England's Winter of Cricket 2022/23

First topic message reminder :

The Lions are doing some Bazball v Sri Lanka A.

Sri Lanka A were bowled out for a paltry 136, Fisher with 5/34, and the Lions have already amassed 249/3 in 48 overs. Hameed, who's captain, 81 off 109, Lees 56 off 69, and Haines unbeaten with 62 from 72.

king_carlos wrote:Must say that looked very out to me live but Root survived on umpires call. Root isn't nearly his fluent best here but if he can hang around the opportunities to score will start to come against an attack with this balance.

Well true he's not ticking over as smoothly so far...but I reckon he's consciously playing the anchor man to Brook's full on Bazballer , no ? He's defended well ; and still ready to take those singles . It looks a good combination.

I haven't been too bothered about Root having a run of modest scores. Nobody can be completely on top all the time ; and it's probably true that he's overdone some attempts to play the same game as Duckett , Brook etc...unnecessary , I think we'd all agree. He's far better off playing his own game *. The situation today certainly has called for it.

* sort of Larry Gomes to Viv Richards and Clive Lloyd , etc , eh guildford ?

Brook closing in on another century as drinks end a very fruitful half session for England at 166/3

Tests in Australia and NZ aren't a very happy place for Root. He only averages 37.6 in Oceania, just 1 century from 42 innings, and a strike-rate that's down at 44 (compared to high 50s/low 60s elsewhere).

So it would be nice if he can grind through here and get a big score.

Brook is already up to being the 24th highest six-hitter in England test history.

Forced to wait a little, but Brook gets his fourth century with a sumptuous cut.

Four away centuries in just one winter. To put it in context, Root has managed 11 away centuries in his entire career.

Fifty for Joe

Chance to boost that Oceania average , maybe , later.

And a hundred for Harry

Bring out the champagne , eh ? After 21/3 , this is a sensibly well-modified bit of Bazball.

Great partnership , this.

After all the early drama , it is back to the usual formula now for the New England...Brook totally dominating the bowlers , 200 up at better than four per over : real problems for Southee to find a way to pull this back now.

Root looking more ready to take the bowlers on too as the afternoon advances. Wagner going at over six per.

Might not be easy for the England bowlers when they get a go , as the pitch seems to be flattening out. But they'll likely have a fair few runs to defend...

Tea. 237/3.  What a session for England ! What a partnership...

I am not sure where you should bowl to Harry Brook ; but Neil Wagner clearly hasn't found it  

Brook now back over run a ball , 136 from 131. Root happy to play second fiddle 72 from 148. Game totally transformed from the early bowler-dominated action. OK , pitch isn't giving as much now ; but the way Brook has torn the bowlers apart has still been remarkable. The lack of truly effective bowling options apart from Southee and Henry has left NZ badly exposed...heaven knows what will happen in this last session (which will be a long one as only 53 overs have been bowled so far)

Brook eases his way to his highest test score. Weird to think that if Bairstow hadn't taken a tumble playing golf, we may not have seen Brook in tests yet.

Wagner approaching another unwelcome century. Not sure what NZ can do until the second new ball, other than hope a rash shot happens. 400 may be on the board by then.

And on we go...250 stand is up now ; Brook continues to marmalize the bowlers (especially the unfortunate Mitchell and Wagner. He's up to 169 now from 155 ! Still 30 overs left in the day so this could get very ugly for the home team...

Don't know how many are staying up in the UK watching this ...but I reckon the highlights will draw good viewing figures later

Brook closing in on his double now...his and the team's run rate ramping on up.

Root a comparatively pedestrian 83 from 167 : but I fancy he's quite enjoying watching this from the other end . Good day for Yorkshire ...

Brook now the highest scoring player ever from their first 9 Test innings

Ha ! Three hundred up so Root feels comfortable bringing out the reverse scoop

Worked fine that time , too. Into the nineties...

Root brings up his hundred

And , less felicitously , Wagner's

Good timing as the rain arrives and we all take a break at 315/3.

Well that was fun. Root and Wagner getting to their centuries off the same ball. One might be more pleased than the other...

