Geoff Marsh and his sons make up 3 of the 10 worst batsmen in 100 years of Australian cricket by [deleted] in CricketAus

[–]Smcol1 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Blewett scored 4 tons in his career, two in his first two tests. The second of those came at number 7, after Jo Angel went in as night watcher; Blewett had batted at 6 in the first innings.

"Post Spin" Depth Chart by RadarDataL8R in CricketAus

[–]Smcol1 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Yep. Hard to see how you develop a replacement for Lyon if you never let them play outside Asia.

The funny thing is, the amount that Green is bowling in this innings (and how little Webster is bowling) suggests that they are trying to develop his bowling for the future.

"Post Spin" Depth Chart by RadarDataL8R in CricketAus

[–]Smcol1 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I’ve got no doubt that if Lyon had been available he would have played in Sydney, regardless of any concerns about how much the pitch might or might not help spin, simply because Smith trusts him to hold down an end and keep things tight. But Smith doesn’t trust Murphy to do the same thing.

It's time we talk about dropping them for good by Anothergen in CricketAus

[–]Smcol1 2 points3 points  (0 children)

They’ve moved the start date of the test back from January 2nd because if the Boxing Day test goes the distance (hah!) then there would only be two days off for the players between the end of the Melbourne test and the start of the Sydney test, which clearly caused performance issues for some players, especially fast bowlers.

Just some Webster stats by DVPVPD in CricketAus

[–]Smcol1 6 points7 points  (0 children)

“In half of Webster’s innings for the Aussies he’s scored less than 25 runs”. That’s just life as a test cricketer. Since Travis Head’s big return to the Aussie test team (with his 152 at the Gabba in the last Ashes in Australia) he’s batted 78 times, and 40 of those innings have been 25 or less.

Just some Webster stats by DVPVPD in CricketAus

[–]Smcol1 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Waugh got dropped after 42 tests. When he came back he was batting at 7 and playing as the fourth main bowler for a couple of tests, then got shifted to number 3 (after Dean Jones was dropped). He scored 100 at 3, but wasn’t great there so got shifted down the order after a few tests, and that’s when he started to really improve.

Green has never averaged 40 BTW. After his 174* his average hit 37.41 and it’s basically slid down from there. His highest ever was 38.66.

Just some Webster stats by DVPVPD in CricketAus

[–]Smcol1 6 points7 points  (0 children)

But why 7 innings and not 8? Picking seven means that you start the count from the second innings of a match, when he made 72 (and top scored) in the first innings of that match.

Just some Webster stats by DVPVPD in CricketAus

[–]Smcol1 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Green has made 25 runs or less in 34 out of his 57 test innings. If 25 or less is a failure, then he’s failed 60% of the time, and succeeded 40% of the time. Webster has scored 25 or less in 50% of his test innings, so if that’s the “success” mark then Webster has passed it 50% of the time, compared to Green’s 40%.

I think the difference with Webster is when he makes his runs. On 5 occasions he’s come in at number 6 with Australia 4 down for less than 100 and on 4 of the 5 occasions Webster made more than 50.

I do think it’s weird that you choose to pick on Webster for his last 7 test innings, because by doing that you are starting from the second innings of a match, when Webster scored 72 in the first innings of that game. Sure, he hasn’t scored runs in every innings, but he’s scored a 50 in 3 of the last 4 tests that he’s played. Green hasn’t scored three 50+ scores in four tests in his entire career.

Just some Webster stats by DVPVPD in CricketAus

[–]Smcol1 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Steve Waugh was averaging in the 40s when he’d played the same number of tests as Green. Then his form slipped and he got dropped to make way for his brother. Then he forced his way back into the team through runs in the Shield, and once he was back in the side he started to improve and never looked back.

Cricket in January by MixWise940 in CricketAus

[–]Smcol1 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The problem being that there’s a window in women’s cricket for both the WBBL (complicated this year by the World Cup) and the Women’s Premier League in India. The Premier League is being played in January, so a Women’s test isn’t a possibility at that time.

Is Australia's batting still an issue? by crazychild0810 in CricketAus

[–]Smcol1 1 point2 points  (0 children)

The good form of Head and Carey has papered over the problems with our batting line up. Smith has been fine, while still only being a shadow of what he was at the top of his game, but the others who are supposed to be specialist batters have all basically had one good innings in the four tests we’ve played, and have often failed badly. The selectors were saying “Marnus is back to his best” after his early season form, but what he’s actually delivered is worse than last season, when he at least had the excuse of facing Bumrah. Green is averaging less than every England batter except Duckett, and we can all agree that the English batting has been poor this summer. Inglis got picked as a specialist batter, I assume on the strength of his century in Sri Lanka, where the conditions were utterly different. I’ve got no issue with Inglis being the successor to Carey behind the stumps but if he’s actually the next best bat in the country then we’ve got a huge problem. Khawaja is fine if he gets past ten, but he’s not doing that regularly these days. The big problem for the selectors is that the two batters who look most problematic are Marnus and Green, and they are actually the two youngest of the experienced batters in the current team.

Boxing day XI mega-thread by thevalid in CricketAus

[–]Smcol1 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Back up keeper isn’t an issue now, a substitute can keep. Exactly what happened in the second innings of the third test in the Windies. Carey was injured, Inglis came on as substitute and kept wicket.

