PDA

View Full Version : Brian Charles Lara


DuckDodgers
13th Apr 2004, 13:46
For those who witnessed it, an amazing display of batting ability, mental strength and personal character as B C Lara regains his world record from Matthew Hayden at St Johns, Antigua yesterday.

400 NOT OUT, the highest ever number of runs by a batsman in a test match.....

Binoculars
13th Apr 2004, 13:49
Ahh, but he only made it against England, whereas Hayden made his against Zimbabwe......:E

DuckDodgers
13th Apr 2004, 14:48
Hey Binos, even i could make 380 against Zimbabwe, personally i'm awaiting our little foray to dispose of Mugabe, then i may watch the England tour there in the winter!

Wedge
13th Apr 2004, 15:11
You mean .....Ahh, but he made it against England, whereas Hayden only made his against Zimbabwe......

Well done to BC Lara. Hayden was never a good enough batsman to hold the title! Anyone but an Aussie ;)

It used to be England stuff the series then win the last match when the opposition didn't care. Good to see us reverse the trend!

Binoculars
14th Apr 2004, 14:03
Few of us there are here on JB who love the game of cricket, so I thought about not replying, but hey, we minority interests have rights too!

Accepting the sly digs involved as part of the inevitable banter, I find I have to take issue with Wedge's statement...
Hayden was never a good enough batsman to hold the title!

The exclamation mark may well be a pointer to Wedge's intentions here, but because I have heard the same sentiment expressed elsewhere (it was only Zimbabwe after all) I thought you might be interested in some illuminating statistics.

M.L. Hayden had an undistinguished start to his Test career, and never looked the same batsman at Test level as he did in his murderous attacks on our domestic competition. Rather like one G. Hick in fact. Then he determined to take his game apart and reassemble it, which he did prior to the 2000/01 series.

Since then he has played in 45 Tests, scoring 4471 runs against all comers at an average of 64.8 and scoring 17 centuries. If you can point me to a better batsman over that time frame I would appreciate it. I haven't looked up others stats, but I suggest that if you need to look further than Rahul Dravid for superior stats, you won't find them.

Taking Hayden's early failures into account, his overall Test average stands at 57.48. Among players who played more than 20 Tests, this places him 11th in the all time list. Ahead of are such nonentities as Tendulkar, Sobers, Weekes, Hammond, Barrington, Sutcliffe, Graeme Pollock, Headley and one D.G. Bradman.

In short, Wedge old bean, once again you are talking rubbish.

;)

mullers
14th Apr 2004, 15:18
I think he has got you there Wedge.

Awesome innings by an awesome batsman, well done that man.

Wedge
14th Apr 2004, 15:53
Accepting the sly digs involved as part of the inevitable banter

Of course, no Australian would ever go so low as to make 'sly digs' at their opponent, on or off the field.

See Zimbabwe comment above........


:E

CoodaShooda
15th Apr 2004, 00:14
That's right Wedge, we antipodeans lack the subtlety that comes from breeding to do anything other than call a spade a bloody shovel. :p (At least you know where you stand with us.) :)

It was without doubt a fine innings by Lara and its good to see the record being extended. That's what records are for.

But before anyone continues to denigrate Hayden's effort on the bowler friendly WACA, because it was against Zimbabwe, consider too the level of endeavour shown by the English teams at the smaller Antigua Ground when Lara set his two records.

From the little I saw of his innings, I'd suggest the Zimbabwe team of last summer would have beaten the English team on the field last week. ;)

wobs
15th Apr 2004, 01:41
Binos,

I think you forgot to mention "daylight" as being second to Bradman.

The Don's figures:

M I NO Runs HS Ave 100 50 Ct St
52 80 10 6996 334 99.94 29 13 32 0

DanAir1-11
15th Apr 2004, 02:21
Congratulations indeed to Brian Lara. It is good for the Windies that they could take at least something from the series.
Good also to see a resurgent England line-up. Am looking forward to the Ashes again, See if you chaps can give us a bit more of a work-out this time?.

It is a brave or foolish person whom questions big Matty Haydens
credentials, No need to go into specifics, there are plenty of numbers stated above that do most of the explaining.

One thing overlooked so far however, is the fact that he is a damned good bloke too, had the priviledge of sharing a yarn with him and Allan Border fairly recently over a cold one and you could not wish to meet a more genuine, DTE sort of a chap. There were plenty of people coming over to get autographs etc and he had time for each and every one of them, also obliging for more than a few photo's. I realise that our lads have a P.R. problem with the sledging allegations etc, so it's great to be able to demonstrate the other side to the coin.

