Hear, Hear, Hear : Lend me your Ear

[andyc]

Somehow, the tone of that post makes me think that you bat somewhere lower down the order yourself....

haha indeed i do, i own that number 9. i mean, after all, a team needs a gun batsman sneakily planted down with the tailenders to support them and score some last minute runs. now if only our team could get one of those guys, we’d be set

 

[Sanz]

Hahaha, Great thread. SoC, Here is a toughie, Can you prove Bangladesh better team than Australia.

 

[vic_orthdox]

Its all in fun, but mate, you got too much time on your hands..

And this post results in me reneging from any forthcoming assignments.

And anyways, it only took me 3/4 of an hour to post. And as many of you would have realised, I bullsh*t on an international scale. I can't believe that the total response I got for this massive post was a sledge.

BTW, its 2:40am and I just got home from a massive night out.

 

[SJS]

Why Brad Hogg is a better Test bowler than Shane Warne.

The one great criticism of Shane Warne is that he has never performed well against the best players of spin, those wristy craftsmen from India. Knowing that this was the chink in his armour, I decided that I may be able to derive the truth from this decades old argument through the respective performances of these bowlers versus the great Indians.

And exploit these figures I did. Now, for the uninformed, Brad Hogg made his debut against India in 1996, when Shane Warne had made his debut 4 years earlier. Now, as we all know, the years from 1990 to 1997 were India's glory years, with Tendulkar, Kambli, Azharuddin, Sidhu, Shastri, young Dravid and an in form Ganguly making them an irrepresible force against slow bowlers. However, after this, clearly India's prowess against spin bowling has worsened, as illustrated by the fact that in Muttiah Muralitharan, widely seen as the greatest bowler ever (except by Australian umpires), averaged 44.14 versus India before 1997, but since then has averaged 19.3 versus the Indian superstars, while Daniel Vettori and Mohammad Rafique have taken 19 and 9 more wickets respectively in the period after 1998, as opposed to their figures against India before this time, therefore displaying that Indian batsman are far less adept to playing spin than what they once were.

Therefore having established that Indian batsman are unable to play spin since the start of 1998, I decided to compare Brad Hogg and Shane Warne's stats versus India in India up to the end of 1997, as this is widely seen (by this commentator anyway) as the truest test for a spinner. Lo and behold, Brad Hogg has taken infinite times the number of wickets that Shane Warne has in India during this time. In fact, showing his complete incompetence, Shane Warne never took a wicket in India pre 1998, therefore making him clearly a worse bowler than Brad Hogg, who at least was able to establish himself a bowling average in India during this period, unlike that plodder Warne. In fact, Warne's figures even put him behind the likes of Mark Waugh, Peter McIntyre and Nathan Haurtitz and on equal footing with such esteemed bowling greats as Justin Langer, WG Grace and Scott Muller, whom all share with Warne the indignation of never having taken an Indian wicket in India.

So in fairness, I decided to include all performances against India before 1998, to help re-establish Warne's fast waning credibility as a bowler of Test standard. Well, my intelligent contemporaries, the news only becomes more shocking. During this period, Shane Warne averages nearly 4 times what Brad Hogg does against the same opponents. It also took Shane Warne, on average, 408 deliveries to take a wicket. This makes Hogg's 69 average and 102 strike rate look Barnes-esque.

Having taken as many wickets as Warne versus India in this period, as well as having done it on the Indians' own backyard, in one quarter of the deliveries, and nearly one quarter of the runs, it therefore becomes fair to estimate that George Bradley Hogg is four times the test bowler that Shane Warne ever has been. This allows us to estimate that if Brad Hogg had've played as many tests as Shane Warne, he would have one quarter the average, and one quarter the strikerate, over the long term. When one allows for the fact that being such a destructive bowler, he would have been allowed to open the bowling becuase of his sheer class, and he would have demolished sides so quickly, we can also say that he would have bowled half of Australia's overs during this time. Therefore, I roughly estimate that Brad Hogg would have 2000 test wickets if he had've been given the opportunities that he rightly deserved, and that world cricket would become so boring and monotonous that he would have been banned from partaking in any cricket anywhere in the world by this time, as the ICC would have ruled that once any player takes 2000 test wickets, he becomes too good for the game.