Earlier start tomorrow. Might be more rain around, but it's clear from day three onwards.

What England have done to Neil Wagner this series verges on abuse - absolutely eviscerated him.

Unbelievable partnership and a great catch up to watch. Literally watching the best start to a batting career ever with Brook, most runs in a players first 9 innings in test history! Incredible.

Great knock by Root too to just quiet that weird media rumblings and nonsense about him fitting in this side - he just had a couple of quiet tests, he fits perfectly and great to see him back on the hundred trail after missing out this winter to date.

England superbly setup now - hopefully these two can get going again in the morning and pile on the misery for New Zealand.

As for the Kiwis…have they fallen foul of their own pitch tricks? Drawn into the green tinge when actually it’s a road once the first hour or so wears off that moisture? They’re going to need that extra batting depth in this one that’s for sure!

Good scoreline to wake up to! The start Brook is having, it's lot like when Strauss debuted and immediately churned out hundreds, but in a far more belligerent fashion, really has been incredible

New Zealand seem to make the same mistakes over and over. Three seamers plus a part time spinner didn't work away to England and hasn't worked today. I think Wagner could well be finished, maybe lost a bit of pace so whereas his bouncers used to cause problems it's now all very predictable and easy to target. Feel they should have swallowed their pride a bit and still picked Boult

VTR wrote:Good scoreline to wake up to! The start Brook is having, it's lot like when Strauss debuted and immediately churned out hundreds, but in a far more belligerent fashion, really has been incredible

New Zealand seem to make the same mistakes over and over. Three seamers plus a part time spinner didn't work away to England and hasn't worked today. I think Wagner could well be finished, maybe lost a bit of pace so whereas his bouncers used to cause problems it's now all very predictable and easy to target. Feel they should have swallowed their pride a bit and still picked Boult

Oh I think not picking Boult was absolutely nuts in the context of this series ; but I guess they might say (a) they need to plan for a future without him ; (b) this series means very little - no WTC points at stake - and (c) At their present state of just having lost several good players they were likely to get hammered anyway...

Think they need to accept that with Blundell such a good keeper/bat at six they always have room for five proper bowlers , as long as one or two of them aren't totally useless with the bat. Bracewell in the spinners role fits that formula , although on pitches more helpful to a spinner they might want someone more threatening. I guess a fit Jamieson would be fine and they are unfortunate he isn't at the moment ; but from what we saw of Kuggeleijn last week he isn't the answer. Tickner didn't tear down trees but at least he looked honest. Duffy wasn't tried at all so no idea about him.

What they've ended up doing has played into England's hands - unless their true aim is a rain-assisted draw with the long batting list stonewalling relentlessly for hours at a time

It might have been interesting this morning had it been Boult rather than Mitchell taking first change duties with England three down for not very many ...

Wagner really has been hammered lately by the McCullum-led England outfit. He had done quite well in England in 2021 ; but last year he got murdered by Jonny Bairstow in Leeds and Brook has picked up the task of using him as a punching bag... Tomorrow might be tough for him : after 17 overs today and an early start he could be a little sore !

His overall record is really good in Australia (better even than at home) but other than there and SA/Zimbabwe he doesn't seem to travel well. At 37 you'd reckon he is on his last legs : for all his undoubted energy and determination his method simply doesn't lend itself to the ravages of time to the degree that Jimmy Anderson has adapted his.

Think the Sri Lanka series will see some new blood introduced. Hope they can find some ; because a competitive NZ team is always worth watching - not so much for thrill a minute batting perhaps , but for a display of old fashioned gritty Test Cricket which can often confound nominally stronger sides.

They are up against it in this one.

We're really starting to see the true genius of Jonny Bairstow now. He knew that his Yorkie mate would be blocked from test selection as long as he was fit so does the selfless thing and breaks his own leg so we end up in a position where both have to be picked.

Only got to watch the highlights but that was one of the most balanced partnerships I have whilst going at some rate as well. Brook, simply brutal and Root doing what Root does.

I think that there is a lot more in this track than what the NZ bowlers extracted and feel that the England bowlers will have much more joy and better returns.

I do feel for Crawley, he is way out of sorts and seems low on confidence. Playing too high for me, he does not seem a competent opener, more of a 4 but England have great coverage there so where to put him? I am not a fan of Bairstow to open option either. I know many have written him off but I would look at Burns again myself.

alfie wrote:Wagner really has been hammered lately by the McCullum-led England outfit. He had done quite well in England in 2021 ; but last year he got murdered by Jonny Bairstow in Leeds and Brook has picked up the task of using him as a punching bag... Tomorrow might be tough for him : after 17 overs today and an early start he could be a little sore !

His overall record is really good in Australia (better even than at home) but other than there and SA/Zimbabwe he doesn't seem to travel well. At 37 you'd reckon he is on his last legs : for all his undoubted energy and determination his method simply doesn't lend itself to the ravages of time to the degree that Jimmy Anderson has adapted his.

Think the Sri Lanka series will see some new blood introduced. Hope they can find some ;  because a competitive NZ team is always worth watching - not so much for thrill a minute batting perhaps , but for a display of old fashioned gritty Test Cricket which can often confound nominally stronger sides.

They are up against it in this one.

I think NZ kind of know in their heart of hearts that Wagner is finished too. Hence why he was so far down the pecking order when they toured England in the summer and he only played the last game where, like you say, Bairstow treated him something on the bottom of his shoe. But it’s pure lack of other options that has kept him in.

Duty281 wrote:Two very poor reviews. They only got suckered into that second one because it was Root.

Three down! What a grab by Bracewell. England in a bit of trouble, but the early evidence does indicate this will be a low-scorer.

Well, that aged well

(sorry Duty, no offence meant)

Eng and Harry Brooks continue to bat like crazy, defying the laws of gravity
Someone needs to figure a way to stop them

KP_fan wrote:Eng and Harry Brooks continue to bat like crazy, defying the laws of gravity
Someone needs to figure a way to stop them

I have been thinking and the answer to my questions lies in using Test match non-restriction advantage to choke Eng's free scoring

Since Eng is using T20 styled batting in Tests
Oppositions should use the relaxation available in test cricket to control Eng

bowl very wide outside the off like 9th stump with 7 fielders on off....no risk of being Wided
Put 7 or 8 on the leg side and bowl preferably an off spinner pitching  on leg or just outside the leg stump
Liberally use overhead bouncers.

Stop their scoring using the test match bowling & fielding non restrictions...cut out what differentiates them i.e free and fast scoring

Not to pile on NZ (but I'm gonna)...it's only two games of course, but Southee appears to be a truly dreadful choice as captain to me. Never hugely pegged him as an inspirational type player, and clearly doesn't have much tactical nous/ability either...and it's like watching what Broad would be like if he had control of the review system too . He looks really quite rabbit in the headlights in the field, and wonder if it burdens him a bit with the ball too. Also hardly a massive long term solution either, he's no spring chicken himself!

Know obviously Williamson gave it up...but surely Latham or Conway might have been better suited?

Great stuff from Harry Brook. What a player he is.

At the risk of being a curmudgeon, not sure I can get on the 'most runs in 9 innings' bandwagon. Since when has 9 innings been a thing. Why not 10? What comes next, most runs after 11 innings? 13 innings? Seems a bit contrived to me. Reminds me of all my Spurs mates getting very excited a few years back when Harry Kane scored more goals in a calendar year than Messi (something along those lines, can't quite remember). Again, since when did calendar year become a metric to judge goals on! One for the Social Media crew.

Anyway, enough of being miserable, great innings by a hugely talented young player. Great to see Root do what Root does having watched Broad do a Broad last test. The 'old' guard showing the new breed that they are not going anywhere just yet.

Mind the windows Tino. wrote:Great stuff from Harry Brook. What a player he is.

