Roar Rookie
Joined April 2020
18k
Views
13
Published
1.9k
Comments
Love Test cricket, love cricket history and love Victor Trumper. Also, enjoy the ODI world cups but the T20s and regular ODIs are just money-making garbage. Sorry. Like the Olympics, soccer World Cup and NRL finals, too.
Published
Comments
Mark Waugh has always been a polarisng cricketer. Among an SCG throng of 40,000, his name might elicit the full gamut of emotions. Supporters…
This is one of those time-honoured notions that has long since entered into Australian cricket folklore. Everyone knows that Victor Trumper was failure in…
The first instalment in this saga looked at the Bodyline series and the alleged outperformance of the legendary Don Bradman. Unfortunately, the article never…
We all know the story, the Poms land Down Under in the summer of 1932-33 armed with a new method of attack and eager…
I would rather a half-century scored in the game’s first innings than a century made in the last. Accurate, controversial, ridiculous? I wonder how…
‘Test cricket is won by the number of runs, not by the speed of the scoring’. Although a Roarer made this claim without a…
"As an opener batting in the first innings, he was getting things off to the perfect start." He was England’s left-handed opener Chris Broad…
“Many a time when Trumper was batting and the team was in a safe position some player in the dressing room would call out…
In this sequel to ‘Australia’s great come-from-behind batsmen’, we look abroad to examine the world’s finest exponents in this genre, in the 145-year history…
The recent Roar article ‘Lies and damn lies: cricket’s debatable statistics’ had me enthralled and sufficiently motivated to weigh in with my two bob.…
In 1877, two momentous events would transform the cricket world in ways that were unimaginable at the time. As many people are aware, March…
“Mere statistics have never helped Trumper’s cause very much...” One hundred and five years since his untimely death, Victor Trumper’s renown for statistical mediocrity…
"Many will scratch their heads over the selection of Trumper." So mused a critic on learning of Victor Trumper’s selection in an all-time Australian…
In case you hadn’t noticed, PTA
fast bowling is an intense and demanding activity.
All other things equal, fast bowling captains are at a disadvantage.
This doesn’t mean that a fast bowler cannot make a good captain.
It means they are at a disadvantage.
Thanks for the career advice.
Coming from a person who believes in ‘change for changes sake’
Pure genius!
'An activity for sadists': Three hurdles Cummins must clear to become our first bowling captain in 65 years
Rowdy,
You have nailed this one out of the park 🏏 🏏
Bob Willis had said that as a fast bowler, he liked to enter a trance like state where he would block out all distractions and focus entirely on his task.
Perhaps spinners and all rounders are different but the case against making a fast bowler captain is a slum dunk.
'An activity for sadists': Three hurdles Cummins must clear to become our first bowling captain in 65 years
Because some people think that a
0-0 series
Is better than 3-1
The goal is to NEVER lose
Perhaps they’ve never heard of ‘opportunity cost’?
Comparing the Waugh twins against South Africa
And remember,
Giles dropped Ponting early.
He takes that and England probably win.
Comparing the Waugh twins against South Africa
I can’t understand this mind set.
England lost because they were the weaker team, not because a first innings total of 550 was insufficient.
At some point, a team has to start their quest for 20 wickets.
England made the correct call, declaring an hour before stumps on day two. To have batted into day three would guarantee a draw.
This type of negative thinking is consistent with the person who invests all their money in a term deposit so they can earn a guaranteed 0.8%p.a. with no risk.
‘I can’t possibly risk 5% of my capital in order to gain 50%’
To be candid,
it’s the mindset of a loser.
Comparing the Waugh twins against South Africa
Yes.
While I agree with your analysis, those who are sceptical will accuse you of ‘cherry picking’ if you have made judgement calls (leave out this test, include that one, cap this score etc.)
My suggestion is to avoid these as much as possible.
At least if you want a miniscule chance of getting through.
Australia's greatest front runners
Correct HPR
The Windies respected Border for his dogged resistance
But he was never feared the way Junior was.
Mark could hurt them in a way AB never could.
One only has to look at the strike rates.
Why Mark Waugh was the world's best against the West Indies
Dave,
not sure if you’re aware
This is how the WSC Australians fared against the WSC West Indians:
1977-78: WI 2-1
1978-79: A 1-0
1978-79: 1-1
In that last series, Australia were arguably the better side as a riot robbed them in one of the supertests.
So the WI, despite being at full strength, didn’t come out ahead during those WSC years.
