Results 1 to 7 of 7

Thread: Anyone have a theory on why.....

  1. #1
    ttm
    ttm is offline
    Cricket Spectator
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    sydney
    Posts
    36

    Anyone have a theory on why.....

    Michael Slater was such a bad one day player? Perhaps its just a statistical anomaly on the outskirts of the normal range. The way he played in tests makes you think he would have been an ideal one day player.

  2. #2
    Hall of Fame Member NUFAN's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Marrickville
    Posts
    18,240
    Quote Originally Posted by ttm View Post
    Michael Slater was such a bad one day player? Perhaps its just a statistical anomaly on the outskirts of the normal range. The way he played in tests makes you think he would have been an ideal one day player.
    Basically he played get out shots far too often.

    Slater scored far too many scores between 50 and 73 which wasn't enough.

    Look at his third and fourth last matches - 53* (69) and 52 (38) batting at 6, he then failed twice in England batting in the middle order where captain Mark Taylor was opening and struggling. There wasn't enough room for both so they kept the captain, and Slats never really did much for NSW in List A matches to force his way back.
    NRL Tipping Champion 2014

    Over 0.2: Putland to Nevill, OUT, no run, full ball swings in late to crash into his pads. Nevill is almost falling over trying to get bat on it but can't. Huge shout for LBW and Umpire Martell eventually raises the finger! P.Nevill - lbw b:Putland 0 (1 ball, 1 minute).

  3. #3
    Global Moderator Prince EWS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Moving to Somalia
    Posts
    43,721
    Too boundary-reliant.
    ~ Cribbertarian ~

    Rejecting 'analysis by checklist' and 'skill absolutism' since December 2009

  4. #4
    International 12th Man Julian87's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Ashfield
    Posts
    1,683
    A more defensive field sorted him out IMO. Hiitting the ball in the air in test cricket is a little less risky at the start of an innings because so many players are behind the icket whereas in ODI's it is always more of a ring field.


  5. #5
    Cricket Web: All-Time Legend Top_Cat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Location
    Adelaide, South Australia
    Posts
    23,182
    Slats' great strength in the early days was his orthodoxy too. Very straight-bat player. In ODI, you need to be able to improvise and because guys are bowling to contain rather than outside off-stump away-swinging deliveries, which his technique was geared towards playing. Little chips over the on-side field, for example, weren't his thing. Wasn't great off his pads, either.
    The Colourphonics

    Bandcamp
    Twitderp

  6. #6
    State Vice-Captain
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    1,221
    I suppose these anomalies happen in cricket. Sehwag also, you would expect him to prosper in onedays like in tests, but he just hasnt clicked.

  7. #7
    Cricket Web Staff Member Richard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    2005
    Posts
    80,401
    Quote Originally Posted by Prince EWS View Post
    Too boundary-reliant.
    Quote Originally Posted by Julian87 View Post
    A more defensive field sorted him out IMO. Hiitting the ball in the air in test cricket is a little less risky at the start of an innings because so many players are behind the icket whereas in ODI's it is always more of a ring field.
    Quote Originally Posted by Top_Cat View Post
    Slats' great strength in the early days was his orthodoxy too. Very straight-bat player. In ODI, you need to be able to improvise and because guys are bowling to contain rather than outside off-stump away-swinging deliveries, which his technique was geared towards playing. Little chips over the on-side field, for example, weren't his thing. Wasn't great off his pads, either.
    Agree with all of this. There's any number of examples of fine, boundary-hitting, orthodox long-form batsmen who struggle with the shorter game: Slater, Michael Vaughan, Younis Khan, Mahela Jayawardene, Virender Sehwag, etc.

    Being "a strokeplayer" isn't something that should make one assume a batsman will be successful at the one-day game.
    RD
    Appreciating cricket's greatest legend ever - HD Bird...............Funniest post (intentionally) ever.....Runner-up.....Third.....Fourth
    (Accidental) founder of Twenty20 Is Boring Society. Click and post to sign-up.
    chris.hinton: h
    FRAZ: Arshad's are a long gone stories
    RIP Fardin Qayyumi (AKA "cricket player"; "Bob"), 1/11/1990-15/4/2006



Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. A theory
    By cover drive man in forum Twenty20 World Cup
    Replies: 24
    Last Post: 26-07-2007, 10:39 AM
  2. Nelsons ? What a theory !!!
    By FRAZ in forum Off Topic
    Replies: 45
    Last Post: 30-09-2004, 01:57 AM
  3. Conspiracy theory - Eddie'll like this one!
    By marc71178 in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 14-09-2002, 09:28 AM
  4. My Theory
    By Paid The Umpire in forum World Club Cricket
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: 29-07-2002, 02:42 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •