darthlewis1
Club Captain
BBC News - Former England cricketer Trevor Bailey dies in fire
RIP to a great cricketer. Its just sad that he died in such a horrible way
RIP to a great cricketer. Its just sad that he died in such a horrible way
Trevor Bailey dies in house fire aged 87
- Thread starter darthlewis1
- Start date
P
pcfan123
Guest
sad way to go but I'd take it if I got to live to 87.
RIP
RIP
sami ullah khan
Panel of Selectors
I am saddened by how he had to die. I hope his soul rests in peace.
England players with 1000 runs & 100 wkts in Tests
Ian Botham : 5200 runs @ 33.54 & 383 wkts @ 28.40
Wilfred Rhodes : 2325 runs @ 30.19 & 127 wkts @ 26.96
Tony Greig : 3599 runs @ 40.43 & 141 wkts @ 32.20
Trevor Bailey : 2290 runs @ 29.74 & 132 wkts @ 29.21
Andrew Flintoff : 3845 runs @ 31.77 & 226 wkts @ 32.78
Maurice Tate : 1198 runs @ 25.48 & 155 wkts @ 26.16
Ray Illingworth : 1836 runs @ 23.24 & 122 wkts @ 31.20
Fred Titmus : 1449 runs @ 22.29 & 153 wkts @ 32.22
John Emburey : 1713 runs @ 22.53 & 147 wkts @ 38.40
Ashley Giles : 1421 runs @ 20.89 & 143 wkts @ 40.60
Source : Records | Test matches | All-round records | 1000 runs and 100 wickets | ESPN Cricinfo
Those are in rough order, although Bailey and Tate only made one hundred each. Flintoff's bowling was a big letdown, beats me why so many England fans rave about him when his batting weren't all that either. BB of 5/58 in 79 Tests, only a spattering of 5wis and not that many 100s.
In my last all-rounder comparison, not touched for a while and quite likely not only out of date, but needing another think of the best way of analysing, Botham was 2nd, Greig 5th and Rhodes 7th - comparing all all-rounders, not just English ones. Bailey was down in 24th, Flintoff 20th.
Titmus, Embury and Giles were filtered out because my qualifier isn't just 1000 runs and 100 wkts, but they need to have scored a hundred and taken a 5wi - most fail on the hundred qualifier, sadly Marshall among them and Warne only just! Biggest problem that I got stuck on was how to reflect 'balance' in a fair way. That is to say how to make someone who could as easily score a hundred as take five wickets presidence over someone who took wickets, but was more a batting all-rounder, or vice versa (Kallis, Hadlee, Benaud etc) I did try and incorporate the overall average of all those compared, taking the mean average, but that might get into standard deviations and I'm not sure it will work anyway.
P
pcfan123
Guest
Tact, get some.
War
Chairman of Selectors
- Joined
- Feb 10, 2010
- Online Cricket Games Owned
Because due to injuries we never got to fully see the best of Flintoff as an all-rounder. Players like Flintoff like Cairns, Frank Tyson, Bond, S Jones & to a degree (Brett Schultz), Akhtar, Ian Bishop are the special cases & we unfortunately can only judge on their short peaks since injury robbed us of seeing them at their best for an extended period.
The longest injury free-period of Flintoff career was from Bridgetown 2004 (when he took his 1st test 5 wicket haul) - Mumbai 2006 (when his batting was making new strides as was shown by his excellent batting vs the spin in that series vs India.
28 matches:
- 1802 runs @ 41.90
- 119 wickets @ 25.15
In this Bridgetown 04 - Mumbai 06 period, he reached the beginning of his zenith as bowler between Ashes 05 to IND 06. This is KEY distinction to make that this was merely the beginning, since alot of fans mistakingly view the Ashes 05 as the ending of his peak. Since his bowling had another level to go (in which the more 5 wicket haul problem would have been corrected) - which we would have seen if the final 3 years of his career (SRI 06 - Ashes 09) wasn't marred by injury, which prevented him frong taking his bowling to another level, although he remained very much test quality & ENG best bowler during this period. Those injuries also affected his batting improvments which he made during the 2006 IND tour in the last 3 injury plagued years of his career.
Last edited:
