In terms of match impact, is Botham better than Tendulkar and McGrath?

[subshakerz]

Monty Noble covered the 1924-25 Ashes series in Australia. He provided a comprehensive report of dropped catches in the series.

A feature of the Test Matches was the number of dropped catches. No fewer than 45 were missed, 24 by the Australians and 21 by the Englishmen. It is hardly creditable that two international sides should average five "misses" an innings, or nine every match. But more surprising still is the great number of runs that these rejected chances cost the offending teams. Contrary, no doubt, to general expectations, Australia was by far the greatest sufferer - says the Sydney Sunday News. Taking as a guide the number of runs the various batsmen scored after receiving a 'life', we find that missed catches cost Australia 897 runs! England's mistakes in the field cost 576.

In addition to missed catches, there were, of course, a few stumping opportunities lost by Strudwick and Oldfield, and also possible runs-out.

Sutcliffe was dropped nine times, costing 507 runs. He scored 734 in total. In the first innings of the fourth Test he offered an easy chance to Ponsford when on 9, and went on to make 143.

Most of the chief culprits were normally good fielders. Gregory dropped five and Oldfield three. For England Woolley put down four and Hendren three.

Fielding standards have improved?

 

[Coronis]

Fielding standards have improved?

Seems like an almost fantastical number tbh. But I’ve also read older reports of innings/matches where the team is stated to have been perfect in the field. There’s also an issue of course, that a missed catch may be a different definition for different people.

 

[kyear2]

What you say here completely contradicts what you said to Coronis.

In an ATG XI, none of your selections are based on slips. Viv and Sobers make it in regardless.

When I pressed you on removing Tendulkar for Smith or Hammond, you desisted.

So why make a big deal about it when in practice you don't really see it differently as almost all here.

The only point of difference is you say a slip position means more than no.8 runs. Ok whatever, in practice you are still not going to accept a no.8 who is a tailend bat because you have Wasim. And you admit you would go for Imran if we picked Knott. So whether you see slips as more important is irrelevant.

So it's a lot of noise but frankly in practice you are just creating drama without doing anything different.

Well either about to prove you right or wrong, honestly lost track at this point.

 

[subshakerz]

Well either about to prove you right or wrong, honestly lost track at this point.

Basically just stop talking about slips in conversations over selection criteria for ATG sides.

 

[Victor Ian]

I think it's time to now focus on inner ring fielding. The slips is covered by Sobers, and others who are already in the team.

But should, for example, Ponting get a gig over Tendulkar because of the extra runouts he brings and runs not attempted when hit in his area when Tendulkar brings nothing to the table in the field?

 

[Coronis]

I think it's time to now focus on inner ring fielding. The slips is covered by Sobers, and others who are already in the team.

But should, for example, Ponting get a gig over Tendulkar because of the extra runouts he brings and runs not attempted when hit in his area when Tendulkar brings nothing to the table in the field?

This is also why Hobbs should be chosen as an opener - he has the most runouts in test history.

 

[shortpitched713]

I think we underestimate the importance of a left/right infield combination for on and off side. Having to turn and throw over your shoulder can make the difference in a run out, and ideally you want your fielders to be able to field and throw clearly at either stumps fron the cover/midwicket analogous areas.