What's new

SuperTests recognised at long last by Cricket Australia

The other person whose reputation is rightfully restored is Mike Procter, who eight years after his "official" Apartheid era Test career was terminated managed to still average less than 20 with the ball in SuperTests.

Really, really good to see Lillee have all 434 Test wickets recognised, not just the establishment's 355.

Now we need to get the Rest of the World Tests re-recognised too.
 
Good job Mitch Johnson didn't hang around to try to reach Lillee's mark of 355 Test wickets. Because suddenly it's gone up to 434!
 
ChachaCricket said:
Forgot to add: Lillee's average has increased even more!
Click to expand...
Sure, but because he was playing against the best players in the world.

The scandal is that Bob Willis, Ian Botham, Rodney Hogg and Graham Yallop retain "official" status for devalued performances against weakened opposition.

Take away Botham's statistics against Pakistan B and Australia C and you have a much less impressive record.
 
I don't see this happening - there were 3 teams AUS, WI & World XI- how ICC is going to adjust International players' stats.

Then comes the legitimacy - those matches were arranged at private initiatives with Umpires not assigned by ICC - I am not questioning the integrity of the players, but, these were sort of exhibition matches; what if, those were scripted to make it exciting?

Also, at that time WI, AUS's recognized team played Test - either ICC has to recognize both teams (like 1930 2 English teams toured WI & NZ at same time) or has to ban the other team (The official team that time). Also, PAK, ENG & NZL dropped their WSC players from Test team - it 'll be injustice to the likes of Imran or Intekhab or Turner or Greig.

Finally, SAF was officially banned from world cricket - BRichards' stat might be fit into his 4 (Proctor's 7) Test, but what about Garth Le Roux & Rice?

I don't think those stats'll be added in Test career - unlike 1970-71 World XI games, these matches are not recognized as First Class - I think, they 'll recognize it as FC cricket. WSC was the highest ever level of the game, but it should never be added in Test stats.
 
How many wickets has Lillee taken on subcontinent?
 
MMHS said:
I don't see this happening - there were 3 teams AUS, WI & World XI- how ICC is going to adjust International players' stats.

Then comes the legitimacy - those matches were arranged at private initiatives with Umpires not assigned by ICC - I am not questioning the integrity of the players, but, these were sort of exhibition matches; what if, those were scripted to make it exciting?

Also, at that time WI, AUS's recognized team played Test - either ICC has to recognize both teams (like 1930 2 English teams toured WI & NZ at same time) or has to ban the other team (The official team that time). Also, PAK, ENG & NZL dropped their WSC players from Test team - it 'll be injustice to the likes of Imran or Intekhab or Turner or Greig.

Finally, SAF was officially banned from world cricket - BRichards' stat might be fit into his 4 (Proctor's 7) Test, but what about Garth Le Roux & Rice?

I don't think those stats'll be added in Test career - unlike 1970-71 World XI games, these matches are not recognized as First Class - I think, they 'll recognize it as FC cricket. WSC was the highest ever level of the game, but it should never be added in Test stats.
Click to expand...

ICC isnt recognising it.It wont go into test stats.Read the article.Only CA is recognising it.

! Encouraging all other boards to recognize." But at this stage, only Australia has moved.
Click to expand...
 
Why so upset Indian fans? Recognizing WSC reduces Viv Richards ODI batting average and brings him a littler lower down, to Sachin's level.
 
Bilal7 said:
Why so upset Indian fans? Recognizing WSC reduces Viv Richards ODI batting average and brings him a littler lower down, to Sachin's level.
Click to expand...

It does but that doesn't matter. Viv is an exceptional player and in ODIs definitely comparable to Sachin. No Indian ever questions that.

But I have trouble in hearing the same for Barry Richards. With all due respect, you cant be rated that highly based on exhibition matches.
 
freelance_cricketer said:
It does but that doesn't matter. Viv is an exceptional player and in ODIs definitely comparable to Sachin. No Indian ever questions that.

But I have trouble in hearing the same for Barry Richards. With all due respect, you cant be rated that highly based on exhibition matches.
Click to expand...

Yes, Sachin is comparable with Viv but comfortably behind. Agreed about Barry Richards, etc, they might have been great players but there is no way to compare them to modern cricketers.
 
Bilal7 said:
Yes, Sachin is comparable with Viv but comfortably behind. Agreed about Barry Richards, etc, they might have been great players but there is no way to compare them to modern cricketers.
Click to expand...

