45HG

You know I love my stats!

69 from his first 110 or so, 62 off his next 16

Simple.

Intereating ideas. For teams in the bottom division, however, I see death to cricket in that nation.

It seems people shouldn't have posted updates! 7-34 at the end to crash away. They lost their 4th wicket at, yep, 104.

Ireland beat England! 50 ball hundred! They were 5-111 but managed 7-329 to knock them off.

Hrm - wonder if he heard something from his old mate the bookie...

A tie! Gee, I thought it at the time, how much would India rue their last 2 overs. Even the simple fact they didn't get to bat the full 50 overs - with missing out on that last ball. Great knock from Strauss it sounds like, can't believe England didn't get there needing 50ish from the last 7 overs with 8 wickets in hand.

Sachin! Crazy end to the inning as India lose 5-11 from the last 11 balls/7-33 from the last 24.

Vics by a run to knock NSW out of the final!

Good captaincy to put Johnson in ahead too.

Can someone be the bigger man here and just agree to disagree? There's nothing new (or particularly intersting) being said IMO, and it just seems to be going in circles.

...?

I'm not dismissing it out of hand, but what would a cricket membership get you? How would it help cricket and it's administrators to do a better job? As I see it, the whole point/necessity of AFL memberships is that there is such a large competition and each team needs a competitive edge (as it's essentially all financial). Cricket doesn't have that competition/need, and as RR points out - the crowds are as big as ever.

Please provide som evidence to qualify this.

This reminds me of your pre-series comments that the public aren't happy and won't go to the tests.

OK, I'll bite, but only for one last time on the matter because I vehemently disagree and because I have too much time on my hands. In what way did Prior make more of his opportunities than Haddin? Concensus has shown that the catches alone shouldn't be enough to put Prior ahead, due to the mugh higher standard of bowling etc. Overall Haddin dropped 2, and had one that he didn't go for but should've. Prior Dropped one and missed an easy stumping. I can't say he's been a better keeper than Haddin, especially considerin the 100s of extra overs Haddin's been out there. Coming in with scores under 200: Prior made 0, 12 and 10. Haddin made 136, 56, 53, 5, 55* (6 and 30 in a dead rubber). So when the bowling was at its best, it's toughest and when they really had to make their runs, Prior averaged 7.33 from 17.33 balls faced per innings. Haddin averaged 56.83 from 89.14 average deliveries. So with the bowling at its best and their team's in the most amount of trouble, Haddin averaged 49 more (scoring 319 more runs) and 72 extra deliviries. I'd call that putting a pretty high price on my wicket (in comparison to Prior anyway). Prior's first 3 tests innings yielded 0, 27*, 12, 10. Haddin's yielded 136, 55, 12, 53 and 7. Again, that shows that Haddin has put the performance on the board. In Melbourne, Haddin faced some of the most hostile bowling you're likely to see and fell for 5 - the first real time he'd let his team down this series, not that it'd haved mattered much. Prior then came into bat with his team already 188 runs ahead. He made a good 85 with the pressure well and truly off. In the second inning, with Australia looking down the barrell of losing the Ashes on home soil for the first time in 24 years and coming in with the score 5-134 - he batted a good 55 not out to be our top scorer in the innings, eventually running out of partners. Obviously Sydney is where Prior shone, but to compare their hundreds tells the story of performance IMO. Prior came in at 6 (really 5) for 380. His team were already 100 ahead, the pressure, again, was well off - especially with the Ashes in the bag. Haddin's, on the other hand, came with his team in dire trouble on the second day of an Ashes series with his team's back well against the wall at 5-143, already 125 runs behind. It's the last I'll say on it (thankfully, some may say!)

They did have the option - the mighty Indian criket power said no

About time. Lucky to be in the team.

I took it as that because you had basically ignored all the analysis that I had provided to go with what I see as being a gut-feel informed essentially by the amount of catches taken and the desire to overstate how poor Australia were.

Maybe not!

That's why I included when he has come in in his innings' and the way the two teams have taken their wickets. Meanwhile in S.A., India are ruining a perfectly good test.

I think I've provided enough evidence to suggest otherwise, but that's just me. I don't think Haddin should lose out because his bowlers aren't good enough to get edges whilst Prior benefits from top class bowling for 4 and a half tests. You've pretty much just said he's taken more catches so he's been better. If that's all you'll say we should probably just leave it.

Ha. It certainly was his wicket.

OK. I've trawled through the cricinfo commentary from all 5 tests (yay for holidays) and have discovered this. Haddin has dropped two (one in Brisbane off Siddle and one in Adelaide in the first innings), he also had the one go between him and Watson... not sure if this is regarded as a drop though. Prior has dropped one (second innings at Adelaide, Hussey). I reckon you've made up your mind and there'll be no budging you, regardless of arguments. Do you give credit to Prior for his 3 catches today? Surely his catches alone don't push him ahead of Haddin's performances this summer (who now is looking pretty good, fighting it out on 27). I find it odd that two people who lament how rubbish our bowling is, while praising England's bowlers, also then give credit to their 'keeper for being the beneficiary of top bowling whilst ignoring Haddin's efforts. Oh well.