|
|
Post by hoskotafe3 on Jul 27, 2021 10:19:48 GMT
Wisden overview Has anyone an idea on how Croft would compare against Holding, Roberts and Garner? He was right up there. His record is exceptional. 125 wickets at a touch over 23. The reason he only played for 5 years is that he was banned for life by the WICB for going on a rebel tour to South Africa (an unforgivable trespass for a dark man to support apartheid by touring South Africa, even if he experienced the racism himself). The ban was lifted in 1989 but by then he was 36 and hadn't played for 7 years. Things got so uncomfortable for him at home he ended up moving to the US. |
|
|
|
Post by weststigersbob on Jul 27, 2021 12:27:13 GMT
Has anyone an idea on how Croft would compare against Holding, Roberts and Garner? Good fast bowler, but not at the level of Holding, Roberts or Garner. He’d be at the level of say the Benjamin’s (Winston and Kenny), Drakes and Gibson were to Ambrose and Walsh in the 90’s. |
|
|
|
Post by hoskotafe3 on Jul 27, 2021 14:09:04 GMT
If you were placing West Indian fast bowlers in tiers it would probably be:
Tier One: Ambrose and Marshall
Tier Two: Garner, Holding, Walsh
Tier Three: Croft, Roberts, Bishop, Hall, Holder
Garner could be fairly put in tier one. None of the rest rate a mention apart from Charlie Griffith who didn't quite play enough games or take enough wickets.
|
|
|
|
Post by Aj_June on Jul 27, 2021 15:52:58 GMT
Thanks, Bob and Hosko for your posts.
I think I agree with Hosko's groupings. Altough I will probably have Roberts in tier 2. Not as good as Garner and Holding but on par with Walsh.
|
|
|
|
Post by hoskotafe3 on Jul 27, 2021 18:09:21 GMT
Main thing I'd bring out about Croft is he had the first 27 tests of a great bowler. He was playing in an attack with Tier One and Two all time fast bowlers and averaged 5 wickets per game at a better average than Roberts or Holding. I'm not willing to say he was better than those two as the volume of work isn't there. But if he hadn't been banned? Who knows what he might have been.
I thought the comparison to Kenny Benjamin, who took 33 fewer wickets in only one less game, Winston Benjamin (64 fewer wickets in 6 fewer games) pretty harsh. The Benjamins came into that great attack and were clearly third wheels. Croft came into the great attack and didn't just hold his own he built up a pretty impressive record in his own right.
|
|
|
|
Post by weststigersbob on Jul 28, 2021 2:45:33 GMT
Main thing I'd bring out about Croft is he had the first 27 tests of a great bowler. He was playing in an attack with Tier One and Two all time fast bowlers and averaged 5 wickets per game at a better average than Roberts or Holding. I'm not willing to say he was better than those two as the volume of work isn't there. But if he hadn't been banned? Who knows what he might have been. I thought the comparison to Kenny Benjamin, who took 33 fewer wickets in only one less game, Winston Benjamin (64 fewer wickets in 6 fewer games) pretty harsh. The Benjamins came into that great attack and were clearly third wheels. Croft came into the great attack and didn't just hold his own he built up a pretty impressive record in his own right. Probably a bit stronger than the Benjamin’s - but I was trying to make an analogy Hosko ! The real ?.?.? bowler for the Windies was Sylvester Clarke. Rated by many county pro’s as the fastest and most dangerous of the lot. Viv Richards said the only bowler he ever felt rattled him with pace and bounce was Clarke, and it wasn’t uncommon for England pro’s to get sudden mystery ailments whenever Surrey lobbed into town with Clarke in tow.
|
|
|
|
Post by hoskotafe3 on Jul 28, 2021 5:38:27 GMT
Clarke took 942 FC wickets at 19! He died exactly one month after Malcolm Marshall. Bloody hell.
|
|
|
|
Post by Carl LaFong on Jul 28, 2021 9:53:19 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Aj_June on Jul 28, 2021 12:28:38 GMT
Gooch's 1987 cricket world cup brilliant century sunk India. Gooch's 333 and 123 in a two innings of a single match at Lord's in 1990 is one of the best stats I have ever seen. And England even won that match.
