Sport Today

Ever since the RSA non-test, whenever India plays a fc game, Cricinfo
has taken to calling the team "indians".

This policy does not extend to other teams ( e.g, "Australians," "West
Indians", "Pakistanis" etc.)

It does. I saw a reference to a match between "Australians" and an FC side last
year.

Dunno about Cricinfo's policy, but that is how Wisden has always
treated non-international matches, for all countries. The slight
variation is for England, who used to play non-Test matches as MCC,
but are now called "(An) England XI".

Cheers,

Mike

it does. One of my favorite records is Australians v/s Essex 1948 being the
most runs scored in a day (721) when Keith Miller was pissed off at his
position in the lineup and got out for 0 offering no stroke. He made up for
it ripping apart Essex the next day with his bowling.

jai [my kingdom for an allrounder of Miller's class and star power in world
cricket today]

An Indian I presume...  Gilchrist does that very well for Aus, thank you
very much... They certainly don't need another world-class allrounder..

*THREE* world-class batsmen keepers playing at the same time.. hmmmm

Bharat
--
R. Bharat Rao

"To play the game is great...
 To win the game is greater...
 But to love the game is the greatest of all..."
Plaque at the Palestra (Author unknown)

That's Gilchrist, Flower and...

Sangakkara appears to be an FTB, while Stewart is adequate on the keeping
stakes (perhaps equal to Gilly at the mo, rather better than Flower) but
pales in comparison with the bat.  Perhaps you're thinking of Rahul Dravid?

Cheers, ymt.

The /batting/ component of that equation is certainly impressive...

Dravid?

Doesn't Stewart have a 40+ average?  And he has now become a good keeper;
much better than Gilchrist (based on what I saw of Gilchrist in India)...

I meant Stewart, anyway...

Bharat
--
R. Bharat Rao

"To play the game is great...
 To win the game is greater...
 But to love the game is the greatest of all..."
Plaque at the Palestra (Author unknown)

Not any more he doesn't.  His batting was excellent during the mid-90s, when
he was mostly playing against the Windies, Pakistan circa the 2 Ws,
Australia, etc.  He's possibly the best player of pace that England has
produced; the likes of Ambrose and Walsh were meat and drink to him, and I
guess that he would have found even Thommo at his peak to his liking.
However, he is unashamedly shite against spin, a weakness typified by his
habit (existent even now) of pushing hard with bat and pad together, with
close fielders around.  This realisation and England's strategy of moving
him all over the shop led to a steep fall in his average.  But still one of
the all-time greats against the quicks.

His keeping has reverted to somewhere near his peak level; solid behind the
wicket, uncaring too much about conceding byes as long as he was taking
catches and quickly up to the stumps for run-out chances.  Not as
attractively wicketkeeperlike as Parthiv in the last Test, or as spectacular
as Gilchrist in Hollywood mode, he nonetheless gives the impression that, if
there was a chance to be had, he would take it.  Still not a patch on Healy
and Russell though.

Cheers, ymt.

Maybe not quite up there with the latter two, but I have been very
impressed with his keeping this summer.

That stumping off Irani in the odo was a remarkably fine piece of
work, and throughout the odos he was in fine form close to the stumps.

Russell's still a better keeper (see him setting a new world record
during the week?), but Stewart may well be the second best keeper in
the country now, and actually worth a place as keeper on merit,
regardless of his pretty useful batting.

Though Gilchrist's success has had a positive impact on Stewart. The
Gaffer has noticed that you can be a big star batsman even if you come
in at seven, so he's a lot happier about coming in low down the order
and doing a very different job to that which he did as an opener.

Cheers,

Mike

Only marginally short of the 40 mark. Currently something like 39.8. But
having to keep hasn't helped his batting. In those Tests in which he
opened but wasn't keeping wicket, he averaged something like 47. (So as
a specialist opener that would put him well ahead of Atherton.)

