On 5), I was going to quote Wisden 2003 at you but all my possessions are currently in boxes, so I can't. The last three years have the highest overall scoring rates of all time, I believe, but it's certainly something like that and given a week I can back it up with statistics.
I agree with 1) and don't think I ever disagreed with it originally. I'll concede 4) and plead lack of evidence on 2), (certainly there are seamers whose averages were in the low teens in the very early twentieth century- and I refuse to believe they were better than Harmison, Gough or Willis). On 3), I would direct you to obdurate batsman Geoff Boycott's Cowdrey lecture in which he posits, (perhaps falsely but I can't see to what gain if so), that bowlers have been given a tough time recently.
But all just for the sake of argument, certainly no over-praise of Ashley Giles intended. He's not as good as Shane Warne or Jim Laker. He did however take 5 of England's twenty wickets.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
timeasmymeasure
no subject
Date: 2005-08-07 11:28 pm (UTC)I agree with 1) and don't think I ever disagreed with it originally. I'll concede 4) and plead lack of evidence on 2), (certainly there are seamers whose averages were in the low teens in the very early twentieth century- and I refuse to believe they were better than Harmison, Gough or Willis). On 3), I would direct you to obdurate batsman Geoff Boycott's Cowdrey lecture in which he posits, (perhaps falsely but I can't see to what gain if so), that bowlers have been given a tough time recently.
But all just for the sake of argument, certainly no over-praise of Ashley Giles intended. He's not as good as Shane Warne or Jim Laker. He did however take 5 of England's twenty wickets.
TCH