Why
I
Seriously
Doubt
English
Non- partisanship

Why
I
Studiously
Dislike
English
Nescience

Can’t come up with any others right now but I do like a good acrostic!! 😂 😂

Thought he said it to the bowler by way of an apology at the end of the over but either way!! 😂 😂

Hi Rellum
Absolutely agree – stats are all a bit meaningless. Number of catches is more a measure of the quality of the bowlers than the keeper. Number of stumpings is a measure first of the sheer number of deliveries spinners bowl and then how good they are and therefore to some extent where the keeper plays most of his matches.
I acknowledge here that a real quality keeper can make stumpings off a quicker bowler when standing up to the stumps.
Really some measure of efficiency would be more meaningful. Dismissals as a percentage of opportunities.
Even then a better keeper will get a finger on a chance that another keeper of lesser ability won’t.
How do you measure poor Chris Scott who put down Lara on 18 on his way to 501??? 😂 😂
There is always the fact that some dismissals are given out when they are not – Greg Dyer – and some keepers recall a player where they deny themselves and the bowler a stat – Rod Marsh.
Measuring byes is also subject to too many variables beyond the keeper’s control- Thommo!! or others that run along the ground on a fifth day wicket that has fallen apart.
A really tough job and one that also rallies the fielders, the bowlers and probably should tell the reviewers to shut up.
Many great ones listed and I am happy with the one we have for the moment!!

Yes it had never occurred to me that he actually took a wicket before he scored his century on debut!!

Hi Choppy
There may well be an article on it and if not it’s probably worth one but Greg debuted at 7 and didn’t bat in the second innings!

Enjoy every minute of it!!

Hi DTM,
I was thinking along similar lines but didn’t want to say it!!! 😂

I know this is completely off track but I suddenly realised on Saturday how old and out of touch I am getting.
Oddly I was quite pleased to realise it if this is where we are heading.
My son showed me an article which was the complete 10 point manifesto emanating from India’s tour to Australia.
A number of them were listed on the ROAR and generated plenty of discussion but there were others and some of them left me astonished.
Since I was going to be busy for the next few days I asked him to save it for me. Which he did- on my phone somehow!!! But oddly that is not the bit that made me feel old and out of touch!! 😂 😂
Some of the requirements
– Having to play domestic matches – we should maybe have a look at this one!!
– participation in official BCCI engagements
– staying till the completion of series/tours
I could see the sense in at least documenting.
Then there were the family travel on tours and general family travel policy that I could see both sides of the argument so had no real issue with.
Then while astounded that the limit is 150kg, I was okay if they needed a policy to cover this, in them developing one.
Similarly if there is a requirement for a policy regarding sending of bags to the Centre of Excellence- go for it and if there is also a need to implement a policy on personal photo shoots by players then by all means- develop a policy!!
So far so good. I am okay with most of this stuff. I don’t know how much of it will help turn India into a cricketing powerhouse but none of it made me sit up and take notice.
What staggered me is that one of the points was compulsory attendance at practice sessions. We were dropped in U/11B cricket if we didn’t attend training. I am astounded that someone selected to play for their country would have to be told that they were expected to be at training!!!
The other one that made me feel very old was that recently I read about the conditions faced by early touring sides. The Indian cricket side has now had restrictions placed on personal staff travelling with them. I cannot remember the complete list of examples but it included managers, PA’s, chefs, security staff etc!!!!
These are still guys in their 20’s and 30’s who bat and bowl for a living right??????
Like I said- I felt very old!!!! 😂 😂

Hi GC,
I have not seen that quote before but was always fond of- God gave us two ears and one mouth, maybe he was trying to tell us something!!

Thanks GG

You never want to see anyone suffer an injury but it is really hard not to look upon this as anything other than a massive opportunity!!!
Sure you want to win the trophy but you always want to win every trophy. So that doesn’t change.
The WTC final is already locked away so I guess it fits into the category of lower pressure!!
For myself I would like to see Head stay at 5 and captain. I kind of like the idea of a top 6 totally different from what we are used to seeing.
For me I would leave Ussie in if for no other reason than you may be either artificially batting someone out of position or offering up another sacrificial lamb.
I think a top 6 of
Ussie
Konstas
Marnus
McSweeney
Head
Webster
works and is the best option for us right now.
It is really only Cam Green shy of a top 6 that could see us through the next 5 years.
Ussie would then make way for Cam Green upon his return and at this stage I guess I would look at moving Marnus up to open and putting McSweeney at 3 and Green at 4.
McSweeney would probably make way for Smith on his return unless Marnus continues to struggle for form. But I would still be loathe to put McSweeney back at opener without giving him a chance to show his wares at test level in a position he is more accustomed to.
This also gives every other aspiring test opener the second half of the SS season to make their case for inclusion in the WI squad.
Anyway I am just juggling some thoughts and wish smudge all the best for a speedy and complete recovery!!

