There is this Kiwi Knight who goes by the name of Sir Richard Hadlee.WSC brings Lillee's WPM up from an unmatched in modern times 5.0 to an even better 5.1.
I am becoming more and more inclined to have my all time fast bowling attack consist of McGrath, Marshall and Lillee.
Unmatched? Hadlee's is 5.0WSC brings Lillee's WPM up from an unmatched in modern times 5.0 to an even better 5.1.
I am becoming more and more inclined to have my all time fast bowling attack consist of McGrath, Marshall and Lillee.
It's also worth noting Greg Chappell's performance in that match - given that it was a game where the bowlers utterly dominated from start to finish, his scores of 74 and 89 are incredible in context.
Chappell >>> Lillee
163 runs in that match? Unbelievable. More runs than the World XI's entire top 6! And possibly his own!
There is this Kiwi Knight who goes by the name of Sir Richard Hadlee.
Continuing to copy superior posters' thoughts isn't going to make you look cooler.Unmatched? Hadlee's is 5.0
My figures behind it are superior.Continuing to copy superior posters' thoughts isn't going to make you look cooler.
This has to stop.Athlai said:Thanks for the stats, Sean.
There is this Kiwi Knight who goes by the name of Sir Richard Hadlee.
You're right, I forgot about him.Unmatched? Hadlee's is 5.0
You're right, I forgot about him.
We even named the Underarm/wanker series after him.
Still similar SR's though implying that he was taking the wickets anyone IMO. Swings and roundabouts argument.Still, Lillee had much more capable backup bowlers than Hadlee, which makes his WPM figure even more impressive.
Those aren't legal and I think we all know why.Murali has 6.0 wpm.
Just for you, a couple of the SA greats and how their numbers would change.Also would give some of the great South African players of the time a bit more recognition.
Continuing to legitimize superior posters' thoughts and adding useful insight and figures isn't going to make you look cooler.Just for you, a couple of the SA greats and how their numbers would change.
Barry Richards
Official Tests: 4 matches, 508 runs at 72.57 with 2 centuries
All "full internationals" including WSC and RoW: 13 matches, 1,309 runs at 56.91 with 4 centuries
Mike Procter
Official Tests: 7 matches, 226 runs at 25.11 and 41 wickets at 15.02, S/R 36.9
All "full internationals" including WSC and RoW: 16 matches, 700 runs at 33.33 and 71 wickets at 16.90, S/R 52.0
Yeah I ignored him for the same reason I ignored Kumble, they spin and spinners can find it a lot easier to get higher WPM than fast bowlers, particularly if the pitches they play on are suited to spin (less spinners in the team, they bowl more overs etc...).Those aren't legal and I think we all know why.
He spins urgh
Continuing to legitimize superior posters' thoughts and adding useful insight and figures isn't going to make you look cooler.
Brilliant stuff, Sean! The sharp decline in Barry's average is shocking though. I knew it would fall from 73 but I was under the impression that he the was the best batsman alongside Chappel in WSC and thought it would be somewhere around the 65-mark overall.Just for you, a couple of the SA greats and how their numbers would change.
Barry Richards
Official Tests: 4 matches, 508 runs at 72.57 with 2 centuries
All "full internationals" including WSC and RoW: 13 matches, 1,309 runs at 56.91 with 4 centuries
Mike Procter
Official Tests: 7 matches, 226 runs at 25.11 and 41 wickets at 15.02, S/R 36.9
All "full internationals" including WSC and RoW: 16 matches, 700 runs at 33.33 and 71 wickets at 16.90, S/R 52.0
How the hell do you do that?Those aren't legal and I think we all know why.
He spins urgh
I remembered James set it up on the forum a while back and guessed the tags.How the hell do you do that?