by dod » Wed, 11 Dec 2002 19:02:30
by Andrew Dunfor » Wed, 11 Dec 2002 19:30:04
In order to allow Aslam 15 minutes to compile his stats, I'll warm up by
noting that ERH Toshack's recorded bowling figures of 2.3-1-2-5 for
Australia against India at Brisbane in 1947/48. The only instance prior to
Lawson's of a player taking six or more wickets at fewer than one run per
wicket is GA Lohmann for England against South Africa in Port Elizabeth in
1895/96: 9.4-5-7-8.
It looks like Lawson took six for none in 15 balls: that's getting into
Curtly Ambrose territory.
As a consolation for Bangladesh the loss of the final seven wickets for
seven runs is not especially impressive, Australia (at Melbourne, 1978/79)
and NZ (at Auckland, 2000/01) having done 'better' in living memory.
Andrew
by Mad Hami » Wed, 11 Dec 2002 19:36:39
I only have info up until 85 but it looks like the most economical
with 6 or more wickets
(although Lohmann 9.4 5 7 8 is worth mentioning)
--
"Hope is replaced by fear and dreams by survival, most of us get by."
Stuart Adamson 1958-2001
Mad Hamish
Hamish Laws
by Yuk Tan » Wed, 11 Dec 2002 21:57:53
> >Question to Aslam:
> >Lawson took JJC Lawson 6.5-4-3-6 against Bangladesh
> >In terms of runs per wicket (for someone taking more than 5 wickets),
> >are these the best figures ever?
> Nope, Toshack 2.3 1 2 5
> I only have info up until 85 but it looks like the most economical
> with 6 or more wickets
> (although Lohmann 9.4 5 7 8 is worth mentioning)
Lampitt 10 10 0 1
Can't remember what happened afterwards, but that scorecard certainly caught
my eye.
Cheers, ymt.
by Mad Hami » Wed, 11 Dec 2002 22:21:22
>> >Question to Aslam:
>> >Lawson took JJC Lawson 6.5-4-3-6 against Bangladesh
>> >In terms of runs per wicket (for someone taking more than 5 wickets),
>> >are these the best figures ever?
>> Nope, Toshack 2.3 1 2 5
>> I only have info up until 85 but it looks like the most economical
>> with 6 or more wickets
>> (although Lohmann 9.4 5 7 8 is worth mentioning)
>A few years ago, Stuart Lampitt managed the following figures in a day in
>the county championship.
>Lampitt 10 10 0 1
>Can't remember what happened afterwards, but that scorecard certainly caught
>my eye.
(then there's G.Elliott in Vic vs Tas 1857-58
19 17 2 9 and
Laker for England vs the Rest
14 12 2 8)
--
"Hope is replaced by fear and dreams by survival, most of us get by."
Stuart Adamson 1958-2001
Mad Hamish
Hamish Laws
by Ma » Thu, 12 Dec 2002 07:16:36
IMHO, however good 6 for 3 is in terms of runs per wicket, I think
most bowlers would rather have more wickets even if they were more
expensive than Lawsons. For example, 3 players have taken 7 for 17 in
test cricket, George Lohmann took 8 for 7, and these firgures are
"better", if more expensive than Lawson's. The "best" bowling I think
is Kumble 10/74 and Laker 10/53 (and 9/37 in the same match)
Regards
Mac
1. Second best Lawson reverse-woof ever?
5. WSC -3 Australia v WI scorecard
7. The first time we've ever seen the best of the best all together
8. Sidebottom - Worst bowling figures ever!
10. Define : Best figures in a limite over game....
11. Best bowling figures after first 5 Tests
12. Warne, Mushtaq, best figures ???
13. Diff bowlers with best match & inns figures in a Test