Casson trades in Perth for Sydney

[vic_orthdox]

15 wickets @ 52.33. I know Aussies are obsessed about finding an all-rounder, but that's stretching it more than a little.

Just wondering, FC or OD statistics?

Thornely definently isn't a FC all-rounder, but his bowling is handy for a few overs, especially if you want to take the pace off the ball on slow pitches, in OD cricket.

Keeping in mind that I don't think anyone has proclaimed him to be a Test (or ODI) standard all-rounder.

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

15 wickets @ 52.33. I know Aussies are obsessed about finding an all-rounder, but that's stretching it more than a little.

I'm not saying he's an all-rounder, and never did. He's a batsman, and a pretty decent one, and bowls a few overs. He might have potential as a one day all-rounder, particularly in English domestic cricket, but that's all.

 

[benchmark00]

15 wickets @ 52.33. I know Aussies are obsessed about finding an all-rounder, but that's stretching it more than a little.

Thornely isn't a wicket taking all rounder, and he's not even used to take wickets,he ties an end up, in this case, stats are irrelevant.

 

[Son Of Coco]

His average without his 261* is 41.59. Not exactly disgraceful.

Incidentally, Hopes average without his highest score is 25.33. His bowling average without his best bowling figures is 44.16. You can do that with most people.

Hey hey now...let's not let rationality get in the way of the maroon haze settling around a certain keyboard up North.

 

[Son Of Coco]

But then, as TC said, why is that Hopes averages 28.84 and Thornely 46.42?

I know this isn't the 'Hear, Hear' thread...but let me try to explain:

The numbers in both player's averages are actually quite similar, it's just that they are arranged a little differently. If you take Thornely's average of 46.42 and tweak it a little (take the last two from the first four (2); times that four by the result (8);do the same with the 4 after the decimal (8) and then times the 6 and the 4 after the decimal together to get 24 before dividing them by the sum total of the first 4 and the 2 after the decimal - you get 4). Thus making Thornely's average 28.84 - remarkably similar to Hopes'.

Step two is to drain the blood of both players from their bodies - in doing this you'll find that Hopes is maroon coloured whilst Thornely is distinctively a blue blooded person. Once the blood is dispatched with it's possible to undertake a forensic investigation into who was the better player without allowing these obvious differences to tarnish our judgement.

Step three: Or, we could just take the fact that Hopes has been in the Australian team and Thornely hasn't as an indication. As we all know though, an average of 28 in domestic cricket doesn't justify gaining a spot in the team to begin with so in the end it's back to Step One and we'll try this again.

 

[marc71178]

I'm not saying he's an all-rounder, and never did.

So what exactly are you trying to say that he is then, since you've already said he "isn't even a batsman"

 

[dontcloseyoureyes]

So what exactly are you trying to say that he is then, since you've already said he "isn't even a batsman"

I believe the comment was a snide remark at Kyle for originally making that comment.

 

[Craig]

I know this isn't the 'Hear, Hear' thread...but let me try to explain:

The numbers in both player's averages are actually quite similar, it's just that they are arranged a little differently. If you take Thornely's average of 46.42 and tweak it a little (take the last two from the first four (2); times that four by the result (8);do the same with the 4 after the decimal (8) and then times the 6 and the 4 after the decimal together to get 24 before dividing them by the sum total of the first 4 and the 2 after the decimal - you get 4). Thus making Thornely's average 28.84 - remarkably similar to Hopes'.

Step two is to drain the blood of both players from their bodies - in doing this you'll find that Hopes is maroon coloured whilst Thornely is distinctively a blue blooded person. Once the blood is dispatched with it's possible to undertake a forensic investigation into who was the better player without allowing these obvious differences to tarnish our judgement.

Step three: Or, we could just take the fact that Hopes has been in the Australian team and Thornely hasn't as an indication. As we all know though, an average of 28 in domestic cricket doesn't justify gaining a spot in the team to begin with so in the end it's back to Step One and we'll try this again.

Another quality post

 

[Nate]

First up - O`Brien is an awesome talent. He`s a quality batsman, and he really picked up his bowling last season, dominating in Grade Cricket. I think he could go a long way.