Buster Hyman
15th Apr 2004, 03:02
Ahh, yes, the Ashes....

Elliott & Hayden opening...what could smack the pommies harder than that combination?

Binoculars
15th Apr 2004, 04:02
Elliott???

Poor Justin Langer; half of the best opening partnership this country has ever had and the knockers are always out to sack him.

W.M Lawry: 67 Tests for 5234 runs at 47.15 with 13 100's.
R.B. Simpson: 62 Tests, 4869 runs at 46.81 with 10 100's
J.L. Langer: 74 Tests for 5278 runs at 44.72 with 18 100's.

Poor bugga must wonder what he's got to do to feel safe.

:hmm:

But to the subject at hand, full credit to Lara. As I've mentioned before, all triple centuries are scored on roads; they simply don't happen on sticky or seaming tracks. To do ANYTHING that only Bradman has done before is a wonderful achievement.

angels
15th Apr 2004, 05:46
Okay lads - the Pom shift is back.

All credit to Lara. The amazing thing about Lara's innings was that he was not up against crap bowling. The English were bowling well -- on a great batting strip admittedly -- but when a genius is on form, there's not much you can do.

I can only recall the one chance and that was when he blasted one at Batty who couldn't hold onto it (I would have been diving for cover). I think he was on 293 at the time.

Roll on the Ashes!!

The Greaser
15th Apr 2004, 08:48
Apart from when he was caught behind on 0 and not given!

surely not
15th Apr 2004, 10:04
Apart from the fact that this latest knock was a fantastic feat of batting, I think it also shows great inner strength by Lara.

I'm not sure that if I'd ever held and lost the World Record for batting that I would be thinking of regaining it. The tempatation to score double hundreds in style and then have fun would must be very strong, so to dig deep and drive on to regain the record is something extra special.

I was lucky enough to be in Sydney when Haydn broke the record, and I was sitting in a bar in North Sydney when he broke the record. Despite it being against Zimbabwe, and despite him being an Oz, I had to join in the applause because it is a mammoth mental task as well as one of technique.

Both Haydn and Lara are extra special batsmen and should get every credit for their achievements.

I have said on other threads that I think England will draw, or narrowly lose, the series when Oz come to England next, then we'll go down to Oz and win the ashes back.




P.s. Garfield Sobers is still the most talented and most complete cricketer I have ever seen.

maximus
15th Apr 2004, 12:01
Binos big call about Langer and Hayden. Even though it is not really possible to compare eras , and having seen both opening combinations I would still rate Simpson and Lawry above them. Statistics do not always show the true story. Simmo and Phantom had on average a better calibre of bowler to face back then. Also the modern game is slanted towards the batsmen with more placid pitches so that matches last on the norm longer and thus more gate receipts for the administrators. Also the ball does not swing nearly as much today as in past years. Grounds are also smaller with the use of boundary ropes instead of the fence.

Drap-air
15th Apr 2004, 12:44
Sachin Tendulkar should surely get a mention

Binoculars
15th Apr 2004, 13:05
Delighted to hear your views, maximus. I too am a dinosaur who saw Simpson and Lawry, and while I don't reject your views out of hand, some points have to be made.

It's true grounds are smaller, and I've often wondered why that is. All I can come up with is the possibility of litigation for injuries received sliding into the fence.

I will grudgingly concede that the average strength of the bowling attacks back then was slightly higher in that there were fewer Tests played against the weaker countries. As for the swinging of the ball, hmmm..... I suspect swing bowling has gone out of fashion rather than the equipment being different, though remembering the havoc Terry Alderman played I don't know why that would be the case. I think swing is seen as being more useful in one day cricket than in Tests these days.

Your other points I have to take issue with, especially the placid pitches and games lasting longer. My earliest memories of the game come in the 1962/63 English tour of Australia, and whatever excitement had supposedly been generated by the West Indies previously was exterminated by a succession of draws caused by the team batting first taking well into the third day to score 500 runs. Series used to be won 2-1, or even 1-0. This continued basically until the Chappell era. How often do Tests last five days now?

The reason, I suggest, is that this Australian side has revolutionised Test cricket with its scoring rate and attack at all costs attitude. A good part of that attitude has come from the openers, whose intimidating and ruthless refusal to be passive has put all opposing teams on the back foot. When this team scores 500, it's done not long after lunch on Day 2. It doesn't always work, but if you look at the number of times Australia has been dismissed for less than 400 in the last few years, it's astonishing. And virtually the only draws they have played in that time have been weather-affected.

