Please. It does not correlate. Hussey,
2008 tests, 14 matches, 900 runs @ 37.50 with 2 hundreds and 4 fifties
2008 ODI, 18 matches, 622 runs @ 56.54 with 6 fifties, SR 74.40
2009 tests, 13 matches, 804 runs @ 36.54 with 1 hundred and 6 fifties
2009 ODI, 33 matches, 1166 runs @ 48.58 with 11 fifties, SR 90.80
2010 tests, 8 matches, 442 runs @ 36.83 with 1 hundred and 1 fifty
2010 ODI, 22 matches, 788 runs @ 46.35 with 6 fifties, SR 93.69
The guy needs to play that effing tour match
With much love & smiles.
Rejecting 'analysis by checklist' and 'skill absolutism' since Dec '09
Rejecting 'selection deontology' since Mar '15
'Stats' is not a synonym for 'Career Test Averages'
Originally Posted by Jeffrey Tucker
Coming up to the first Test, any comments on the ICC Rankings comparison .
1. Katich (14) Strauss (27)
2. Watson (24) Cook (31)
3. Ponting (16) Trott (15)
4. Clarke (13) Pietersen (23)
5. Hussey (32) Collingwood (33)
6. North (46) Bell (28)
7. Haddin (39) Prior (34)
8. Johnson (86) - Swann (80)
9. Hauritz (91) - Broad (49)
1. Bollinger (9) Anderson (4)
2. Hilfenhaus (19) Broad (11)
3. Johnson (7) Finn (29)
4. Hauritz (31) Swann (2)
5. Watson (35) Collingwood (84)
Well on the rankings England have a better batting line up and bowling if you discard Colly who doesn't bowl much at all these days.If Colly bowls more than 20 overs in the series then England are in trouble (in 2009 series he bowled 18 overs and just 3 last time down under) as it means the men chosen are really struggling.
Watson will bowl more than Colly does in the series during the 1st test in my opinion so it makes it a bit of a strange comparison.Colly v North or Clarke would be a better comparison and i'd expect them to bowl more than Colly too anyway.
Last edited by flibbertyjibber; 03-11-2010 at 01:19 PM.
And how does England have a better batting line-up with Aussies having 4 of the top ranked 6?
1. Clarke (13)
2. Katich (14)
3. Trott (15)
4. Ponting (16)
5. Pietersen (23)
6. Watson (24)
7. Strauss (27)
8. Bell (28)
9. Cook (31)
10. Hussey (32)
11. Collingwood (33)
12. Prior (34)
13. Haddin (39)
14. North (46)
Last edited by aussie tragic; 03-11-2010 at 01:30 PM.
The more I look at Anderson, Broad and Finn, the more I worry about our pace attack in Australia tbh. Personally, really hope that Tremlett goes well in the warmups and manages to displace Finn. Would have been nice to have had Onions.
Isnt much doubt in my mind that Australia have the better pace attack in Australian conditions.
Tendulkar = the most overated player EVER!!
Beckham = the most overated footballer EVER!!
Vassell = the biggest disgrace since rikki clarke!!
I reckon the teams are about equal on batting though. Each of them have class from 1 to 7 but severe problems with form/decline/inconsistency in a couple of their players. The difference will be in the bowling and I think England have a better attack for English conditions while Australia have a better attack for Australian conditions. So I'm tipping Australia, but only because of the HGA. The teams are extremely even IMO.
Last edited by Prince EWS; 03-11-2010 at 04:20 PM.
Tremlett should definitely be in the team though. He'd be the first bloke I picked. I'll also throw in a wildcard and say that I'd consider picking Darren Pattinson ahead of Bresnan should it get down to that, particularly given his early-season form here.
PEWS left the rolleyes out.
If you add up the positions of the top 7, it's as near as damn it the same.
The rankings basically say that the Aussies have the stronger top four on paper, we have the stronger middle/lower order.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)