I know these things are always highly subjective but that side is very questionable to say the least.
Anderson over Trueman, Snow or Willis? He has a ton of wickets but that's not to say he was a better bowler.
Border was a great player but spent the first eight years of his Test career getting battered by England before the tide turned in 1989.
If you are going to look back to Jack Hobbs then you'd be hard pushed to select Border over the great Walter Hammond (average 58.8 from 85 Tests), Denis Compton (average 50 from 70 Tests) or Len Hutton (average 56.6 from 79 Tests) or even Graham Gooch (average 49 from 119 Tests).
Four Englishmen is too light and Gilchrist is basically getting picked for his batting rather than his keeping which was no more than adequate, not in the same class as many 'specialist' keepers including Knott and Healy.
Great post. Only thing I will dispute is the wicket keeper issue. There is no greater fan than me of Knotty - he was one of my heroes growing up. However, in picking the side, I had to consider not only the massive impact that Gilchrist had batting at 7 but also the fact that keeping is all about the relationship that the keeper has with the bowler, something that is far more relevant when standing up to spin.
In this respect, Gilchrist knew Warne inside out. Had I picked Underwood as the spinner then, for the same reason, it would have been Knotty.
Snow wasn't even on the list of options as far as I could see!
That's a travesty if true given his contribution in 1971 in particular.
The whole thing was stupid Len. You couldn't pick two spinners if you wanted to. You had to, as in Sports Personality of The Year, go with the BBC's nominations.
To be fair, they would have to have a LOT of phone lines if you could just vote for whoever you wanted in SPOTY...
I know these things are always highly subjective but that side is very questionable to say the least.
Anderson over Trueman, Snow or Willis? He has a ton of wickets but that's not to say he was a better bowler.
Border was a great player but spent the first eight years of his Test career getting battered by England before the tide turned in 1989.
If you are going to look back to Jack Hobbs then you'd be hard pushed to select Border over the great Walter Hammond (average 58.8 from 85 Tests), Denis Compton (average 50 from 70 Tests) or Len Hutton (average 56.6 from 79 Tests) or even Graham Gooch (average 49 from 119 Tests).
Four Englishmen is too light and Gilchrist is basically getting picked for his batting rather than his keeping which was no more than adequate, not in the same class as many 'specialist' keepers including Knott and Healy.
Great post. Only thing I will dispute is the wicket keeper issue. There is no greater fan than me of Knotty - he was one of my heroes growing up. However, in picking the side, I had to consider not only the massive impact that Gilchrist had batting at 7 but also the fact that keeping is all about the relationship that the keeper has with the bowler, something that is far more relevant when standing up to spin.
In this respect, Gilchrist knew Warne inside out. Had I picked Underwood as the spinner then, for the same reason, it would have been Knotty.
Snow wasn't even on the list of options as far as I could see!
That's a travesty if true given his contribution in 1971 in particular.
The whole thing was stupid Len. You couldn't pick two spinners if you wanted to. You had to, as in Sports Personality of The Year, go with the BBC's nominations.
To be fair, they would have to have a LOT of phone lines if you could just vote for whoever you wanted in SPOTY...
Don't need phone lines, that's just a money making exercise. If you want to vote you send your vote in on a postcard or with the voting form you cut out of the Radio Times. That's the way it used to be.
I have to take it back about Healy's wicket keeping - she has dropped two sitters. In fact the Aussie catching has been absolute dross and given England a chance of a record chase.
Could only find some viewership numbers from the Broadcasters' Audience Research Board.
It shows that Sky Sports average daily viewership (in 000s) per channel is as follows:
& that BT Sport average daily viewership (in 000s) per channel is as follows:
All of BTs sport channels combined come to less than two thirds of the viewership of Sky Sports Main Event channel (where presumably the Ashes would've been shown) and only just over half of the viewership of Sky Sports News where there would've been round the clock updates from training camps etc and a little "countdown to the Ashes" clock in the corner, probably.
On the other hand, more people have BT Sport bunged in as part of their internet packages, but may not choose to watch very often
The shame is that BT don't sell on highlights packages, next season the Champions league will be the same with no ITV highlights show
I genuinely stopped watching that when Sciver ran herself out
I'm refusing to acknowledge women's cricket until the girls are paid the same as their male peers. Could I politely request that you move all discussions onto a separate thread until equality has been achieved.
The ECB should pay them the same on a per-match/per-training session basis. The men will naturally get far, far more through sponsorship anyway, so it's fine, they're safe
I'm so glad the entire women's ashes is done and dusted before the proper cricket starts
Proper? Someone's angling for a flag :P
Haha was a bit of a fish on my part! But there has been far too much coverage of the women's game whilst the men are playing, and if people are honest the standard is dreadful
The standard is much improved from even ten years ago! I say stick with it - in twenty years there might even be women playing men's minor counties standard
yeah absolutely it has, i enjoy watching it too! But when the men's team is playing i could do without hearing about the world cup win every 5 mins. I almost compare it to watching non-league vs Premier league. I'll happily watch both but i don't want to hear about South Shields FA Vase win when the Manchester derby is on...
The standard is much improved from even ten years ago! I say stick with it - in twenty years there might even be women playing men's minor counties standard
I’m glad the women’s has developed - and, rapidly too, I am also glad that Cricinfo adds -W to national teams as I got confused on several occasions when checking scores. I suppose it would be politically correct to add -M to men’s teams but I’ll leave that for others to argue.
My Emirates flight from Singapore leaves tomorrow afternoon for Brisbane for a late arrival and The Gabba the next morning. Bring it on. What I’d give for 5 Aussies out by lunch. You can only dream.
I’m glad the women’s has developed - and, rapidly too, I am also glad that Cricinfo adds -W to national teams as I got confused on several occasions when checking scores. I suppose it would be politically correct to add -M to men’s teams but I’ll leave that for others to argue.
My Emirates flight from Singapore leaves tomorrow afternoon for Brisbane for a late arrival and The Gabba the next morning. Bring it on. What I’d give for 5 Aussies out by lunch. You can only dream.
As long as England weren't bowled out first in the same session...
Comments
The shame is that BT don't sell on highlights packages, next season the Champions league will be the same with no ITV highlights show
My Emirates flight from Singapore leaves tomorrow afternoon for Brisbane for a late arrival and The Gabba the next morning. Bring it on. What I’d give for 5 Aussies out by lunch. You can only dream.