At the risk of being a curmudgeon, not sure I can get on the 'most runs in 9 innings' bandwagon. Since when has 9 innings been a thing. Why not 10? What comes next, most runs after 11 innings? 13 innings? Seems a bit contrived to me. Reminds me of all my Spurs mates getting very excited a few years back when Harry Kane scored more goals in a calendar year than Messi (something along those lines, can't quite remember). Again, since when did calendar year become a metric to judge goals on! One for the Social Media crew.

Anyway, enough of being miserable, great innings by a hugely talented young player. Great to see Root do what Root does having watched Broad do a Broad last test. The 'old' guard showing the new breed that they are not going anywhere just yet.

It ends up as 'most runs scored on a Thursday afternoon in February by a player with the middle name Cherrington*' - given enough options you can almost always find some sort of record.
Still a fantastic start to his Test career for Brook - 6 matches, 800 runs with 4 hundreds and 4 50s, current average 77. THE form player in Test cricket at the moment

* I hope that isn't Wikipedia vandalism and is genuinely Brook's middle name.

It is completely contrived! Fastest to 1000 runs is in his sights, which seems to have more merit as an actual record

Nothing though will ever be as bad as Premier League records, as if the rebranding of the top division of football invalidated all achievements before that date

Just taken a look at fastest to 1000 run in Tests, which has been an historic marker:

Current best is Herbert Sutcliffe, who took 12 innings over 9 matches and 244 days from debut to 1000 runs.
Everton Weekes took the same number of innings and matches over a slightly longer period (just over 1 year).
The Don only 7 matches but 13 innings in a span approaching 2 years.

Brook as noted is currently on 807 runs in his 9th innings and 6th match. Test debut was 8 September 2022
To beat Sutcliffe in terms of time, he needs to reach 1000 runs in this match - don't think scoring another 193 is likely, but is just about within the bounds of possibility, especially with his overnight not out.

Obviously, if he achieves this, he sweeps all the records - fastest in time from debut, fewest matches and fewest innings.

England's next Test is the Ireland game from 1st June, so about 2 weeks late for Sutcliffe's record (I'm surprised that England and Australia managed to play 9 times over the course of just over 8 months in 1924/1925, given the time required for travelling in those days). Looks potentially a better bet for Brook to tie the record for fewest matches (in the insignificant company of DG Bradman) and either take or equal the number of innings of Sutcliffe and Weekes.

Anyway, whatever happens, he's in pretty good company - I assume all three made the 606v2 hall of fame. Might have been a little debate about the inclusion of that annoying Aussie, but I suspect he just about made the cut.

Looking a bit further, 6th in the list is Len Hutton. CAn't be thant many lists of top Test criketers where two of the top 6 were from the same village and played (at least for a short time in Sutcliffe's case) for the same club side (Pudsey St Lawrence - a club I played against as a junior)

I’m sorry, but cricket was invented so people could make up contrived stats about anything. The nicher the better in my opinion. I’ve not heard any speculation about what the highest Test score by a batter in the month of February is yet. This is what should be being done!

Further down my rabbit hole of fastest to 1000 runs, I've come across the Australian Sid Barnes, as the 10th fastest to achieve this, in terms of innings, needing 17 innings over 11 matches. The oddity and unfortunate thing for Barnes is that this was over the period 1938 to 1948, so two months less than a decade.
He only played a couple more Tests as part of the Invincibles side, finishing his Test career with 1072 runs in 13 Tests at an average of 63.

JDizzle wrote:I’m sorry, but cricket was invented so people could make up contrived stats about anything. The nicher the better in my opinion. I’ve not heard any speculation about what the highest Test score by a batter in the month of February is yet. This is what should be being done!

I'm fairly confident that this one is true
"most runs scored on a Thursday afternoon in February by a player with the middle name Cherrington"

Also doubt that it will ever be broken by anyone other than Harry Brook...

JDizzle wrote:I’m sorry, but cricket was invented so people could make up contrived stats about anything. The nicher the better in my opinion. I’ve not heard any speculation about what the highest Test score by a batter in the month of February is yet. This is what should be being done!

Sobers 365*

Galted wrote:

JDizzle wrote:I’m sorry, but cricket was invented so people could make up contrived stats about anything. The nicher the better in my opinion. I’ve not heard any speculation about what the highest Test score by a batter in the month of February is yet. This is what should be being done!