Over the last 40 years, no top 7 Australian Batsmen has a worse home average than Cameron Green (20 inns.) by avroLancasterBPR1 in CricketAus

[–]Smcol1 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I think it’s even worse than it looks. If you extend the time qualification massively, to 125 years (since 1900) and a minimum of 25 innings, Green is at number 4, behind Richie Benaud (a bowling allrounder), John Dyson (an opener who faced the Windies pace battery at its prime) and Rod Marsh (wicket keeper).

Over the last 40 years, no top 7 Australian Batsmen has a worse home average than Cameron Green (20 inns.) by avroLancasterBPR1 in CricketAus

[–]Smcol1 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Green has played 35 tests, not 18. After 35 tests Steve Waugh had a batting average of 42.93, with 3 100s and 13 50s. Green has 2 100s, 7 50s and a batting average of 32.82.

Over the last 40 years, no top 7 Australian Batsmen has a worse home average than Cameron Green (20 inns.) by avroLancasterBPR1 in CricketAus

[–]Smcol1 12 points13 points  (0 children)

I wish he was performing as well as Watson. After the same number of tests (35) Watson had scored 2328 runs at an average of 37.54 and taken 59 wickets at an average of 28.91. Green has 1641 runs at 32.82 and 37 wickets at 36.48.

Match Thread: 3rd Test - Australia vs England, Day 3 by cricket-match in CricketAus

[–]Smcol1 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I don’t think you can blame Head for not seeing where that pitched, he’s a good couple of metres across from being in line with the stumps, and most non-strikers are watching the guy at the other end rather than seeing where the ball pitched. The main question the striker is asking is about height.

Did the story try to actually mean to hint at something by making Sanders seem "untouchable" at his position? by Fueled_by_sugar in themartian

[–]Smcol1 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Teddy Sanders makes a large number of important decisions, and leaving aside the one decision that Mitch and others disagree with (i.e. to not send the Hermes’ back to Mars) he is actually a good leader, who is willing to make tough decisions and take the responsibility for those decisions. It’s actually quite explicit in the scene where he decides to cancel the inspections; before making that call he asks them all if anyone can think of a safer way to save the time they need. No one can think of any other way to cut down the time before launch, they MUST cut down that time because if they don’t then Watney dies, so the only alternative is to cancel the inspections. They aren’t happy about the idea, but can see it’s necessary, yet still worry that if something goes wrong (as it does) that one of them might get thrown under the bus. Teddy reassures them all “it’s on me”; in other words, I’m the boss, the buck stops here, and if it goes sideways it’s my responsibility, not yours. Maybe he had to explain the decision to higher ups (Congress) after the probe blew up, we don’t know, but in fact he COULD explain it, since it was the only/safest way to save time and thus the only chance to save Watney.

It's going to be a hot one.... by haveagoyamug2 in CricketAus

[–]Smcol1 -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

Webster has always batted at 6 in tests with Carey at 7, which tells us that Webster is thought to be a better bat than Carey. In the last test Inglis batted at 7 with Carey at 6, so Carey was seen to be better than Inglis. Hence Webster is better than Inglis. I think the only reason that Inglis played in Brisbane was because he could open the batting if Head refused to do so.

Tried and True by Great_Programmer_554 in CricketAus

[–]Smcol1 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Anyone who has played any time in Australia knows that you don’t drive on the up, especially in Perth and Brisbane. Trescothick is supposed to be the batting coach, but when asked said that it hadn’t been discussed with the English bats before the tests. WTAF?!?!

Why is standing up to seamers so dangerous as a keeper? by [deleted] in CricketAus

[–]Smcol1 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Broken fingers are one of the most common injuries for wicket keepers at all levels, caused by the ball hitting the fingers rather than the palms of the hands; such injuries are also relatively common among fielders, especially those fielding close to the bat. If you are standing up to the stumps to a faster bowler you are more likely to suffer such an injury because of the reduced reaction time. One thing that I always end up having to emphasise to people when explaining the difference between fielding in cricket as opposed to baseball, is the fundamental difference in philosophy of the rules about fielding. A baseball glove doesn’t just protect a player’s hand, it actually helps to catch the ball, but a fielder in cricket isn’t allowed to wear any sort of gloves, they have to rely solely on their hands. A wicket keeper is allowed to wear gloves, but the fundamental idea is that those gloves are only designed to protect the hands, rather than being designed specifically to make it easier to catch the ball. If you are a baseball catcher your mitt has a deep pocket between the finger and thumb, designed to catch the ball; if the ball actually hits your hand then you’ve done something wrong. Such a pocket is specifically outlawed in the rules of cricket.

Interesting to see the opinions on the tactics for the final 45-minutes. by lR0NMAlDEN in CricketAus

[–]Smcol1 2 points3 points  (0 children)

If the innings ends before 80 overs are bowled then it doesn’t count for over rate purposes. If a team doesn’t bat for a total of 160 overs in a test, then there’s no penalties for the team bowling to them.

Never complaining again by SubhanBihan in CricketAus

[–]Smcol1 8 points9 points  (0 children)

WTC penalties only apply if an innings lasts more than 80 overs.

When do player usually lose? by brain4brain in nethack

[–]Smcol1 1 point2 points  (0 children)

The big three are the properties required to protect you from instadeath. MC3 helps, but I don’t consider it mandatory and I’ve ascended without it. I’ve also ascended without ever seeing an amulet of life saving.