Therefore, these are the figures Brad Hogg has been robbed of.

Matches
123
Overs
4916.4
Runs
12760
Wickets
2000
Average
6.38
Economy Rate
2.56
Strike Rate
14.74

Question me at your peril.

That was really really good Vic. Honestly. I am sure you know that without anyone having to say it.

Its possible some people who read it didnt even realise that we had a guest(free lance) writer filling in.

Please keep up the good work. You are a credit to Bullshi**ers Anonymous of which all us statisticians are proud members

 

[vic_orthdox]

We are not bull-shi****s !! We have our credibilty to think of !!

You are a credit to Bullshi**ers Anonymous of which all us statisticians are proud members

Spot the difference...

 

[SJS]

Spot the difference...

OOOOOOPS !!

 

[jot1]

OOOOOOPS !!

 

[King_Ponting]

sorry mate good effort but that realy suks

 

[honestbharani]

good effort, mofo... I think you were on the right track until you went into Newton's law..

 

[Deja moo]

And this post results in me reneging from any forthcoming assignments.

And anyways, it only took me 3/4 of an hour to post. And as many of you would have realised, I bullsh*t on an international scale. I can't believe that the total response I got for this massive post was a sledge.

BTW, its 2:40am and I just got home from a massive night out.

I'm sorry if my response offended you mate. It was not a sledge by any means. I just thought it must have taken you an incredibly long time to write out that post.

 

[SJS]

Australia versus Bangladesh !!

This has to be the most unfair comparison ever undertaken. Let me show you why it is unfair :

1. Australia started playing cricket in March 1877 and Bangladesh in November 2000 !!
Bangladesh have been playing test cricket for 54 months and Australia for 1538 months !!
Australia have 2848 % more experience !!

Conclusion I : Bangladesh have been kept out of test cricket (in fact from the comity of nations) intentionaly so that they will be handicapped perpetually throughout time !! A conspiracy of the imperialist whites as some friends of mine on this forum will surely agree to and applaud. Thank you. Thank you.

2. Australia play a test every 2.31 months or get a rest of 65 days between two tests. Bangladesh play a test every 1.5 months so they get only 40 days rest between two tests !!

Aussies get 162.5 % more rest than the poor (impoverished) Bangladeshis

Conclusion II : Another conspiracy to keep Bangladesh cricketers completely exhausted (particularly considering they play more than half their matches at home in one of the hottest and most humid areas in the world.

3. Another fact that shows the effect the above Conspiracy number 2 is having on Banglasesh's hugely talented cricketers is shown by the fact that Aussies have played 391 players in the 665 matches the country has played. On the other hand, Bangladesh has played 40 players in 36 tests. Thus an Aussie player plays an average of 18.7 tests in his career while the bangladeshi plays only half of that at 9.9 !!

An Australian is able to, thanks to the conspiracy, play nearly 200 % more test cricket than his Bangladeshi counterpart

Conclusion III : . A case of white imperialists burning out the opressed brown people !!

4. Also note that with 391 players over 1538 months, Australian cricketers last an average of 43.3 months while Bangladesh players last only 14.85 months !!

The longevity of the Aussie is nearly 300 % that of the poor Bangladeshi.

Conclusion IV : They are killing them, literally !!!

...to be continued​

 

[andyc]

we've been found out... bugger

 

[SJS]

Australia versus Bangladesh !!

.......continued​

An unfair comparison.


5. Australia fhad to play only two opponents in their first 36 tests one of whom was less experienced than Australia and the other an equal in this respect.

Bangladesh, on the other hand, has to match their wits against 9 opponents (450% more than the Aussies) and all of them are infinitely more experienced and will always remain so !!

Conclusion 5: Let their be sides less experienced or as experienced as the Bangladeshis and we will talk.

One can go on and on about the unfairness of this comparison and how it is like comparing sweet ripe mangoes to rotten apples. Nevertheless, I will now proceed to show how, inspite of the aparently insurmountable odds facing them, Bangladesh have shown they are nota match but superior to the Aussies in each aspect of the game, batting, bowling and wicket keeping.