However, Fletcher seems now to have improved his playing of spin (in
common with most of the English batting line-up), to the point that -
whilst he's still clearly not entirely comfortable - once he's fully
"in" he seems to cope pretty well. As evidence there's his hundred
against Sri Lanka plus his innings in the Test just gone.
--
John Hall

            "The beatings will continue until morale improves."
         Attributed to the Commander of Japan's Submarine Forces in WW2

except that against the stronger attacks he tended to be keeping and
batting down the order.
He played 5 tests out of 29 against Australia as an opener, I don't
know if that sort of ratio would hold against other teams but it's
suggestive that he was used as a keeper against the stronger teams a
fair bit of the time.
--
"Hope is replaced by fear and dreams by survival, most of us get by."
Stuart Adamson 1958-2001

Mad Hamish
Hamish Laws

These stronger attacks would not then include the WI of Marshall,
Ambrose and Walsh, or the Pakistan of Wasim, Waqar and Mushtaq.

In fact, Stewart's reputation as a master of fast bowling as an opener
mainly comes from his performances against the Windies. Earlier this
season, someone on the TV commentary was talking about overhearing a
conversation in about 1992 between Ian Bishop, Malcolm Marshall and
Curtly Ambrose, who were picking their World XIs, and all were
completely convinced that Stewart was the best player of fast bowling
in the world at the time. Obviously this sort of evidence is pretty
feeble when you consider that the only validating facts are those in
matches involving Australia, but some of us still think those WI guys
could bowl a bit.

Stewart had to bat down the order and keep when we couldn't afford not
to have five bowlers, which was possible against the 90s WI, who were
nowhere near as strong in batting as the 80s team, but not against
Australia, who even then had a keeper coming in at 7 who could score
centuries, and usually did when playing us (or so it seemed).

Cheers,

Mike

[Re Stewart's average]

I'm not sure that the ratio does hold against other teams. He played a
fair few Tests in the early nineties as opener and non-keeper against WI
(Ambrose, Walsh and the Benjamins) and Pakistan (Wasim, Waqar, Mushtaq
Ahmed), two sides with strong attacks.
--
John Hall
             "One half of the world cannot understand
              the pleasures of the other."
                           From "Emma" by Jane Austen (1775-1817)

On Mon, 19 Aug 2002 23:23:13 +0100, Mike Holmans

against the Windies Stewart opened in 15 tests averaging 44.34 with 2
100s and 6 50s
He played 24 tests against them with an overall average of 36.90 (1
100 and 0 50s in the non-opening tests)

He opened in 6 tests against Pakistan (averaging 81.87) out of 13
tests against them.

against RSA he played 18 tests and opened in 6 of them.

So against the 4 best attacks he opened in 32 out of 84 tests he
played against them.

Overall he opened in 45 out of 120 tests

So it looks like the ratio against the stronger teams and overall is
close enough to the same so I was wrong there.

at the end of 92 his average against the Windies was 29.87 with a high
score of 45
at the end of 94 his average against the Windies was 42.11 with 2 100s
and 2 50s from 10 tests. He didn't make a 100 after that against them.

Now I'd believe that if Stewart had kept playing as an opener he'd
have done better than he managed as a keeper but I'd suggest that they
were basically picking him on the 4th test at Bridgetown where Stewart
made 118 and 143, looking at the scorecard nd the attack that he was
facing there's no question that it was a great effort but it's one
match and he never made another 100 against them...

Most of the time I saw Stewart he was coming in down the order against
Warne, when he didn't (e.g. late in the last Ashes series in Aus) he
did a lot better. Possibly his lack of success when I saw him causes
me to underrate him...

I hadn't realised that he'd opened in as many tests against the
Windies as he had.

Well that was the policy of the selectors anyway.

I still think that Russell at 7 and Stewart as an opener was a better
plan but it doesn't matter now.
--
"Hope is replaced by fear and dreams by survival, most of us get by."
Stuart Adamson 1958-2001

Mad Hamish
Hamish Laws