Crazy Cricket

[deleted]

Did anyone just witness Tendulkars 200 in an ODI against the Proteas?

Crazy...

But ja, good old boring Indian wickets again... (For the cricket purists)

I always say "The day Sehwag and Tendulkar hit a double hundred, in a test on South African soil.... I'll drink the Indian Ocean"

It's just not cricket if its so one sided. Poor bowlers... and I am/was a batsman...

Anyway, I'm just shocked ?

arjunmenon

Call it what you will Brent.

The Proteas just got their @$$ handed to them ?

And i'm sure the favour will be returned

[deleted]

Arjun Menon wrote Call it what you will Brent.

The Proteas just got their @$$ handed to them ?

And i'm sure the favour will be returned

Oh for sure!!!! ?

Wonderful player. No one can fault him... but only loosing 3 wickets in an entire innings tells you a bit about the wicket... It's just not quite as fun as a hard grafting...

arjunmenon

Brentcgp wrote Oh for sure!!!! ?

Wonderful player. No one can fault him... but only loosing 3 wickets in an entire innings tells you a bit about the wicket... It's just not quite as fun as a hard grafting...

True ? but then most Indian pitches are batting pitches. And Amla has been doing well there.

Only Bombay has a pitch thats even handed with bowlers and batsmen alike. Calcutta has been seeing some rain for the past while, only downside is that the outfield gets very slow. The other north western pitches are not too bad for spinners.

If you want grafting, SA should tour West Indies.

Sean

I used to be crazy about cricket years ago, also used to play club cricket. Must say that it does very little for me now (watching it).

Sean

The only mildly interesting thing for me now is to see Tendulkar score 50 test centuries. That is certainly a milestone. I think he's on something like 47?

Bob-Dubery

Brentcgp wrote Wonderful player. No one can fault him... but only loosing 3 wickets in an entire innings tells you a bit about the wicket... It's just not quite as fun as a hard grafting...

Two possibilities....

1) The pitch is a batter's paradise. In which case we are in with a shout.

2) We came up against a great player (which Tendulkar is) on a day when he hit miraculous form. In which case we are screwed.

[deleted]

X-rated Bob wrote 1) The pitch is a batter's paradise. In which case we are in with a shout.

I can assure you we in for a shout or will get close... ?

Arjun Menon wrote True ? but then most Indian pitches are batting pitches. And Amla has been doing well there.

Only Bombay has a pitch thats even handed with bowlers and batsmen alike. Calcutta has been seeing some rain for the past while, only downside is that the outfield gets very slow. The other north western pitches are not too bad for spinners.

If you want grafting, SA should tour West Indies.

Yeah but the Indians only do it so they can get the full 5 days worth of TV rights and advertising money in, never mind the results...

I have to disagree..

The official average runs per wicket in test cricket (which obvioulsy shows where it is most difficult to bat)

South African wickets with an average of 27 runs per wicket falling
second place is Ozzie, with average of 28 runs per wicket falling.

India is somewhere in the 40's if I'm not mistaken... I cannot remember that far down the list ?

So if thats the case, I can statistically assume that it is almost twice as hard to bat in SA and Oz than in India... Meaning all Indians have inflated averages making the best cricketers on earth, Ponting and Kallis... ?

It was great to watch and I love Sachin Tendulkar and will always be a great of the game... But it just takes something away from cricket... It's just not fair for bowlers ☹

[deleted]

Sean wrote The only mildly interesting thing for me now is to see Tendulkar score 50 test centuries. That is certainly a milestone. I think he's on something like 47?

Correct ? and a twenty year career. Amazing!!

SvR65

Hahaha, ya boet you just like Kallis too much! Haha!

But then again if you look at stats (as you like to do) then Kallis IS the best! ?

I should really start following the cricket more diligently...

Bob-Dubery

Read up on WG Grace. He had a looooong career, and he played on for the love of the game when he was way past his best - something I can't think of many modern players doing.

I'd argue that he was better player than Tendulkar, that he's the only other batsman you could stack up against Bradman.

[deleted]

X-rated Bob wrote Read up on WG Grace. He had a looooong career, and he played on for the love of the game when he was way past his best - something I can't think of many modern players doing.

I'd argue that he was better player than Tendulkar, that he's the only other batsman you could stack up against Bradman.

I have to agree Bob! and the other who unfortunately never got to play as much... Our very own Barry Richards!

Played club cricket in SA and would get bored and start playing with the side of the bat... and go on to make 50s... arrogance or brilliance? you decide ?

SvR65 wrote Hahaha, ya boet you just like Kallis too much! Haha!