Thanks ADRAD!!

Hi BG,
My impression of him is that he is what we once had a proliferation of but seem to lack these days.
He has been selected and hopefully will build a career as a middle order batsman.
As another string to his bow is that like Travis Head currently and like Stacky, Chappelli, Greg, Dougie from a past era is able to competently twirl down a spell and will occasionally take a vital wicket.
He will probably never be selected as an all-rounder (I better not say definitely- the kid will probably make a liar of me) but will fit the definition of a batsman who can bowl if required.

Hi 13th,
I would think a regeneration policy does not work by applying a broom to everyone over a certain age following one unsuccessful series.
I think the selectors would look at two prospective candidates- in this case say Handscomb and Connolly and if they are unable to decide between the two they select the younger player.
It would probably be rare in a 3 man panel that this situation arises but when it does you appoint the player with greater career potential.
Shane Warne, who was not only a magnificent bowler but also possessed of a keen cricket brain maintained that for a touring squad “you should always pick one player on potential”!!
There are two reasons why perhaps Connolly was selected.
I admit I was also fearful that we were hanging onto an aging squad and would potentially see a repeat of the post 1984 and 2007 periods but during a successful series against the world 2nd ranked side we introduced McSweeney, Konstas and Webster and now with Connolly in the SL squad and Green to return there looks to be light at the end of the tunnel.
There are no guarantees that all or indeed any will succeed- we need only look back on Handscomb, Maddinson, Renshaw, Burns, Harris, Bancroft for players who have been given opportunities over the last decade and for a variety of reasons have been unable to grasp them to realise that it is unrealistic to think that they will all succeed at the top level but it appears that hopefully at least it will not have been for lack of opportunity.
After that it really is up to the player.
Connolly may be a hunch selection but there always needs to be room for that as well.

Yeah I wondered that!!

Hi BG,
I agree with you- I think this entire thread of argument is ludicrous. As you say none of these guys would be struggling financially.
An equally plausible argument could be made that like the brain drain suffered by Lend Lease which emanated from Dusseldorp’s highly generous employee benefit and superannuation packages aimed at attracting the best employees which backfired a little when many of them took early retirement the money in the game could in fact shorten careers if it was the sole motivation to play the game.
Players are not staying in the game any longer than ever.
The following data shows the age at retirement of the players in the Australian side at 10 year intervals over the last 100 years.
We may have a higher than normal number of older players in the side atm but it would appear that players are not staying in the game longer.
To attempt to exclude bias I have chosen the side from the last test of the year in question.
The average at the end is the average age of retirement of the players in that game, not the average age of the team.
1925:
43,45,40,42,37,34,31,36,33,40,38 avg 37
1935: 30,36,28,29,43,28,33,42,45,41,32 avg 35
1955: 24,33,32,35,37,34,34,30,34,39,39 avg 34
1965:
34,35,28,34,33,36,30,29,32,39,30 avg 33
1975:
35,36,37,36,36,37,31,33,35,35,35 avg 35
1985:
33,29,37,39,28,27,28,29,32,31,26 avg 30
1995
35,31,36,37,39,29,35,29,33,38,37 avg 35
2005:
37,38,38,35,34,35,37,38,36,37,33 avg 37
2015:
35,38,36,37,36,33,31,35,33,38,35 avg 35
It should be noted that WW2 created some premature retirements to the 1935 side
The 1985 side had a greater proportion of players with shorter careers due to players being dropped when rebel tour players became available again than other decades.
Five players from the 2015 side are still in the current side so their retirement dates are still unknown.
Rather than just create an “average age” for each team which shows only players ages at the time of that match this shows their retirement ages.
This team at this point in time may have a higher proportion of players towards the latter part of their career but certainly not staying in the game for longer.