Sobers 365*

Well, there's another target for Brook tomorrow ;-)

Galted wrote:

JDizzle wrote:I’m sorry, but cricket was invented so people could make up contrived stats about anything. The nicher the better in my opinion. I’ve not heard any speculation about what the highest Test score by a batter in the month of February is yet. This is what should be being done!

Sobers 365*

Was only 228* overnight on the 28th. Fails my arbitrary criteria of entirely in Feb. I’ll settle for beating Sangakkara’s 319!

JDizzle wrote:

Galted wrote:

JDizzle wrote:I’m sorry, but cricket was invented so people could make up contrived stats about anything. The nicher the better in my opinion. I’ve not heard any speculation about what the highest Test score by a batter in the month of February is yet. This is what should be being done!

Sobers 365*

Was only 228* overnight on the 28th. Fails my arbitrary criteria of entirely in Feb. I’ll settle for beating Sangakkara’s 319!

Are you sure it wasn't a leap year?

Pretty sure you could come up with some spectacularly niche stats for best performances on February 29th...

JDizzle wrote:I’m sorry, but cricket was invented so people could make up contrived stats about anything. The nicher the better in my opinion. I’ve not heard any speculation about what the highest Test score by a batter in the month of February is yet. This is what should be being done!

Niche stats have kept Andy Zaltzman, Andrew Samson, Bill Frindall and Malcolm Ashton in jobs and i'm all for it. Just imagine a sporting world where the action is more important than the numbers behind it, doesn't bare thinking about.

JDizzle wrote:

Galted wrote:

JDizzle wrote:I’m sorry, but cricket was invented so people could make up contrived stats about anything. The nicher the better in my opinion. I’ve not heard any speculation about what the highest Test score by a batter in the month of February is yet. This is what should be being done!

Sobers 365*

Was only 228* overnight on the 28th. Fails my arbitrary criteria of entirely in Feb. I’ll settle for beating Sangakkara’s 319!

FFS, well then that's the highest score started in February and carried over into March

Galted wrote:

JDizzle wrote:

Galted wrote:

JDizzle wrote:I’m sorry, but cricket was invented so people could make up contrived stats about anything. The nicher the better in my opinion. I’ve not heard any speculation about what the highest Test score by a batter in the month of February is yet. This is what should be being done!

Sobers 365*

Was only 228* overnight on the 28th. Fails my arbitrary criteria of entirely in Feb. I’ll settle for beating Sangakkara’s 319!

FFS, well then that's the highest score started in February and carried over into March

And the highest spanning two months.

Galted wrote:

JDizzle wrote:

Galted wrote:

JDizzle wrote:I’m sorry, but cricket was invented so people could make up contrived stats about anything. The nicher the better in my opinion. I’ve not heard any speculation about what the highest Test score by a batter in the month of February is yet. This is what should be being done!

Sobers 365*

Was only 228* overnight on the 28th. Fails my arbitrary criteria of entirely in Feb. I’ll settle for beating Sangakkara’s 319!

FFS, well then that's the highest score started in February and carried over into March

It actually isn't, Conrad Hunte was 242 not out overnight in the same match.

Soul Requiem wrote:

JDizzle wrote:I’m sorry, but cricket was invented so people could make up contrived stats about anything. The nicher the better in my opinion. I’ve not heard any speculation about what the highest Test score by a batter in the month of February is yet. This is what should be being done!

Niche stats have kept Andy Zaltzman, Andrew Samson, Bill Frindall and Malcolm Ashton in jobs and i'm all for it. Just imagine a sporting world where the action is more important than the numbers behind it, doesn't bare thinking about.

I used to know Andrew Samson's brother. He was a mine of film and music trivia.

Soul Requiem wrote:

JDizzle wrote:I’m sorry, but cricket was invented so people could make up contrived stats about anything. The nicher the better in my opinion. I’ve not heard any speculation about what the highest Test score by a batter in the month of February is yet. This is what should be being done!