I also believe the quality of fielding and catching to be considerably higher now, generally speaking, than in the 60's, and it is impossible to ignore the effect of the third umpire, which has removed the benefit of the doubt factor from run out and stumped dismissals.

This revolution is spreading. The other Test playing nations are now adopting the same attitude, and Test cricket is once again a pleasure to watch.

You can stick with Lawry and Simpson if you like. To me they are the dinosaurs now. The game has moved on, and the bar has been lifted a long way.

Long may it continue!

P.S. Drap-air, I'm happy to talk about Tendulkar at any time. I just don't remember him playing for Australia as an opener. ;)

Drap-air
15th Apr 2004, 13:10
< slap >

i guess i should have read the first 15 threads!

:sad:

Binoculars
15th Apr 2004, 13:18
Nurries, Drap! As I said, always delighted to talk about cricket. You'll probably find some miserable bastard from the Ultimately Boring thread coming in here and complaining about how boring cricket is, but **** 'em. I've never seen a cricket thread get past two pages, so just ignore them!

angels
15th Apr 2004, 13:29
To me it's the fielding -- and the fitness which great fielding requires -- which has improved beyond no end.

I'm not quite in the Simpson/Lawrie league (well, I am a Pom!) but can remember John Snow, John Edrich etc etc....

The first game of first class cricket I went to was at the Oval and I had the honour of seeing Sir Gary tonk the English all over the shop. A mere kid knew a great batsman when he saw one!

But -- looking back -- the fielding was crap. Overweight blokes lumbering after stuff that would have been cut off comfortably nowadays.

For my sins, my cricket season starts on April 22. I will be working hard to improve on my batting average of 2.8....modesty forbids me to say I picked up the 'Strike Bowler of the Season' award last year.

IE - When all else fails, put me on and my dolly-drops confuse the oppo no end and they succumb!

Buster Hyman
15th Apr 2004, 13:34
Overweight blokes lumbering after stuff that would have been cut off comfortably nowadays
Ahh yes...Greg Ritchie!!!:ugh: Binos, nothing wrong (much) with Langer, but Elliott is a sweet striker of the ball IMHO, and through no ones fault but his own, should've been cemented in that opening spot on sheer ability...if only he'd come from NSW!!!:hmm:

Drap-air
15th Apr 2004, 13:34
well i shall be happy to continue this thread until every cricketting aspect has been covered.

I can't get enough of cricket, and after my recent visit to florida, where i watched a few 'spring training' baseball games, and constant argueing with americans that baseball is a soft and boring version of cricket, i can't wait for the new cricket season to start!

oh yea, anyone know any good clubs in cardiff??

DuckDodgers
15th Apr 2004, 15:36
Drap, theres a really good club if you head out west from RAF St Athan, can't remember the name but they are Very good and have teams for all levels........

Stoney X
15th Apr 2004, 15:48
Binos,
I've never seen a cricket thread get past two pages, so just ignore them
You must be forgetting the fantasy cricket thread (http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=79041&perpage=15&highlight=fantasy%20cricket&pagenumber=1) run last year. Looking back I see nine pages of good banter, but it was about ODI's and not real (5 day) cricket.

Regards
Stoney X

DishMan
15th Apr 2004, 15:54
Hey Angels, a bit generalistic:
-- looking back -- the fielding was crap. Overweight blokes lumbering after stuff that would have been cut off comfortably nowadays.

Remember Derek Randall?
OK only one name out of the hat but he was a superb fielder.
I remember one particular run-out where he picked a ball up on the run and in one movement threw in at the stumps from a good many yards out SQUARE of the wicket. He only had a single stump to aim at and was bang on. :ok:

True the level of fitness today is way up - but that applies to all the players - batsmen and fielders alike!

Anyone else like watching the cricket on TV sound turned off with a radio commentary alongside??

Anyway - my hat off to Brian Lara well hit that man.

And even bigger congrats to England for pulling off the series win!!:ok:

Drap-air
15th Apr 2004, 16:47
Stoney X

i'm sorry buddy, but ODI's are the best fun to watch. As for 20 20, that game will be massive!

BALIX
15th Apr 2004, 20:04
oh yea, anyone know any good clubs in cardiff

Glamorgan?