|
|
|
|
Post by Carl LaFong on Jul 28, 2021 14:00:18 GMT
Gooch's 1987 cricket world cup brilliant century sunk India. Gooch's 333 and 123 in a two innings of a single match at Lord's in 1990 is one of the best stats I have ever seen. And England even won that match. The only one I remember is the 333. |
|
|
|
Post by hoskotafe3 on Jul 28, 2021 18:03:22 GMT
I believe that was voted by Wisden as one of the top 5 innings of all time. On a pitch where everyone struggled and nothing looked easy this guy made 154. Guided England to a victory. Due to the dross England were continually serving up in Ashes competition in that period it's often forgotten just how close they came to knocking the all conquering Windies off twice. They had all but gone 2-nil up in 1989 until rain intervened and then led in this return series as well. They also nearly won a cricket World Cup in this period. My best memories of Gooch would have to be Adelaide in 1990. Chasing 470 odd for a win, Gooch smashed our bowlers to all corners. For a fair chunk of the last day the chase looked on. It was an angry innings from Gooch where he was basically saying to his team "have a bloody go you Muppets!" |
|
|
|
Post by hoskotafe3 on Jul 28, 2021 22:05:51 GMT
Gooch's 1987 cricket world cup brilliant century sunk India. Gooch's 333 and 123 in a two innings of a single match at Lord's in 1990 is one of the best stats I have ever seen. And England even won that match. 456 is still the highest aggregate in a test match. I think Tubby Taylor is next with 428 (334no and 94). |
|
|
|
Post by hoskotafe3 on Jul 29, 2021 20:44:09 GMT
WTF happened to India? I'll offer some defence for their Game 3 performance in that they only had 3 players in their squad I've heard of (Kumar, Kuldeep and Dhawan) but 8-81 off 20 overs? Second string, third string or Tasmania under 20s, that's embarrassing.
|
|
|
|
Post by Aj_June on Jul 29, 2021 21:32:51 GMT
WTF happened to India? I'll offer some defence for their Game 3 performance in that they only had 3 players in their squad I've heard of (Kumar, Kuldeep and Dhawan) but 8-81 off 20 overs? Second string, third string or Tasmania under 20s, that's embarrassing. Yeah, that was one of the worst T-20 effort I have seen.
|
|
|
|
Post by weststigersbob on Jul 30, 2021 5:09:31 GMT
WTF happened to India? I'll offer some defence for their Game 3 performance in that they only had 3 players in their squad I've heard of (Kumar, Kuldeep and Dhawan) but 8-81 off 20 overs? Second string, third string or Tasmania under 20s, that's embarrassing. Yeah, that was one of the worst T-20 effort I have seen. Just saw some of the highlights - and it wasn’t pretty. Poor batting. Horrendous batting. Poor technique and not watching the ball spinning. I thought I’d never see the day that Indian batsmen really struggle against ‘decent’ spin bowling.
|
|
|
|
Post by hoskotafe3 on Jul 30, 2021 18:43:13 GMT
A couple of brilliant caught and bowleds but yes, horrible batting which I think is inevitable if Kumar is your number six. India's second and third tiers are pretty good, but I reckon some of this team is 4th or 5th tier or lower. Still no excuse for scoring 4 an over in a T20.
|
|
|
|
Post by Carl LaFong on Jul 30, 2021 20:40:45 GMT
They remind me of Henry Blofeld!
|
|
|
|
Post by Carl LaFong on Jul 31, 2021 3:19:57 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Aj_June on Aug 1, 2021 0:59:25 GMT
Yeah, that was one of the worst T-20 effort I have seen. Just saw some of the highlights - and it wasn’t pretty. Poor batting. Horrendous batting. Poor technique and not watching the ball spinning. I thought I’d never see the day that Indian batsmen really struggle against ‘decent’ spin bowling. India is giving chance to players like Prithvi Shaw in England? This just shows how stupid the selectors are. Batsmen with horrible techniques should not be encouraged. And even if Shaw made some good runs in England I still think it's a joke to allow such batsmen on international stage.
|
|
|
|
Post by hoskotafe3 on Aug 1, 2021 19:53:25 GMT
Just saw some of the highlights - and it wasn’t pretty. Poor batting. Horrendous batting. Poor technique and not watching the ball spinning. I thought I’d never see the day that Indian batsmen really struggle against ‘decent’ spin bowling. India is giving chance to players like Prithvi Shaw in England? This just shows how stupid the selectors are. Batsmen with horrible techniques should not be encouraged. And even if Shaw made some good runs in England I still think it's a joke to allow such batsmen on international stage. Stokes out indefinitely with Mental Health issues, so they should be right whoever they pick with the bat. Root's the only England top order player who can be relied on to score consistent runs. England's attack will be good, but not significantly better than India's. This is India's best chance to beat England away since 2007. On Stokes: I hope he comes back and is still a good player. I'd like to think England have learned something from Jonathan Trott. Looking back it's clear to me that his mental health was ailing in the home ashes series in 2013, and probably for at least 6 months before that. If he'd taken a break around then he may not have had the breakdown he ultimately suffered in Australia later that year. |
|