Niche stats have kept Andy Zaltzman, Andrew Samson, Bill Frindall and Malcolm Ashton in jobs and i'm all for it. Just imagine a sporting world where the action is more important than the numbers behind it, doesn't bare thinking about.

I think truly niche stats is Zaltz's specialty. The others all used the stats to provide depth to the game situation, while I think Zaltz would be right on top of finding the most runs scored by one batsman on a Thursday afternoon in February, playing against a 3 bowler attack south of latitude 39 degrees S.

England continues to amaze! Blasted their way out of yet another tough corner... Root played like Root does, when coming in with 2 down for next to nothing! Harry Brook. He does seem the real deal, the best English test batter since Root. Will have to see how he goes against proper spin in proper spinning conditions, and would want to have a closer look at him in his home conditions early on a summer day against test lineups, but does seem really outstanding at the moment.
What was that New Zealand bowling lineup. Was just asking for trouble, and got plenty of it despite a fine start. They should be realistic, and get Boult involved when available. Their contracted bowlers just aren't anywhere near as good. Tickner is rather ordinary. Kuggeleijn isn't test class with bat or ball. Henry is a good 3rd seamer. Southee is a declining force. Ferguson isn't usually fit, and not proven at test level. Jamieson is on a long road to recovery. They just can't afford to miss out on the quality of Boult when available. Its a shame he's picking and choosing, but I guess the team should also focus on getting that winning feeling back into the setup.
Not saying Boult in his 30s, can provide all the answers, or that he is the greatest ever bowler to have walked the planet. But the gulf in quality seems too huge at the moment between him and the rest they've been trying.

Boult may not be an all time great, but he is a very good Test quality opening bowler and to not pick him for these games seems slightly absurd.
OK, it MIGHT not have mattered today, but surely when you have the opposition at 21-3, you don't want to be bringing a bits and pieces seamer on as first change? A line up of Boult, Southee, Henry and Wagner looks to be of Test class, even in the absence of a Test level spinner (and to be fair, England are only marginally served in this regads with Leach - probably still the weakest area of our team).

Neil Wagner is one of my favorite cricketers. But unfortunately, his time seems to b almost up. But with Jamieson injured and Boult not available/unselected, they don't seem to have too many options. The new seamers I've seen them using in white ball games, none of them really presented a strong case for test cricket. Anyone following NZ domestic seen, who could be the options?

dummy_half wrote:

Duty281 wrote:Two very poor reviews. They only got suckered into that second one because it was Root.

Three down! What a grab by Bracewell. England in a bit of trouble, but the early evidence does indicate this will be a low-scorer.

Well, that aged well

(sorry Duty, no offence meant)

Well the early evidence did indicate that, with England three down in about half an hour and Henry moving the thing at great angles. But it was a classic deceptive NZ pitch, though it wasn't entirely out of coincidence that things settled down when NZ had to go to their change bowlers.

NZ have suffered from retirements and the odd injury, but you should never go into a test match with Bracewell and Mitchell as your fourth and fifth bowlers. Duffy is having a strong season, averaging in the low 20s with the ball, but wasn't deemed worthy of a start in either game, which seems baffling v the options they chose. Wagner's career is over, safe to say.

Good that England have finally put this garbage attack to the sword. They got enough runs in the first test, but didn't properly destroy them. And I reckon the English bowling trio will get far more out of this pitch than the Kiwis have.

Soul Requiem wrote:

Galted wrote:

JDizzle wrote:

Galted wrote:

JDizzle wrote:I’m sorry, but cricket was invented so people could make up contrived stats about anything. The nicher the better in my opinion. I’ve not heard any speculation about what the highest Test score by a batter in the month of February is yet. This is what should be being done!

Sobers 365*

Was only 228* overnight on the 28th. Fails my arbitrary criteria of entirely in Feb. I’ll settle for beating Sangakkara’s 319!

FFS, well then that's the highest score started in February and carried over into March

It actually isn't, Conrad Hunte was 242 not out overnight in the same match.