And then Thornely. Probably not an International standard batsman, he hasn`t been tested yet, but definately an extremely capable FC and OD batsman. Much better than Hopes IMO. His bowling is nothing more than handy, though Hampshire might disagree.

 

[Craig]

Isn't this just coming down to which state you are from?

If you are from Queensland you might say Hopes is an execellent player and Thornley is rubbish, whilst if you are from NSW (or from another state but don't like Queensland) you are going to blow Thornley's trumpet even louder and tell us Hopes shouldn't be playing in Hobart 3rd Grade.

 

[Mister Wright]

Isn't this just coming down to which state you are from?

If you are from Queensland you might say Hopes is an execellent player and Thornley is rubbish, whilst if you are from NSW (or from another state but don't like Queensland) you are going to blow Thornley's trumpet even louder and tell us Hopes shouldn't be playing in Hobart 3rd Grade.

Haha. This is all too funny. I've never said that Hopes is an excellent player, I have said that Thornely is rubbish (but tha'ts just my opinion). I've only ever said that there's not that much between Thornely's and Hopes' batting (again my opinion) and I've said that Hopes' bowling is far superior to Thornely's which almost everyone here has agreed to. People like top_cat like to think there is some marooned-tinted glasses thing going on here, but that is just to make them feel better about their believed truth.

 

[Kweek]

How is Le Loux rated in this story ? if I may ask ?

 

[vic_orthdox]

How is Le Loux rated in this story ? if I may ask ?

He's been overtaken by Daniel Doran, a leg spinner who played ahead of Le Loux throughout the second half of the domestic season this year. The impression I've gotten was that there was a period where Le Loux was considered the best spinner in QLD, but the selectors were hesitant to play him and went in with a few all-pace attacks during that time, signalling that they didn't think he was ready.

 

[The Argonaut]

How is Le Loux rated in this story ? if I may ask ?

He hasn't really been tested yet. Doran came from nowhere and took his chance. He was very expensive but also bowled plenty of good nuts to get wickets.

Hauritz had to leave Qld to get a game. I remember making a prediction on this forum 3-4 years ago that Hauritz would need to leave to play test cricket. It just so happened that he got lucky and got a test by sheer luck. He may one day come back and be a good bowler. He is still young.

NSW may well pick either Casson or Hauritz for variation to back up MacGill. The one with the better control will be picked. They've already got a relatively expensive wicket taker in MacGill so Hauritz might be a better option.

 

[Kweek]

so far Le Loux is being quiet succesfull in holland bowling, and scored 2x50 in warm ups, hasnt been impressing with the bat in the competition though. hope that changes, I like what I see at training

 

[Top_Cat]

Now, why would they think that?

Yeah exactly I mean, it's quite clear that I, you and the rest of CW are on acid because there's clearly not overwhelming evidence to support the idea.

 

[Mister Wright]

Yeah exactly I mean, it's quite clear that I, you and the rest of CW are on acid because there's clearly not overwhelming evidence to support the idea.

Oh please. You started this whole idea that I have bias. All I said at the beginning was that I thought Thornely was crap. You brought up the whole Thornely v Hopes thing, not me.

Quite rich coming from someone who will go out of his way to use statistics against me, but won't aknowledge when I bring up certain statistics about South Australian players.

 

[Top_Cat]

Quite rich coming from someone who will go out of his way to use statistics against me, but won't aknowledge when I bring up certain statistics about South Australian players.

Classic tactics of someone who's been busted; repeat the accusation back at the accuser but make sure it's not able to be contradicted so no-one can prove you wrong.

 

[benchmark00]

Classic tactics of someone who's been busted; repeat the accusation back at the accuser but make sure it's not able to be contradicted so no-one can prove you wrong.

Which you just did then....

 

[Mister Wright]

Classic tactics of someone who's been busted; repeat the accusation back at the accuser but make sure it's not able to be contradicted so no-one can prove you wrong.

Admittedly you didn't answer my question on whether you thought Cullen should hold on to his national contract after averaging 47 with the ball last season...so I guess ignoring those types of questions cannot make you out to be one-eyed.