Who can be England's next Hussain and Fletcher?

Ah yes, that was a beauty.

Shoeshine wrote:Is it my selective memory, or did Nass seem to attract hideous umpiring decisions more than the norm?

He got quite a few in a period of 12 months, especially when Ashoka was umpiring. Think there was an allusion to 12 out of 17 innings around 2001 where the decision was dubious. Think it was the period where his average went under 40.

By f*ck if he'd played the bulk of his career this decade I'd warrant he'd be a 45+er.

Brass Monkey wrote:

Shoeshine wrote:Is it my selective memory, or did Nass seem to attract hideous umpiring decisions more than the norm?

He got quite a few in a period of 12 months, especially when Ashoka was umpiring. Think there was an allusion to 12 out of 17 innings around 2001 where the decision was dubious. Think it was the period where his average went under 40.

By f*ck if he'd played the bulk of his career this decade I'd warrant he'd be a 45+er.

I wouldn't be surprised. I do remember that when he got a century against Sri Lanka he got away with a catch to short leg, and everyone commented at the time that he was more than due a bit of luck.

I remember Nasser's 207 against Aus in 1997. Batted like an absolute dream. Never batted as well again. He himself admitted that.

Henry wrote:I remember Nasser's 207 against Aus in 1997. Batted like an absolute dream. Never batted as well again. He himself admitted that.

Well, quite, but then that's his top score isn't it. Against a useful side. Bit of a no brainer all in all.

But he never again got anywhere near to repeating the free flowing stroke play that he displayed- Not against any side.

No, but the side started to decline and he had to grit it out, especially when he became captain not too long after..

And my God was that side rubbish. The way that Hussain absolutely refused to accept that mediocrity, and forced good performances out of a horrendously poor team is quite extraordinary.

That his own batting suffered somewhat shouldn't really be a shock.

And he wound up some Indians on his first tour as captain there by refusing to allow sachin to hit 4's at will against an incredibly poor side.

Top bloke

he just bored us with incredibly negative play. at least it brought about a change in the way wides were called down the leg-side in tests

Sunil should have been lapping it up!

it suited him i guess. he could probably claim to having had the most negative innings in cricket history

The One wrote:he just bored us with incredibly negative play. at least it brought about a change in the way wides were called down the leg-side in tests

As opposed to letting Sachin smack it all around the park? Awww, did diddums struggle?

averaged around 80 i think

the only thing he achieved was to bring the run-rate down, because half the deliveries were not even reachable. if everyone did the same you can say goodbye to test cricket

Which is why they changed the laws, and nothing wrong with that.

But as it stood, it was a legitimate tactic, adopted by a far weaker team. All the whinging was ridiculous, you'd have thought Hussain had taken a shotgun out on to the field they way people carried on.

What is it with leg side bowling hang-ups in the old colonies ?.

First it was the Aussies that bitched and moaned at the excellent Dougie Jardine tactics which eventually overwhelmed the sooks causing them to complain to the Governor General.

Then, years later, the Indians leap onto the bandwagon gnashing their gums and wailing "Foul Ref ... we can't hit the ball"
when the brave opportunist Naz detected a ploy to lower the run rate.

Take a guard outside legstump FFS ... and get on with it.

The One wrote:he just bored us with incredibly negative play. at least it brought about a change in the way wides were called down the leg-side in tests

Well, what do you do when armed with popguns, against a better team on their own turf? You use spoiling tactics.