.....to be continued​

 

[SJS]

Comparing Australia and Bangladesh in their first 36 test matches ​

Batting

The biggest problem that minnows of cricket are accused ofis that they make a mockery of the game as a contest by getting bowled out for ridiculously low totals. Lets see how the "mighty" Aussies fare in this respect with the "lowly" Bangladesh !!

Lowest team total in first 36 games

- Australia : 36
- BDesh : 87

Surprised ? Well here is more. This inspite of the fact that australia, inspite of being in their first 36 tests werenot minnows, at least not relatively speaking since they played only two other sides and neither of them were more experienced than them !!!

This is not all though. While Bangladesh had one freak innings when they got out for 87 runs in their 36 tests. The Aussies, on the other hand got out NINE TIMES below 87 in their first 36 tests !!

Conclusion : Bangladesh are NINE times the batting side AS A TEAM as the Aussies were after their first 36 matches !!

Now coming to individual batting stars.

After 36 tests, lets look at the top batting stars of both sides.

Top aggregate runs in first 36 tests by one batsman

- Australia : AC Bannerman 1029 at 22.4 per innings
- Bangladesh : Habibul Bashar 2299 at 34.8

The top Bangladeshi batsman after 36 tests outscores the top Aussie in similar situation by 220% !!

Career 50’s/100’s

- Australia : 7 50’s and 0-100’s Bannerman
- Bangladesh: 19-50’s and 3-100’s Habibul Basher

The top aussie batsman scored 7 fifites in this period (the highest number of fifties by any Australian while the top Bangladeshi scored 19, 50's besides 3 centuries !!!

Conclusion 2 : Inspite of the heavy odds stacked against them, the Bangladeshi stars have shown far greater class than the Aussie pretenders !

Having proved without any doubt that the bangladeshis were far superior to their Australian counterparts in batting lets turn our attention to the equaly important aspect of bowling.

Bowling

It is said that the weakest link in a chain determines its strength. So I would like to look at the weak links of both teams bowling.

Bowlers who did not get a wicket

It may be a surprise to those who blindly consider the Aussies God's gift to the game of cricket and its bowlers the best over time but to the discerning, the opposite is clearly the case. Here is a startling fact. We have listed the bowlers who failed to get a single wicket in test matches they bowled in for both sides. The results are before you.

- Australia 19
- Bangladesh 8

Clealy Australia has 237 % more toothless bowlers than Bangladesh.

Another aspect of the weak links of bowling..

Bowlers with strike rate above 200

- Australia : 2
- Bangladesh : 1

Conclusion 3 Australia's bowling chain is 200 to 237 % weaker than Bangladesh.

Wicket Keeping

It is not surprising that both these teams were served by one outstanding wicket keeper each for most of these 36 tests. Blackham for Australia and Khaled Masud for Bangladesh. However, the imperialist conspirators and their biased history writers will have us believe that Blackham was a legend, a prince amongst keepers while Khaled Masud doesnt even deserve a footnote in cricket history. Well you judge for yourselves.

Keeping : Maximum catches by a wicket keeper after 36 tests

- Australia : Blackham 38 catches
- Bangladesh : Khaled Mashud 59 catches !!

Khaled held 155 % more catches than Blackham but the Aussies and their imperialist co-conspirators will have us believe otherwise.

Conclusion 4. If Blackham is to be called the Prince amongst Wicket keepers then Khaled Mashud must be put on a pedestal as THE EMPORER amongst wicket keepers !!

 

[marc71178]

Excuse me, but didn't Bannerman score a ton?

 

[SJS]

Excuse me, but didn't Bannerman score a ton?

That was CHARLES Bannerman not AC Bannerman.

Charles Bannerman scored 1 century and no fities. We were looking for the highest scorer (aggregate) for the 36 tests AND the scorer of maximum fifties

Moral : You can not disprove SJS Stats Factory stats

 

[marc71178]

I apologise for my rank amateur attempt at proving you wrong.

Could you prove for me how Robert Croft is on a par with Ashley Giles please when comparing their respective non-Test stats?