Stoney X
15th Apr 2004, 20:11
Drap-air, the shorter versions of the game are good at building up the popularity of the game, but the longer versions of the game, specifically where each side gets two innings, is still what holds the greatest interest for me. It's the long term tactics, the ability for a side to re-group after a set back, the pychology of the game that makes it so interesting. I agree that 20/20 will be very popular, might even be short enough to interest some footie fans ;)

Regards
Stoney X

surely not
15th Apr 2004, 20:25
That's a good point about the standard of fielding having improved.

Dish Man I consider Derek Randall to be at the beginning of the modern era. If you watch the grainy old black and white film of cricket in the 50's and 60's younever see anyone making a diving stop in the covers, or chasing the ball down and finishing with a sliding save at the boundary. I'm sure that the Comptons, Bradmans et al would still have made heaps of runs but I don't think they would have scored as many as easily.

First game of the season this Saturday. A friendly before the League starts the following weekend. Can't wait to start taking wickets again.

CoodaShooda
15th Apr 2004, 23:37
-- looking back -- the fielding was crap. Overweight blokes lumbering after stuff that would have been cut off comfortably nowadays.

It was the West Indian teams in the 80's who developed the modern approach to attacking the ball in the field.

But the earlier eras had a fine crop of attacking fieldsmen.

Sobers, Lloyd (in his youth), a little chap called Solomon who helped achieve the first tie in Test history, Paul Shehan, Alan 'the Claw' Davidson, Keith Miller and so on and so on.

A brief perusal of cricketing histories will reveal any number of stand out acts in the field.

The only difference is in the sustained level of intensity that we see today.

As for swing bowling, it will return in good time as batsmen loose the ability to deal with it through lack of exposure.

As exciting as a Lee or an Aktar might be to watch, I'd prefer to
see another Massie or Alderman operating into the wind.

Contributed in an effort to see the thread exceed 2 pages :p

henry crun
16th Apr 2004, 02:20
A digression.

"Overweight blokes lumbering after stuff that would have been cut off comfortably nowadays."

Reminds me of John Arlott referring to Colin Milburn, who was rather portly, "And Milburn comes in from long off to retrieve the ball, the ground trembling as he runs". :D

DanAir1-11
16th Apr 2004, 08:31
Ah Cooda, Terry Alderman!!!

Remember well a game at Old Trafford, moist heavy evening air and he had it swinging like I'd never seen before and haven't seen since. Recall sitting in fits of laughter as the thing went 'Irish' time and again then back the other way and oh boy it was unplayable !!! Never had the same effect back home on thje WACA, mind you on a WACA concrete-top it's more a case of wondering which body part you're going to lose next !

Cricket, second only to women of the world!!

Buster Hyman
16th Apr 2004, 09:59
Ah...pyjama cricket makes me long for watching thw Windies of the 80's. One day cricket has never had the same appeal for me since the days of Richards & Garner et al. That's why I prefer watching the test matches now...must be getting old...although my MCC (MEL) membership hasn't come through yet.:(

I hope this doesn't sound condescending chaps, but I really enjoyed watching the Aussies playing when we were very average amongst quality opposition. To have blokes like Lillee, Walters, the Chappells etc in your team & still have to struggle for a win was truly awesome.

Binoculars
16th Apr 2004, 13:30
Not sure what you're getting at Buster. I distinctly remember the Ian Chappell led, Walters containing, Lillee-Thomson inspired Aussies sweeping aside the Poms and West indies successively in 1974-1976 and being compared to the all-conquering Invincibles of 1948.

If you really want my opinion as to everything that was wrong with the game when Clive Lloyd reigned supreme, feel free to ask.

In the meantime, I'll make what I think is a reasonable claim; the current Australian side, as long as it includes Shane Warne and Glenn McGrath, is the best Test side I have ever seen play the game in my 40 years of watching.

I wasn't around in 1948, but I am happy to suggest that if you took Bradman's name out of the "Invincibles" lineup, they wouldn't rate a mention against this side, Miller/Lindwall notwithstanding. (Remember Harvey was a nervous debutant that year).

Carry on, gentlemen, and if we have any female cricketing fans out there, I would love to hear from them. We see lots of them in the camera shots; are they all groupies?

Buster Hyman
16th Apr 2004, 13:40
Hmmm...yes. Poorly worded there methinks.:O

I was only learning to take interest in cricket around 75 onwards, my definition of average could've been clearer. What I meant was the fact that a series was generally decided when the series was over. The fact that most teams had genuine stars playing & the quality was such that the outcome wasn't a certainty. Perhaps I'm thinking more of the ODI's, now I'm confused.