If you are living in 1996 then may be. Ever since 1999, Tendulkar has been accepted as a greater cricketer and was 2nd greatest till 2009. Post his 3rd batting peak as a 37 year old, he has surpassed Don to be regarded GOAT aa acknowledged by Nasser Hussein, Richard Hadlee and Hanif Mohd.
 
freelance_cricketer said:
If you are living in 1996 then may be. Ever since 1999, Tendulkar has been accepted as a greater cricketer and was 2nd greatest till 2009. Post his 3rd batting peak as a 37 year old, he has surpassed Don to be regarded GOAT aa acknowledged by Nasser Hussein, Richard Hadlee and Hanif Mohd.
Click to expand...

Ahh the big 3.
 
freelance_cricketer said:
If you are living in 1996 then may be. Ever since 1999, Tendulkar has been accepted as a greater cricketer and was 2nd greatest till 2009. Post his 3rd batting peak as a 37 year old, he has surpassed Don to be regarded GOAT aa acknowledged by Nasser Hussein, Richard Hadlee and Hanif Mohd.
Click to expand...

In the real world, it doesn't matter if it's 1995 or 2015, Bradman and Richards are better batsmen than Sachin. If you're living in dream-land, what you have said is true.
 
Bilal7 said:
In the real world, it doesn't matter if it's 1995 or 2015, Bradman and Richards are better batsmen than Sachin. If you're living in dream-land, what you have said is true.
Click to expand...

Braddy in tests and Vivvy in ODIs are fair comparisons. I already agree to that.

Also The Big G, William Grace is in the mix.
 
Bilal7 said:
In the real world, it doesn't matter if it's 1995 or 2015, Bradman and Richards are better batsmen than Sachin. If you're living in dream-land, what you have said is true.
Click to expand...
Lol @ Bradman better than Sachin.

Sent from my GT-I9505 using Tapatalk
 
Junaids said:
Sure, but because he was playing against the best players in the world.

The scandal is that Bob Willis, Ian Botham, Rodney Hogg and Graham Yallop retain "official" status for devalued performances against weakened opposition.

Take away Botham's statistics against Pakistan B and Australia C and you have a much less impressive record.
Click to expand...

But Lillee was outbowled by Le Roux, Roberts, Imran, Holding, Garner etc.
 
Should be considered first class. Should not be considered tests
 
IndianWillow said:
Regardless of the quality, supertests were only exhibition matches.
Click to expand...

With respect, absolutely not.

The only reason why they should not be classed as Tests is because they rank above Tests.

The official Australia played the official West Indies with no first choice players from either side apart from Thommo.

And the Packer Australia played the Packer West Indies with the entire first choice squad of both teams. The players are quite clear in their uniform agreement that they were the real Australia versus the real West Indies and viewed it as such at the time. The only differences between the official and Packer matches were:

1) Packer had the best players.

2) Packer has a much more professional set up.

3) The establishment had the best grounds in the first season.
[MENTION=79064]MMHS[/MENTION] wrote
Then comes the legitimacy - those matches were arranged at private initiatives with Umpires not assigned by ICC - I am not questioning the integrity of the players, but, these were sort of exhibition matches; what if, those were scripted to make it exciting?

But the ICC never assigned umpires or anything else in those days. The official home boards appointed home umpires.

I'm not sure whether anybody else here is old enough to remember World Series Cricket. I can assure you, it was the real deal - the best players in the only official set-up.

Establishment cricket was the substandard amateur-hour joke. Second rate players, including geriatrics like Australia's new captain Bob Simpson who was 41, had been retired for 10 years and yet scored 89, 176 and 39 in his first two official "Tests" back in the team.

Anybody who recognises the devalued official Tests of 1977-79 and rejects the SuperTests really does not understand anything about the two series.
 
freelance_cricketer said:
If you are living in 1996 then may be. Ever since 1999, Tendulkar has been accepted as a greater cricketer and was 2nd greatest till 2009. Post his 3rd batting peak as a 37 year old, he has surpassed Don to be regarded GOAT aa acknowledged by Nasser Hussein, Richard Hadlee and Hanif Mohd.
Click to expand...

You are a parody of yourself these days.
 
Does recognising supersets affect other countries apart from Australia? What about subcontinent teams?
 
ExplicitAI said:
Does recognising supersets affect other countries apart from Australia? What about subcontinent teams?
Click to expand...

The only three teams were Australia, West Indies and Rest Of The World.