This is the kind of content I follow this sport and forum for - superb

Soul Requiem wrote:

Galted wrote:

JDizzle wrote:

Galted wrote:

JDizzle wrote:I’m sorry, but cricket was invented so people could make up contrived stats about anything. The nicher the better in my opinion. I’ve not heard any speculation about what the highest Test score by a batter in the month of February is yet. This is what should be being done!

Sobers 365*

Was only 228* overnight on the 28th. Fails my arbitrary criteria of entirely in Feb. I’ll settle for beating Sangakkara’s 319!

FFS, well then that's the highest score started in February and carried over into March

It actually isn't, Conrad Hunte was 242 not out overnight in the same match.

It is though, 365 trumps 260.

Soul Requiem wrote:

Galted wrote:

JDizzle wrote:

Galted wrote:

JDizzle wrote:I’m sorry, but cricket was invented so people could make up contrived stats about anything. The nicher the better in my opinion. I’ve not heard any speculation about what the highest Test score by a batter in the month of February is yet. This is what should be being done!

Sobers 365*

Was only 228* overnight on the 28th. Fails my arbitrary criteria of entirely in Feb. I’ll settle for beating Sangakkara’s 319!

FFS, well then that's the highest score started in February and carried over into March

It actually isn't, Conrad Hunte was 242 not out overnight in the same match.

Daryl Cullinan was 246* overnight on the 28th Feb 1999. This is a productive use of all our time!

https://www.espncricinfo.com/series/south-africa-tour-of-new-zealand-1998-99-61848/new-zealand-vs-south-africa-1st-test-63834/full-scorecard

Speaking of records...what chance do we reckon Brook has of becoming the first Englishman since Gooch to reach a triple century...? Isn't going to get many better opportunities you wouldn't think (flat deck, old ball, loads of time, poor attack)

JDizzle wrote:

Soul Requiem wrote:

Galted wrote:

JDizzle wrote:

Galted wrote:

JDizzle wrote:I’m sorry, but cricket was invented so people could make up contrived stats about anything. The nicher the better in my opinion. I’ve not heard any speculation about what the highest Test score by a batter in the month of February is yet. This is what should be being done!

Sobers 365*

Was only 228* overnight on the 28th. Fails my arbitrary criteria of entirely in Feb. I’ll settle for beating Sangakkara’s 319!

FFS, well then that's the highest score started in February and carried over into March

It actually isn't, Conrad Hunte was 242 not out overnight in the same match.

Daryl Cullinan was 246* overnight on the 28th Feb 1999. This is a productive use of all our time!

https://www.espncricinfo.com/series/south-africa-tour-of-new-zealand-1998-99-61848/new-zealand-vs-south-africa-1st-test-63834/full-scorecard

That is some impressive work JD, I got excited by Sarwan in 2009 but he was only 184*, pitiful from him really. In short Galted needs to sort himself out, he's not only embarrassing him but Tino too.

Soul Requiem wrote:

JDizzle wrote:

Soul Requiem wrote:

Galted wrote:

JDizzle wrote:

Galted wrote:

JDizzle wrote:I’m sorry, but cricket was invented so people could make up contrived stats about anything. The nicher the better in my opinion. I’ve not heard any speculation about what the highest Test score by a batter in the month of February is yet. This is what should be being done!

Sobers 365*

Was only 228* overnight on the 28th. Fails my arbitrary criteria of entirely in Feb. I’ll settle for beating Sangakkara’s 319!

FFS, well then that's the highest score started in February and carried over into March

It actually isn't, Conrad Hunte was 242 not out overnight in the same match.

Daryl Cullinan was 246* overnight on the 28th Feb 1999. This is a productive use of all our time!

https://www.espncricinfo.com/series/south-africa-tour-of-new-zealand-1998-99-61848/new-zealand-vs-south-africa-1st-test-63834/full-scorecard

That is some impressive work JD, I got excited by Sarwan in 2009 but he was only 184*, pitiful from him really. In short Galted needs to sort himself out, he's not only embarrassing him but Tino too.

It's mainly Tino who should be embarrassed. I'm only moonlighting, my real area of expertise is August and September test cricket.