I bet they wouldn't. You clearly don't know the game. Most test players are nowhere near fit or quick (and big) enough for test 7's.
Sure the difference is more marked than with cricket, but the point remains that someone can be ideal for one version of a sport, but not good enough at another. For cricket in particular you don't really have the luxury of playing yourself in playing ODIs at world cup level. Take a look at the first 10 over run rates for Australia or South Africa vs England. Maybe if we had any kind of late/middle order there would be less pressure on the top order batsmen to perform, and we all know what effect pressure has on sportsmen. -----Original Message----- From: Richard Walker [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 19 April 2007 18:34 To: Mark Humphries; 'Tim Leslie'; [email protected] Subject: Re: [LU] Moving on ... --- Mark Humphries <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > And how many rugby players play at the top level > both in test rugby & > sevens? No fucking idea. But I'd be prepared to bet that Johnny Wilkinson and Ronan O'Gara would score a few points at sevens. > > Do you think Boycott would have been a good 1 day or > 20/20 player? Well, I would have given my right arm to see Sir Geoffrey walk out as opener against South Africa the other day. We might have batted past 20 overs then and not given wickets away cheaply. So I looked up Boycott's average in ODIs. This was on the Wiki : "In 414 matches for Yorkshire he scored 32,570 runs at 57.85 with a best score of 260* against Essex and 103 centuries in all. He scored another 8,699 runs in List A one day cricket at 40.08. He twice averaged over 100 for an English first class season, 100.12 in 1971 and 102.53 in 1979 and remains the only player to have achieved this rare feat twice." So I think the answer is Mark , yes by today's standards he would have been a bloody great one day player. And I bet Sir Geoffrey didn't have the luxury of playing against Bangledesh and Ireland either !! If you score 100s at test level , you can score them at one day. Too much bollocks talked about test cricket. > > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On > Behalf Of Richard Walker > Sent: 18 April 2007 18:21 > To: Tim Leslie; [email protected] > Subject: Re: [LU] Moving on ... > > > "Vaughan is a shrewd tactician and a good leader. He > is also a fine Test batsman. However, his record as > a > one-day cricketer speaks for itself, and he should > not > be chosen again." > > It's this sort of bollocks that does my head in. > You're either a good batter and can play at the > highest level or you can't. Surely a 'fine test > batsmen' should be averaging more that 20 in this > world cup ???? All the Aussies are managing to do it > and even some of our batsmen who haved proved > themselves at test level recently have managed to > average over 50 (Collingwood and Pietersen). So to > say > Vaughan can't bat at one day level is like saying > Wayne Rooney would be no good at 5-a-side. What a > joke. Why can't the cricketing commentators say it > how > it is. > > > > _______________________________________________ > the Leeds List is an unmoderated mailing list and > the list administrators accept no liability for the > personal views and opinions of contributors. > Leedslist mailing list > [email protected] > http://list.zetnet.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/leedslist > it's a God awful small affair > ___________________________________________________________ Yahoo! Mail is the world's favourite email. Don't settle for less, sign up for your free account today http://uk.rd.yahoo.com/evt=44106/*http://uk.docs.yahoo.com/mail/winter07.htm l _______________________________________________ the Leeds List is an unmoderated mailing list and the list administrators accept no liability for the personal views and opinions of contributors. Leedslist mailing list [email protected] http://list.zetnet.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/leedslist it's a God awful small affair