So apart from Aussies and West Indians the people whose records are enhanced are basically Imran Khan and the two South African geniuses Barry Richards and Mike Procter, whose records were almost identical to their brief Test records of a decade earlier and confirm what those of us in England already knew - they were the best batsman and bowler in the world by a million miles.
 
cricketjoshila said:
ICC isnt recognising it.It wont go into test stats.Read the article.Only CA is recognising it.
Click to expand...

I know, I was posting against Junaids post. It can't be considered as Test, though the standard might be at it's highest.
 
Junaids said:
The only three teams were Australia, West Indies and Rest Of The World.

So apart from Aussies and West Indians the people whose records are enhanced are basically Imran Khan and the two South African geniuses Barry Richards and Mike Procter, whose records were almost identical to their brief Test records of a decade earlier and confirm what those of us in England already knew - they were the best batsman and bowler in the world by a million miles.
Click to expand...

I went on Imran Khan's cricinfo page for his stats and I don't recognise anything. Did I miss something?
 
Junaids said:
With respect, absolutely not.

The only reason why they should not be classed as Tests is because they rank above Tests.

The official Australia played the official West Indies with no first choice players from either side apart from Thommo.

And the Packer Australia played the Packer West Indies with the entire first choice squad of both teams. The players are quite clear in their uniform agreement that they were the real Australia versus the real West Indies and viewed it as such at the time. The only differences between the official and Packer matches were:

1) Packer had the best players.

2) Packer has a much more professional set up.

3) The establishment had the best grounds in the first season.
[MENTION=79064]MMHS[/MENTION] wrote
Then comes the legitimacy - those matches were arranged at private initiatives with Umpires not assigned by ICC - I am not questioning the integrity of the players, but, these were sort of exhibition matches; what if, those were scripted to make it exciting?

But the ICC never assigned umpires or anything else in those days. The official home boards appointed home umpires.

I'm not sure whether anybody else here is old enough to remember World Series Cricket. I can assure you, it was the real deal - the best players in the only official set-up.

Establishment cricket was the substandard amateur-hour joke. Second rate players, including geriatrics like Australia's new captain Bob Simpson who was 41, had been retired for 10 years and yet scored 89, 176 and 39 in his first two official "Tests" back in the team.

Anybody who recognises the devalued official Tests of 1977-79 and rejects the SuperTests really does not understand anything about the two series.
Click to expand...

Those umpires were not even assigned by ACB (CA). Also, who were the home board for that WSC - Channel 9?

I agree that WSC was a level higher than Test, but it can't be recognized. For example, NBA is easily higher by several levels compared to World Cup basketball or World League, same I can say about NHL, but ............
 
MMHS said:
Those umpires were not even assigned by ACB (CA). Also, who were the home board for that WSC - Channel 9?

I agree that WSC was a level higher than Test, but it can't be recognized. For example, NBA is easily higher by several levels compared to World Cup basketball or World League, same I can say about NHL, but ............
Click to expand...


Guys this is a useless debate.

Super tests were good and now they are finally getting their due.

Never saw them, read a lot about them and that is that :)
 
"In tough times, some people emerge and some people fade away. I will give the example of World Series Cricket. They collected the top players of the world in 3 teams. There had never been any cricket as strong as that previously. In that, many players come up and many big names failed. The same is about to happen with you. Those of you who stand up with the people in these tough times, the people will always be with you."

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">PM Imran Khan "In tough times some emerge & some fade away. For example, World Series Cricket. Many players came up & many big names failed. The same is about to happen with you. Those who stand up with the people in these tough times, the people will always be with you" <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/COVID19?src=hash&ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#COVID19</a> <a href="https://t.co/bjSOqki1JW">pic.twitter.com/bjSOqki1JW</a></p>— Saj Sadiq (@Saj_PakPassion) <a href="https://twitter.com/Saj_PakPassion/status/1246456242597441536?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">April 4, 2020</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

BouncerGuy
  • Poll Poll
[PICTURES/VIDEOS] Inzamam-ul-Haq, Misbah-ul-Haq, Mushtaq Mohammad and Saeed Anwar named in the PCB Hall of Fame for 2024
2
Replies
106
Views
5K
RizwanT20Champ
R
Aang_The_last_airbender
The Art of the Deal: The long game by BCCI
Replies
13
Views
715
Aang_The_last_airbender
Aang_The_last_airbender
MenInG
"If you want to beat Australia, just follow this plan..." : Greg Chappell
Replies
23
Views
2K
Shaheenthefalcon
S
Technics 1210
More than a game - Modi and India's cricket supremacy
2
Replies
90
Views
5K
guard
G
MenInG
POTW: Bilal Ahmad15
Replies
4
Views
806
MenInG
MenInG
Back
Top