it might be Peter Pollock (averaged 21 at 10, where he batted in 20 of his 41 test innings) backing onto someone named Pat Trimborn (averaged 6.5 in his four tests, unsurprisingly batting at 11).
Literally can't believe we've just had 3 largely shit years without him just because he is short. It's shit like this where Kevin really falls down.
Wouldn't this 10 to 11 debate be settled by whoever batted at 10 when Chris Martin was playing for New Zealand?
Or, non-professionally, whoever batted 10 when I used to tinker around at the bottom of the order.
Topley is not very far off Chris Martin I reckon, having seen him flail a couple of times.
This is golden from these two.
The full list of NZ players who batted at 10 ahead of Chris Martin. I've ordered it by their average at 10, because I'm not sure how to get at their career average.
http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/eng...s;type=batting
When it was Iain O'Brien, the difference wasn't actually that marked.
There's a few occasions where Tim Southee came in at 10 before Chris Martin at 11. Or James Franklin, who only came in at 10 once (0* off one ball faced, if you were interested), but has 21 first-class hundreds, including a double. Has a test century to go with that, too.
That one partnership got 133. The other six partnerships combined, 28.
Are they the two shortest players in the team?
You have to say the batting was woefully poor from all concerned there. Never mind, next time we'll get 400.
It's a bit ridiculous to say this when he's sitting on 215 off 245, but Warner has matured incredibly as a batsman. He's more watchful, and is always alert for ones and twos - 77 singles so far in the innings. He's definitely not the slogger he was early in his career.
England-esque from the Kiwis. Waking up with the same two batsmen at the crease as when you went to sleep six hours earlier.
I thought New Zealand were meant to have something approaching a fucking clue?
I suppose they did lose to us in a one day series, that takes some real bollocks.
To have any chance New Zealand would have had to have played this on a Hobart GREENTOP, and be under the impression they were playing someone other than Australia.
Stone cold classic Jason Roy knock there. 50 and out.
Get him in the Test side just for shits and giggles. Bat him at 9 or something and he can get 34 off 7 balls when the oppo are least expecting it.
Didn't even realise we were playing.
Hales.
270ao from here.
Our inability to hit boundaries borders on the embarrassing. Gone absolutely nowhere since Hales started approaching his ton.
Run rate exactly the same in 49th over as it was in 25th, just four down. Seriously poor stuff.
56 off the last ten having had eight/nine wickets in hand is pretty fucking superb.
31-3 off 13.
Pile on Pakistan.
Or not. Chris Woakes just too good for yet another nation of 300 million.
Did I see earlier that before today's century Alex 'The Next Saviour of England's Test Opening Partnership' Hales had only got two 50s in a load of ODIs?
Yeah, I was a bit taken aback by seeing that was his maiden ODI hundred.
New Zealand really don't have the bowling when the ball isn't moving through the air. Their young quicks are decent, but reliant on swing. No swing on a hot clear day in Australia, lads...
Warner's just unfair on flat, even Australian pitches.
Fucking hell, Immy T has dropped a proper goober at square leg against India.
South Africa vs spin is evidence that we should just bin off the likes of Jimmy and instead take Fat Sam, Zafar, Mason Crane and possibly Shaun Udal down there.
Watching the Aus v NZ highlights now, and Kane Williamson is looking sexual as fuck. My goodness, the timing.
I love Steve Smith, and if I needed a current player to bat for my life under pressure, I'd probably pick him. But Williamson is the most talented young player going around at the moment, no question.
If we remove the age qualification, it might just be Amla/De Villiers ahead of him, to be perfectly honest.
Taylor/Williamson is New Zealand's most prolific ever partnership (in terms of total runs scored), for any wicket.
Went ahead of Astle/Fleming in this match.
Amla seems to have gone off the boil somewhat (still very good), but obviously AB is a freak show.
I'm on the verge of putting that Test team together.
Cook
Warner
Williamson
Smith*
Root
de Villiers+
Kohli
Ashwin
Wahab Riaz
Steyn
Anderson
I'm still not entirely happy with it, but I really just want to see the look on Virat's face when he's told he's batting seven.
I'd largely agree. Certainly on the batting.
Anderson wouldn't be in my lineup, although I'm not immediately sure who I'd put there instead - maybe Trent Boult, who has actually bowled generally pretty well on this tour, and has generally been New Zealand's best bowler. Actually, I'd probably go Herath and enjoy watching the two spinners play together.
Riaz would be great just for the windup, but I'm not sure I'd trust him in tests to carry a side. Exciting to watch though.
EDIT: I suppose Anderson would have to be in there if it's a three fast bowler lineup though. But that's more of an indictment of the global fast bowling stocks than anything else. Also, give Starc a year or two.
I thought about Rangy but only as an alternative to Trashwin, there's no way I could leave out any of those three seamers. Jimmy doesn't get the rep in some countries but the guy's a bloody colossus. Wahab is just a complete geezer.
I was trying to think of an all-rounder to allow me to leave Virat out but I don't think there is one apart from Angelo Mathews.
Anderson has to be in it, no question. He's consistently a beast in almost any conditions these days.
A world XI without Rangy Herath is invalid, what a man. Him and Angelo for Kohli and Ashwin. Fuck India. I'd probably take Yasir Shah over Ashwin as well at this moment, interested to see how he would go outside Asia.
Not sure that beats this XI, Jim:
Hurts to this day that I didn't make the squad
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
