The Roar
The Roar

Renato CARINI

Roar Rookie

Joined April 2020

1.1k

Views

3

Published

205

Comments

Passionate lover of Test cricket. Special interest in Test history and the Golden age, in particular. Enjoy discussing the greatest players and the classic contests.

Published

Comments

Yeah, good point regarding Wagner vs Smith last year but I think the Aussie will adapt to such tactics, as he has in the past.

Archer did knock smithy about at Lords but then Smith answered with 211 in the next innings.

No one can say what would happen if Smith had the face the bowlers of the 80s.

I don’t know if Trumper would have handled Bodyline well. . .

We do know, however, that Smith is a country mile in front of the next best Aussie and he’s handled everything thrown at him, despite looking ungainly against Wagner last year (they did met in NZ a couple of years back and Smith made his usual hundred.)

Commemorating the birth of Victor Trumper

I see your point about Smith part-way through his career but I would say he is nearer the finish than the start.

Smith is no flat-track bully, I have watched him singlehandedly carry Australia on countless occasions. He dominated the 2019 Ashes in a way that I have never seen before.
Imagine, no Australian could reach 75 in the first innings of five consecutive Tests, that’s how strong the bowling was. Then you have Smith making 144, 92, 211 and 80.

That is the opposite of an ftb.

Sure, Smith has made lots of runs against ordinary bowling, and on flat decks but he has consistently demonstrated his class and even if he never made another run, I would still rate him as one of our all-time greats.

What he has done between 2013-2020 gives him that right, IMO

With Border we may politely disagree.

His great strength was to show courage, fight and survive. He was at his best when the game needed saving, when runs didn’t matter and he could put his head down and say to the opposition ‘you can’t get me out’.

I would not call him a great matchwinner.

Even his best innings were characterised by struggle, tenacity and rock-like defense, rather than dominant play. He didn’t command in the way that Chappell, Ponting and Smith have done (and I’m talking of the years 78-84, when Australia was one of the best sides in the world).

Don’t get me wrong, AB was a very, very good player but we our talking about our greatest eleven.

Agree with you on Hayden, by the way.

Commemorating the birth of Victor Trumper

Hi Micko.

I agree wholeheartedly that Trumper is an automatic selection.

He was never a machine, spitting out huge scores no matter how irrelevant.

But you put him a situation that mattered and he would deliver more than anyone.

Bernie, matth and I tried to establish our all-time Aussie XI and came up with:

Trumper
Hayden (I said Lawry)
Don
Smith
Chappell/Ponting
Miller
Gilchrist
Lillee
O’Reilly
Warne
McGrath

I did suggest Davidson for left arm swing, to add variety, but was outvoted.

So pretty close to your side. . .

You don’t rate Smith?

Commemorating the birth of Victor Trumper

Maybe tomorrow.

I would like to say that I don’t want any hard feelings, okay?

We have different ideas in some areas. There’s nothing wrong with that.

Analysing Australia’s Test cricket winners: The best of the best

Three tests in a row

A v P in 1980 (2 and 3 tests)
Then centenary test

That’s about 90 innings, all up

Analysing Australia’s Test cricket winners: The best of the best

I can’t help

Analysing Australia’s Test cricket winners: The best of the best

Which supports my claim

Lots of soft runs in draws.

Analysing Australia’s Test cricket winners: The best of the best

Knock yourself out.

Everyone knows that the main reason tests matches are drawn is because the pitch favours batsmen.

Which also means that runs have less value, naturally.

If you can’t acknowledge this, I can’t help.

Analysing Australia’s Test cricket winners: The best of the best

All I need to say is this

On the whole over 2000 tests

Batsmen average 40 percent more in draws.

You haven’t explained why?

Could it just be that the pitch is a batsman’s paradise?

I think you know the answer.

Analysing Australia’s Test cricket winners: The best of the best

Makes no difference, Bernie, my point has been made.

Analysing Australia’s Test cricket winners: The best of the best

I agree with that.

What I’m saying is it’s less common.

An example using Bradman , I can name 2 needless hundreds in draws (334, 304)

And many huge scores that were unnecessary in wins (201, 244, 127, 112, 232) among many.

But they aren’t any examples of useless hundreds in defeat.

Trumper, of course, is another example.

Hobbs is another.

Useless scores in crushing defeats don’t happen much and when they do, they come from second-rate players who need every run.

Analysing Australia’s Test cricket winners: The best of the best

I never ‘dissed’ Border as you put it.

