Cheapening the 300 club

Henry wrote:I think Hilfenhaus will end up having a better career than both Johnson and Siddle. He seems to have the soundest head on his shoulders,

Doesn't he have a spare?

Zat wrote:XXXX.

For the benefit of those outside Australia, it's spelled that way because Queenslanders are too dumb to spell 'beer'. And because the rest of Australia wouldn't ever call it beer.

What's the most popular beer/lager in Aus?

Oh, and Burt Sutcliffe was quality - the 1st NZ great Test player.

Brass Monkey wrote:

Zat wrote:XXXX.

For the benefit of those outside Australia, it's spelled that way because Queenslanders are too dumb to spell 'beer'. And because the rest of Australia wouldn't ever call it beer.

What's the most popular beer/lager in Aus?

VB is the top selling beer in Australia, accounting for a quarter of the total beer market and 60% of CUB’s output. It is the most popular beer in New South Wales, Northern Territory, Victoria and the Australian Capital Territory.

Zat wrote:

Brass Monkey wrote:

Zat wrote:XXXX.

For the benefit of those outside Australia, it's spelled that way because Queenslanders are too dumb to spell 'beer'. And because the rest of Australia wouldn't ever call it beer.

What's the most popular beer/lager in Aus?

VB is the top selling beer in Australia, accounting for a quarter of the total beer market and 60% of CUB’s output. It is the most popular beer in New South Wales, Northern Territory, Victoria and the Australian Capital Territory.

i wanna try this shit in the uk, XXXXX is puire shit.and catlemaine

Quality wise, VB isn't all that much better. It is really just a vehicle for getting drunk (which isn't a bad thing). Best served very cold so it numbs your taste buds.

However it does serve its purpose adequately

It's still better than XXXX. But so is hydrochloric acid.

Not even Billies seem to drink XXXX all that much anymore.

Although they do go for XXXX Gold - which I have never quite got my head around

G.Wood wrote:Not even Billies seem to drink XXXX all that much anymore.

Although they do go for XXXX Gold - which I have never quite got my head around

At least XXXX will - if you can force a few down quickly - get you drunk. XXXX Gold is a ridiculous concept.

Bah. (In response to original post).

300 is 300. Doesn't automatically make you a great player, but it suggests you are not shithouse.

The only way to uncheap 300 (or 200) is to go back to the Test schedules of 30/40/50 years ago, and a. have more lacunae than matches, b. omit anyone outside the "tradional eight". Don't blame the doughty and skilled Vettori for that, any more than for not being immortally great, in the manner of Brett Lee and such.

Brett Lee is the worst bowler to take 300 Test wickets.

Ntini would be next.

Vettori's better than both of them.

oughie should have

What a shame. The Lankans have allowed Harry Potter to 'cheapen' massive test 100s as well.....

vilkrang wrote:oughie should have

Well said.

Zat wrote:Brett Lee is the worst bowler to take 300 Test wickets.

Ntini would be next.

Vettori's better than both of them.

Better or worse than Harbhajan?

Harbhajan is a better bowler than Vettori but not a better cricketer.

I don't think Lee is necessarily worse than either of them.

JGK wrote:Harbhajan is a better bowler than Vettori but not a better cricketer.

I don't think Lee is necessarily worse than either of them.

I think I agree with that, Harbie & Vettori are the only two slow 'lefties' in the 300+ club with Murali, Warne & Gibbs the only other spinners. I think Vettori should be congratulated not only for elevating the status of New Zealand slow bowling (I can remember when Steve Boock used to be brought on to use up the overs until the new ball became available) but also for being, I think, the first bowler to captain the Kiwis on a regular basis.

Kumble had twice as many wickets and he was hardly a great bowler.

I think, the first bowler to captain the Kiwis on a regular basis.

That's probably true although Harry Cave captained the kiwis in 9 tests. I'm told his team-mates called him Hairy Cave, although that might just be the NZ accent.

Allan D wrote:

JGK wrote:Harbhajan is a better bowler than Vettori but not a better cricketer.

I don't think Lee is necessarily worse than either of them.

I think I agree with that, Harbie & Vettori are the only two slow 'lefties' in the 300+ club with Murali, Warne & Gibbs the only other spinners. I think Vettori should be congratulated not only for elevating the status of New Zealand slow bowling (I can remember when Steve Boock used to be brought on to use up the overs until the new ball became available) but also for being, I think, the first bowler to captain the Kiwis on a regular basis.

Harby's a righty and Kumble is in the club too.

PlanetPakistan wrote:Kumble had twice as many wickets and he was hardly a great bowler.

Apologies, of course Kumble is the 2nd leggie and 6th spinner (out of 24) in the list with McGrath the most prolific seamer. Disagree with your last point, though. He's only the 2nd bowler in Test history to take all 10 and like Kapil had to contend with flat Indian wickets.

JGK wrote:

Allan D wrote:

JGK wrote:Harbhajan is a better bowler than Vettori but not a better cricketer.

I don't think Lee is necessarily worse than either of them.

I think I agree with that, Harbie & Vettori are the only two slow 'lefties' in the 300+ club with Murali, Warne & Gibbs the only other spinners. I think Vettori should be congratulated not only for elevating the status of New Zealand slow bowling (I can remember when Steve Boock used to be brought on to use up the overs until the new ball became available) but also for being, I think, the first bowler to captain the Kiwis on a regular basis.

Harby's a righty and Kumble is in the club too.

Of course, see above. Having a bad day.

WideWally wrote:

I think, the first bowler to captain the Kiwis on a regular basis.

That's probably true although Harry Cave captained the kiwis in 9 tests. I'm told his team-mates called him Hairy Cave, although that might just be the NZ accent.

No, you're right again, WW, given the amount of Test cricket NZ used to play in his era 9 matches was probably a long-term appointment! He surrendered the captaincy to Reid after the 1st Test v. WI at home in February 1956 but played a major role as a player in the Kiwis' historic first win in the final Test of the series at Auckland the following month when he took 8 wickets in the match and 4-21 when the Windies were bowled out for 77 in the 4th innings. Reid, Coney and Dion Nash (who captained in 3 Tests in 1999) should also be counted as all-rounders.

Mind you, after my Harbhajan faux pas I ought to get my coat Obviously reminds me of Bishen B. Vettori has overtaken Deadly as the most prolific SLA (if you can call Underwood 'slow') in Test history then; Wasim Akram the most prolific left-armer overall:

Aggregate Test Wickets by Left-Arm Bowlers

Aggregate Test Wickets by Slow Left-Armers

Surprised Tony Lock is 3rd in the second list. Better bowler than he was given credit for.

Allan D wrote:

PlanetPakistan wrote:Kumble had twice as many wickets and he was hardly a great bowler.

Apologies, of course Kumble is the 2nd leggie and 6th spinner (out of 24) in the list with McGrath the most prolific seamer. Disagree with your last point, though. He's only the 2nd bowler in Test history to take all 10 and like Kapil had to contend with flat Indian wickets.

Indian wickets were MADE for Kumble and he took full advantage of that.

Great bowler at home
Average bowler overseas

Overall- A very good bowler(mainly due to the sheer volume of wickets) but not a great one.

Warne's figures in India were not that great though:

34 wkts @43.12

S.K.Warne's Performance Analysis in India