And so claims to ‘undisputed supremacy’ are not appropriate for the 1976-78 period
Why Mark Waugh was the world's best against the West Indies
Hi matth
_
I enjoyed your comment apart from the cliche
_
‘Stats can be cut and diced to create any result you want’
_
There’s an element of truth to this but boy, doesn’t this notion get taken to the extreme.
_
Stats can be manipulated to create a more favorable impression but try turning Brearley into Bradman.
_
Or, better still, make a statistical case to show that Dean Jones was better than Greg Chappell.
_
For an experienced accountant,
_
this should be a piece of cake 😁
Why Mark Waugh was the world's best against the West Indies
Was I making a case in favour of subjective calls, Dave?
A cut and paste is in order 😁
Why Mark Waugh was the world's best against the West Indies
HPR,
I did think that including the dead rubber test of 1991
would raise some objections 😊
I do recognise the difference between that dead rubber
and those of 83-84 and 88-89.
Still a subjective call.
Why Mark Waugh was the world's best against the West Indies
Just countering this line:
“Those WI pitches in 91 were a little bit dry and flat.”
Why Mark Waugh was the world's best against the West Indies
I think we can all agree that dead rubber Tests
are not important as those when the series is alive.
This extent of this difference is open to debate.
In any event,
it is valid to consider performances in live matches,
as an important subset of overall performance.
Why Mark Waugh was the world's best against the West Indies
Aussie averages in WI, 90-91
Junior 61.2
Taylor 49.0
Border 34.4
Boon 33.3
Jones 30.6
Marsh 25.1
S Waugh 16.0
Matthews 9.0
Why Mark Waugh was the world's best against the West Indies
Hi Pope
There’s no need to play down the WI attack of 90-91
Marshall, Ambrose, Walsh and Patterson
was a good as anything from the previous 9 years.
Junior’s best series against them (90-91)
coincides with the Windies at their (bowling) peak.
The reason they become vulnerable,
as you describe,
was due to failures when batting,
not bowling.
Why Mark Waugh was the world's best against the West Indies
That’s an improvement on your normal MEW stance, Rowdy.
Even the longest of journeys begins with a single step.
Why Mark Waugh was the world's best against the West Indies
Maybe you missed all those innings against the Windies?
Such a shame, Rowdy
Why Mark Waugh was the world's best against the West Indies
Well done, HPR.
No doubt,
this piece will inspire a plethora of Mark Waugh haters to crawl out of the woodwork.
11 fifties from 26 innings
against the world champs
at a SR of 53
says it all.
And he has a similar record against Pakistan,
South Africa, England and India (in India).
Junior let Australia down?
What a joke.
Why Mark Waugh was the world's best against the West Indies
I know you won’t mind if I’m straight up.
It’s best to make just one point per comment.
If your going to use numbers,
pick your best stat and go with that.
For example,
I find this statistic compelling:
against the top four teams,
Junior reached fifty in 35.4%
of his innings,
while his brother
reached fifty in 32.9%
That’s an easy to digest comparison
that isn’t easy to explain away.
Stick to one point,
that is my suggestion.
Busting cricket myths: Trumper was failure in 1905 and 1909
It was pretty long from memory so I skimmed
😊
Busting cricket myths: Trumper was failure in 1905 and 1909
HPR
that’s probably true of most fans.
Although they pretend that averages are just ‘a guide’,
most enthusiasts will insist that the player who averages 50
MUST be better than the one who averages 40
(especially if they’re from the same team).
When I look at Junior’s average of 41
I see it like this:
When the situation counts, you can expect him to average 51
and when the situation is less important, you can expect 31
You and I don’t place much importance on the 31
but most people do.
In your exchange with Sheek,
it was probably better to state your position once
and then leave it at that.
At the age of 65ish,
and having thought about cricket for 50-odd years,
Sheeky was never going to change his mind.
Busting cricket myths: Trumper was failure in 1905 and 1909
I thought it was time for a break.
I still flick through articles,
some make my blood pressure rise.
Enjoyed Lewis’ piece on capitalism and test cricket.
Busting cricket myths: Trumper was failure in 1905 and 1909
HPR,
email:
thecrowd@theroar.com.au
With your table(s)
Busting cricket myths: Trumper was failure in 1905 and 1909
95% of the captain’s job is done in the field.
Try again
'An activity for sadists': Three hurdles Cummins must clear to become our first bowling captain in 65 years