My memories are when Thommo was pretty much done, Lillee got smarter with his short run up and Border was just a good shield player. I was wrapt when Yallop got the captaincy and was quietly happy when all that died down.

You know, I better have another look at my copy of Cricket in the 70's again...might have to buy the rest of the series I think.:ok:

Binoculars
16th Apr 2004, 14:04
What I meant was the fact that a series was generally decided when the series was over.

Well, I can't argue with that one! :\

Wedge
16th Apr 2004, 18:27
Bins -

Interesting stats on Hayden. As you suspected I was indulging in a bit of Aussie baiting (and it worked ;)), but can you blame me, after x number of Ashes series where I have watched England's hide get tanned by your boys, and having to endure the fabled Aussie sledging - let's face it, your team are good enough to beat anyone without sledging!

I retract my aspersions on Hayden's ability, he is no doubt a great batsman - but - taking his career as a whole was he really worthy to hold the title of top Test match scorer? I think Lara deserves it more - not least because of the huge number of Test match runs he has notched up. Having said that 57.48 is a first class test batting average, they say that the difference between an average of 30 and 40 is the difference between a bog standard and a good test batsman, so an average nearing 60 is exceptional.

Fletchers Left Boot
16th Apr 2004, 19:43
Going back a few posts...

I am also one for turning the TV sound down and having the radio commentary on.
But definitely not during the Windies series. Talk-Sports commentary is bloody awful! And during one match I was driving in my car for about 20 mins during play and they never gave the score once :mad:

Please, BBC, make sure you win the radio rights for the South Africa series next winter!!

Ok, another one for y'all.. whats the favourite Test series you've experienced during your cricket-watching lifetime?

CoodaShooda
17th Apr 2004, 04:59
but can you blame me, after x number of Ashes series where I have watched England's hide get tanned by your boys,

Ahhh wedge me ole china. you're obviously not old enought to remember and glory in the English sides of the 60's and early 70's. The one's with a great depth of talent but a game plan of winning through boredom. :suspect:

I'm sure those days will eventually return to you, as the wheel turns - along with the British Empire :rolleyes: :}

Buster Hyman
17th Apr 2004, 13:25
I think England is seeing some good signs, but the problem they face, IMHO, is the County system. You've got to stop the foreign players...full stop.

The Australian domestic comp can be downright ordinary, in terms of spectator attendance, but for bringing the next generation along, it's got to be the best by far.

I'm probably wrong, but I imagine that the County comp is where the big $$$ or (lbs) are, but the price for that profit has to be 20 odd years in the wilderness for the national team. If England can bite the bullet & stop providing free training for the rest of the world and start to bring through the next generation of their cricketers, well then the "game" will be the big winner.

Look at what WSC did to the Aussie test team. Devastated it! But from that came players like Border who, given time, would probably have made his mark anyway, but without the sudden push into the spotlight, might have made his impact in later years, just like Hayden is doing now. Our test team was very ordinary under Yallop (Through no fault of their own) but they built themselves up so that when the WSC players eventually returned, there was quite a few of the newer players holding their own.

Oh well...better stop there...I'm getting RSI!:uhoh:

BALIX
17th Apr 2004, 15:53
I'm probably wrong, but I imagine that the County comp is where the big $$$ or (lbs)

You are wrong - the county game doesn't have two ha'poth to rub together. They are forced to play a load of one-day competitions just to get people through the door and get a bit of sponsorship money. The only serious money in English cricket comes from the internationals. However, the point you made is a good one.

The reason the foreign players are in the county sides are to make it more appealing to the punters. The trouble is that with so many test series now, the foreigners we get are pretty much second-rate so why bother? Stick with the Brits!

Rich Lee
17th Apr 2004, 16:30
Sorry, I thought you this was a figure skating thread.

Buster Hyman
18th Apr 2004, 08:41
Point taken BALIX. Perhaps then the ICC should be ruling on this, to help foster the game domestically in all countries?

In the mean time, Warne is getting a good work out & I see Stuart Law has made a ton! As you mentioned, Law isn't even on the national payroll for Australia (I think), but I'm sure he isn't there for a working holiday...at the end of the day, two locals have missed out!:(

Animalclub
18th Apr 2004, 11:56
And now Warnie's going to captain Hampshire!!

DuckDodgers
18th Apr 2004, 13:37
Warnie can captain Hampshire all he likes, they are still a second rate county!