But then again if you look at stats (as you like to do) then Kallis IS the best! ?

I should really start following the cricket more diligently...

Stats dont lie.. ? Too many runs and a great bowler to boot. has to be the greatest, cricketer of our time, not batsman or bowler... the BEST Cricketer ever. Yes even better than Sir Sobers ?

Bob-Dubery

Brentcgp wrote
X-rated Bob wrote Read up on WG Grace. He had a looooong career, and he played on for the love of the game when he was way past his best - something I can't think of many modern players doing.

I'd argue that he was better player than Tendulkar, that he's the only other batsman you could stack up against Bradman.
I have to agree Bob! and the other who unfortunately never got to play as much... Our very own Barry Richards!

Played club cricket in SA and would get bored and start playing with the side of the bat... and go on to make 50s... arrogance or brilliance? you decide ?

I was once fortunate enough to sit at the same supper table as Clive Rice. Rice told me that if he had to pick somebody to bat for his life he'd want Graeme Pollock, not Richards. He said that Richards would get a ton in no time and then go out doing something stupid, whilst Pollock would scratch around for the first 20 or so runs and then once he was set he'd be intent on batting all week.

[deleted]

X-rated Bob wrote I was once fortunate enough to sit at the same supper table as Clive Rice. Rice told me that if he had to pick somebody to bat for his life he'd want Graeme Pollock, not Richards. He said that Richards would get a ton in no time and then go out doing something stupid, whilst Pollock would scratch around for the first 20 or so runs and then once he was set he'd be intent on batting all week.

Wow thats cool! Yeah but Graeme Pollock was an inspiring player. Richie Beanuad says the same thing as Clive Rice. ?.
But I think Barry Richards got bored... Thats why he would do something stupid... And he only played 4 tests! average of 72.5!

Too good... Sad he never got to show the world more!

[deleted]

I remember watching Pollock bat, at Kingsmead, in the twilight of his career. The ground would be abuzz when he came out to bat (before readmission and the excitement of international cricket reduced attendance at domestic matches). By that stage in his career, he just stood and tonked the ball into the stands at will. He didn't bother running. This is, of course, in stark contrast to the beginning of his career, where he just stood and tonked the ball into the stands at will... I'd also choose that guy, for sheer entertainment value.

Personally, Brent, I'd have a hard time NOT voting for Ponting (or even Tendulkar) as a better batsman over the last decade, but certainly Jacques gets my all-round vote.

Bob, the game has lost most of its characters (viz WG Grace hiding the ball in his beard). All we could muster of late is Andre Nel... Hahahaha.

Squonk

Kallis is good but he doesn't dominate bowlers the way Pollock did.

What makes Kallis great is his Batting and Bowling, maybe one of the best All rounders, but I think Botham was ahead of him in the all round department. Botham had more of a match winning tempermant than Kallis.

IceCreamMan

ZA 2 down for less than 50 on the board

Bob-Dubery

Brentcgp wrote Wow thats cool! Yeah but Graeme Pollock was an inspiring player. Richie Beanuad says the same thing as Clive Rice. ?.
But I think Barry Richards got bored... Thats why he would do something stupid... And he only played 4 tests! average of 72.5!

Too good... Sad he never got to show the world more!

I also have heard Rodney Marsh speak. He confined his estimates of players to those he'd been on the field with, and he singled out two batsmen. One was Rohan Khanhai who, Marsh said, was the best player he ever saw on bad pitches. The other he went for was Pollock. He said for any batsman there is range in which you can bowl and the batsmen is unsure whether to play back or forwards. The good players are the ones where that range is small, and he said that for Pollock that range was smaller than for any other batsman he saw playing.

inflames

Sit back, grab a beer and see how SA get their asses kicked :'(

Bob-Dubery

Squonk wrote Kallis is good but he doesn't dominate bowlers the way Pollock did.

What makes Kallis great is his Batting and Bowling, maybe one of the best All rounders, but I think Botham was ahead of him in the all round department. Botham had more of a match winning tempermant than Kallis.

Botham had that X-factor - it's a mental thing. He was one of those players who could change the game, who could make things happen. He wasn't the only one who had it, and he couldn't do it against the West Indies who were the best side of his day. The flip side of the coin is that for several years after he was past his best he could play against Australia and send them packing, he had a special hold on Australia.

Shane Warne had the same quality, so did Brian Lara. I think Sachin shows it sometimes, and not so much these days. Viv Richards was another. Richard Hadlee could turn it on, could change the course of the match. For me that's what the truly great players have, that special quality that allows them to create a situation where everybody else is on THEIR field.