With fame has come scrutiny, with sections of the British press sceptical of the swashbuckling teenager
I know it is part of sports journalism throughout the world to attempt to undermine the self confidence of opponents before they do battle with one’s own national side but it is difficult not to reserve a very special scorn for the British Press who number amongst themselves those such as Percy Fender who fearlessly predicted that Bradman would not be able to make runs on English pitches just prior to the 1930 ashes or a whole host of writers who dubbed the 1989 Australians as the worst side to tour England.
Say what you like guys. It isn’t as though you have any claims to being the Nostradamus of cricket!!
Look forward to seeing you in November!! 😂 😂
Although in fairness I have loved much of the work of Arlott, Cardus, Roebuck, Swanton and Robertson-Glasgow

Hi GC,
One of my favourite memories too. We were actually visiting a relative in hospital and it was the usual sombre atmosphere in a hospital but I swear EVERYONE must have had the cricket on because suddenly there was just this massive roar reverberating throughout the hospital. I shouldn’t laugh but I do everytime I remember it.
I also remember seeing once footage from Greg Chappell’s century on debut in 1970-71. It was just how coverage was in those days so you didn’t know any different but there was one camera, one commentator (I think) and no breaks for ads being the ABC so it was about ten minutes of Greg swatting flies between balls!!
Loved it!!

😂 I still haven’t forgiven Kerry Packer for this mess! If he had just left the ABC and Norman May who were doing a sterling job in black and white (I might add) alone we wouldn’t have this debacle seemingly every time there is a test series!!
I am tempted to express my contempt for John Logie Baird also for inventing television in the first place and robbing us of the one and only Alan McGilvray but that is best left for another time!! 😂 😂

I seem to recall the latin phrase ceteris parabus from my schoolboy economics!! 😁 😁
That being essentially when all other things are equal.
Cricket is probably the exact opposite of this.
Essentially it would entail us saying if all other things were equal and age the only variable factor in the above data we could say with certainty that the statistics of every player listed has changed due to age and only age.
Ceretis parabus is the main reason that comparisons over time are pointless.
BECAUSE THERE ARE A MULTITUDE OF OTHER VARIABLES WHICH CHANGE!!
During the three thirds of any player’s career, pitches, opponents, weather, equipment and so on will all impact on his career performance as will age.
Furthermore if pitch conditions and balls changes have resulted in lower scores for batsmen then logically the bowlers will have benefited from these changes and their records will have improved. This has not universally been the case.
Why not????
Is a further hypothesis that as the players have aged the poorer reflexes and slower movement leads to weaker fielding and thus the bowlers results suffer??
I am not saying this is the case just that I think most of us accept that a player’s physical ability reduces with age- hence why Ricky Ponting is not still playing- but the above table does not prove this to be the case.
There are far too many other variables in cricket to simply lump these statistics onto any single one.

I think it’s “others preferred” Don. Sorry to be pedantic!! 😁 😁

Actually I had a quick look and Ken was the one who batted at 3 early in the season with Lawry and Stacky opening.
We talk about no-one bashing down the door in SS to make a case for inclusion in the test team.
He played 5 SS matches in 1970-71 to score 737 runs at 122.83 with knocks of 221 and 177 to top the averages despite Barry Richards famous 300 in a day innings!!
He certainly made a convincing case for when an opportunity presented itself!!

And not just any bum either. England #3 Keith Fletcher who played 60 odd tests and averaged a creditable 40. England had reached 1-130 in an innings that eventually set up their victory but Kenny in his one and only test did his bit to stifle their bid. They sort of fizzled from 1-130 to all out 302 so under other circumstances it would have been referred to as “match turning”!!
Anyway despite leaving test cricket with an average of only 2.5 with the bat he can tell the grand kids that he averaged 21 with the ball!!
Actually wiki do you have any idea about how Victoria managed to supply 3 opening batsman during the series in Lawry, Stacky and Eastwood?? I presume when all played in the SS someone batted further down and I would be sure it wasn’t Bill!!

I was always so pleased that the wrong ‘un was created by someone with a surname like Bosanquet and hence the delivery was termed the bosie.
While with deadpan delivery “the batsman’s Holding the bowlers Willey” is highly amusing I regret we would have had generations of wannabe humorist commentators falling over each other to grab the microphone each time one was bowled had the delivery been developed by Niroshan Dickwella, Sam Fanning or Fred Titmus. I’d have been reaching for the mute button even quicker than I do now!!

Sorry Rowdy, Don says he can’t turn his legbreak any more!! 😂 😂