He's been named in the T20 squad.... Why is he still getting named in any squad? Getting paid plenty to travel the world basically - because he can't be getting paid to make runs.
The first opener to ever register eight single-figure scores in a Test series.
Will enter the 'G for the Boxing Day test once he's dismissed, won't be waiting too long no doubt. Not interested in sitting there watching some overhyped has-been.
David Warner
https://www.iplt20.com/stats/2019/most-runs
692 from 12 innings, average 69.20, strike rate 143.86. Second on the table played 2 more matches for a hundred less runs. Moreover, Warner made at least 50 in 9 of his 12 innings.
I also see that he is close to the best batsman ever in the IPL, over his career:
https://www.iplt20.com/stats/all-time/most-runs
Highest average of any of the serious runmakers in that list and most 50s by a mile, despite the fact that all of the 3 players ahead of him have played at least 40% more IPL games than he has (Warner 126, Kohli 177, Sharma 188 and Raina 193).
692 from 12 innings, average 69.20, strike rate 143.86. Second on the table played 2 more matches for a hundred less runs. Moreover, Warner made at least 50 in 9 of his 12 innings.
I also see that he is close to the best batsman ever in the IPL, over his career:
https://www.iplt20.com/stats/all-time/most-runs
Highest average of any of the serious runmakers in that list and most 50s by a mile, despite the fact that all of the 3 players ahead of him have played at least 40% more IPL games than he has (Warner 126, Kohli 177, Sharma 188 and Raina 193).
There is no truly good batsman in Australia at the moment. The best of them only do well in their own easy conditions. Standards are so low that new terminology is needed. The term "flat-track bully" has been used up on guys who would not get international games if the standard in world cricket were higher (e.g. Bairstow), so new terms are then needed for those not that bad but who score well only when conditions suit (e.g. Warner, Smith).Pies4shaw wrote:Test average of 59.64 in Australia but only 33.17 away. He's no Steve Bradsmith, that's for sure.
His Test average against Pakistan in Australia is well over 70.
True of many bowlers too. Broad and Anderson have 1000 wickets, but it has to be their conditions.
But back to Warner. It was ridiculous that they played him in the last Ashes Test.
Flat-track bully. I think we can use grades, like hamstring injuries, etc. Grade I, Grade II, Grade III, Grade IV. Is I worse than II? I have to check, so we can have similar terminology.
If Oz had Ponting at the same age playing in that last Ashes innings, he would probably have won the Test and series with Wade.
If Oz had Ponting at the same age playing in that last Ashes innings, he would probably have won the Test and series with Wade.
-
luvdids
- Posts: 3963
- Joined: Sat Mar 22, 2008 12:56 am
- Location: work
K wrote:
There is no truly good batsman in Australia at the moment. The best of them only do well in their own easy conditions. Standards are so low that new terminology is needed.
Those Ashes conditions were so easy, everyone was making centuries! 
I'll be at a dinner with Steve Waugh in December, I'll get his opinion on your statement if you like.
The standard of batting worldwide is abysmal.
If you watched the broadcast, you'd know that every Sky commentator agrees on that. And the Sky commentary was way, way superior to the stuff on free to air.
Holding just said that T20 has ruined the game.
Yes, please ask Steve. But unfortunately he's more diplomatic than honest now. e.g. In the ODI WC, they were asking him about the 99 SF, and he didn't want to rub it in to SA, so he just said both teams choked. (And he consulted to the Ashes team, so it'd be a bit disloyal to bag them to the public.)
It's not a secret, if only cricket followers pay attention. Two decades ago, it was already known that curators were being instructed to make the pitches flatter so that the Tests lasted longer. The problem is that you make pitches flatter; then the batsmen don't learn to play on fair pitches, so they find it even harder; so then the curators make the pitches flatter still; so then the batsmen become even worse; and it never ends.
If you watched the broadcast, you'd know that every Sky commentator agrees on that. And the Sky commentary was way, way superior to the stuff on free to air.
Holding just said that T20 has ruined the game.
Yes, please ask Steve. But unfortunately he's more diplomatic than honest now. e.g. In the ODI WC, they were asking him about the 99 SF, and he didn't want to rub it in to SA, so he just said both teams choked. (And he consulted to the Ashes team, so it'd be a bit disloyal to bag them to the public.)
It's not a secret, if only cricket followers pay attention. Two decades ago, it was already known that curators were being instructed to make the pitches flatter so that the Tests lasted longer. The problem is that you make pitches flatter; then the batsmen don't learn to play on fair pitches, so they find it even harder; so then the curators make the pitches flatter still; so then the batsmen become even worse; and it never ends.
Last edited by K on Fri Oct 25, 2019 4:20 pm, edited 3 times in total.