I said he was a very good player so it’s unfair of you to stretch my words into a cartoon version.

What I did say was that I wouldn’t class him as outstanding.

Among Australians, I rank him below Ponting, both Waughs, Smith, Chappell G.

On the world stage, I could name 15 or 20 players above him,
Over the last 30 years.

Analysing Australia’s Test cricket winners: The best of the best

Well have to agree to disagree on the subject of draws.

You can always find examples where an important innings was played to secure a draw.

But for every one such century, like KP in 2005, I can point to 10 that were worthless.

There’s a reason why, taken as a group, batsmen average 40 percent more in draws than in result matches.

I think we both know the reason why.

Analysing Australia’s Test cricket winners: The best of the best

My point was that the loss average is a better indicator that the won average.

I didn’t say it was flawless.

We are talking about different things.

Or are you saying that the win average, or draw average is a better guide??

Analysing Australia’s Test cricket winners: The best of the best

Making a big score when the game is all over doesn’t happen very often and it certainly didn’t happen in the cases of Trumper, Bradman, Hutton, Hobbs and most of the players at the top of matth’s list.

So I don’t accept this point.

I will address your question on Border in an upcoming article.

BTW: would Border have been chosen in the top six for the West Indies teams of the 80s?

Just curious on your view here.

Analysing Australia’s Test cricket winners: The best of the best

Kallis was a tremendous all rounder.

I would pick him in front of our whole top order, except for Ponting.

In not a big fan of his defensive style but you need a player like that in the top six.

Analysing Australia’s Test cricket winners: The best of the best

I agree with Dave on the point that losses are a better indicator.

It’s much easier to score 220 not out in a runaway victory, than it is to score 220 not out when you are behind by this much.

The problem is, when are are behind your whole innings is of value,
when in front only a portion of the innings matters,
and sometimes not even the first fifty.

Take Matthew Hayden’s 380 vs Zimbabwe
how much of this innings was of value to the team?

I know a lot about the career of Warren Bardsley.
He was the type of player who flourished when the going was easy,
and failed when runs were hardest to come by,
and therefore most in need,
(he never made a hundred in a decided Ashes match, despite 35 innings).

Yet, Bardsley finished with a very high ‘winning average’
(courtesy of runaway victories against South Africa).

Stats are only a guide but the losing stats are a better guide, IMO

Analysing Australia’s Test cricket winners: The best of the best

Okay, to clarify.

In this comparison, I am using their first two and half seasons in first class cricket (VT: 1897-98 until 1900; DB: 1927-28 until 1930).

Over these years, counting both grade and state cricket, Trumper has the better figures (as per the table).

I think you have ignored grade cricket.

Remember, for a young player climbing the ladder, grade cricket matters; more so before they have established a regular place in the state team.

Commemorating the birth of Victor Trumper

From that perspective, yes.

However, De Villiers sounds like a better match given his versatility and ability to hit in 360 degrees. Then back this up with orthodox play when longer innings are required.

Commemorating the birth of Victor Trumper

Hi matth.

Thanks for the positive feedback. It makes all the difference to know that one’s hard work has resulted in something of value.

I’m intrigued by your idea of ABDV as a modern day Trumper. To be honest, I don’t know that much about De Villiers, not having much interest in the shorter forms of the game but now that you have made this proposition, I shall do research. From what you write, I agree.

Commemorating the birth of Victor Trumper

Hi JGK.

How ironic, sitting in Crown Street while reading about an alumni of the local school!!
Some lovely cafes around there, too.

Apparently, so the story goes, Dally wasn’t sure about switching codes but once his mum found out Trumper was in favour of League, she twisted his arm.

Commemorating the birth of Victor Trumper

Hi Dave.

Fair point re: George Hirst comment. The game has obviously advanced in technical knowledge and expertise.

Consistent swing was something new at that time, like the googly.

The comparison with Don was for the ages 19-22

Commemorating the birth of Victor Trumper

Hi Roseville.

Did you enjoy the piece?

Commemorating the birth of Victor Trumper

I would just add Dave that if you’re in the camp that believes Bradman is easily superior to Trumper, which represents 99 per cent, the results from this study of the first innings should cause one to scratch their head.

It doesn’t make sense.

Don should be miles in front.

Australia's greatest: Bradman or Trumper?

Agree

I read your piece on the DRS and found it interesting. Am looking forward to the next installment.

One day and T20 is not my thing so I didn’t comment.

My passion is test cricket.

Australia's greatest: Bradman or Trumper?