 

[Son Of Coco]

Comparing Australia and Bangladesh in their first 36 test matches ​

Batting

The biggest problem that minnows of cricket are accused ofis that they make a mockery of the game as a contest by getting bowled out for ridiculously low totals. Lets see how the "mighty" Aussies fare in this respect with the "lowly" Bangladesh !!

Lowest team total in first 36 games

- Australia : 36
- BDesh : 87

Surprised ? Well here is more. This inspite of the fact that australia, inspite of being in their first 36 tests werenot minnows, at least not relatively speaking since they played only two other sides and neither of them were more experienced than them !!!

This is not all though. While Bangladesh had one freak innings when they got out for 87 runs in their 36 tests. The Aussies, on the other hand got out NINE TIMES below 87 in their first 36 tests !!

Conclusion : Bangladesh are NINE times the batting side AS A TEAM as the Aussies were after their first 36 matches !!

Now coming to individual batting stars.

After 36 tests, lets look at the top batting stars of both sides.

Top aggregate runs in first 36 tests by one batsman

- Australia : AC Bannerman 1029 at 22.4 per innings
- Bangladesh : Habibul Bashar 2299 at 34.8

The top Bangladeshi batsman after 36 tests outscores the top Aussie in similar situation by 220% !!

Career 50’s/100’s

- Australia : 7 50’s and 0-100’s Bannerman
- Bangladesh: 19-50’s and 3-100’s Habibul Basher

The top aussie batsman scored 7 fifites in this period (the highest number of fifties by any Australian while the top Bangladeshi scored 19, 50's besides 3 centuries !!!

Conclusion 2 : Inspite of the heavy odds stacked against them, the Bangladeshi stars have shown far greater class than the Aussie pretenders !

Having proved without any doubt that the bangladeshis were far superior to their Australian counterparts in batting lets turn our attention to the equaly important aspect of bowling.

Bowling

It is said that the weakest link in a chain determines its strength. So I would like to look at the weak links of both teams bowling.

Bowlers who did not get a wicket

It may be a surprise to those who blindly consider the Aussies God's gift to the game of cricket and its bowlers the best over time but to the discerning, the opposite is clearly the case. Here is a startling fact. We have listed the bowlers who failed to get a single wicket in test matches they bowled in for both sides. The results are before you.

- Australia 19
- Bangladesh 8

Clealy Australia has 237 % more toothless bowlers than Bangladesh.

Another aspect of the weak links of bowling..

Bowlers with strike rate above 200

- Australia : 2
- Bangladesh : 1

Conclusion 3 Australia's bowling chain is 200 to 237 % weaker than Bangladesh.

Wicket Keeping

It is not surprising that both these teams were served by one outstanding wicket keeper each for most of these 36 tests. Blackham for Australia and Khaled Masud for Bangladesh. However, the imperialist conspirators and their biased history writers will have us believe that Blackham was a legend, a prince amongst keepers while Khaled Masud doesnt even deserve a footnote in cricket history. Well you judge for yourselves.

Keeping : Maximum catches by a wicket keeper after 36 tests

- Australia : Blackham 38 catches
- Bangladesh : Khaled Mashud 59 catches !!

Khaled held 155 % more catches than Blackham but the Aussies and their imperialist co-conspirators will have us believe otherwise.

Conclusion 4. If Blackham is to be called the Prince amongst Wicket keepers then Khaled Mashud must be put on a pedestal as THE EMPORER amongst wicket keepers !!

Superb work yet again....apologies for going missing during the week, but work has grabbed a hold of me lately due to the fact that I'm working in an office now where people can see my computer screen!

I'm prepared to do some overtime on the weekend though to make up for it...

 

[Slats4ever]

i would just like to say that this is the greatest thread on CW cricket chat at the moment.... By a long way.

Can anyone try to prove that a test match with Zimbabwe v Bangladesh warrants more attention than a Australia v England test match

 

[Sanz]

I'm prepared to do some overtime on the weekend though to make up for it...

Ajit Agarkar > Glen Mcgrath Please...

And thank you for your wonderful effort in this thread