25 thoughts on “2000th century in test cricket – Mark Waugh 137 vs England 1993”
2000th test century, Mark Waugh 137 vs England 1993
Pretty rubbish captaincy. Bouncy track but still spinning enough, and Mark Waugh so strong on the off side against spin and pace, especially playing the late shots, but still no third man despite being 200 runs ahead. Steve Waugh being troubled by the sharp bounce off the cracks several times but no man in close, or even a backward man at all. God I miss Aussie players like the Waugh twins; Steve could dig Australia out of almost any hole and Mark was patient but ruthless, silky but powerful.
great crowd
Now we’re talkin Rob…Gold Waugh boys, Mark is by far my favorite alltime cricketer, and Steve wasn’t to shabby either. I used to love when the boys batted together, I guess everyone did. How ever I recall that their communication wasn’t as strong as you would expect, arn’t they supposed to minds?
If you are then I am
That is pretty terrible, and I can’t think of anything worse to represent England. Watching Capel was always peculiarly depressing. The ‘next Botham’ tag was always invidious, but it seemed particularly absurd when applied to him.
This is worse. The bowling attack at the Oval in 1989. Small, Igglesden, Pringle, Capel, Cook, Atherton, Gooch. DeFreitas and Foster were alright. Lewis had his moments. Malcolm could be pretty devastating given the right conditions. Even Pringle was occasionally handy. However, I reckon that 1989 Oval attack could out crap the other 2 attacks any time.
thanks rob found it but that video quality is really bad. Would be mighty grateful if you could upload a better version.
You set my curiosity running. Compare:
(i) Calcutta 92-93: Devon Malcolm, Paul Jarvis, Chris Lewis, J.P. Taylor, Ian Salisbury
(ii) Headingly 89: Phil DeFreitas, Neil Foster, Phil Newport, Derek Pringle
It’s hard to say which one is worse. On statistics it’s Calcutta 92/93, but at least that attack had a bit of variety (I confess that I’d completely forgotten about J-P. Taylor). The Headingly 89 is mediocre and incredibly dull. Botham getting bowled by Hohns was priceless.
Yes, 89 was terrible. The Aussies weren’t great. They were certainly far better than anything England had to offer. I think we might have had a good session at Lords but I might be deceiving myself. My personal highlight was when Botham charged down the wicket to Trevor Hohns and got bowled. We played 4 seamers at Headingley in 89. 5 if you included Gooch. I bet those 4 seamers in Calcutta was better than what we had at the Oval in 89.
9:37
What was that missing?
type in Pakistan NZ 1993
pretty sure the whole test is on youtube already.
Rob mate got any footage from 1993 pakistan vs newzealand test at hamilton. It was an only test and boy did our boys (wasim and waqar) give the kiwis a hiding of a life time. Been looking for it a long time. Please upload the last innings from this match where kiwis were bowled out for 93.
I think you’re right that 89 was worse than 93 – we had some decent periods of play in 93, but I can hardly remember a decent session in 89. In fact, 89 is probably the most depressing series I can remember. At least in 84 we were thrashed by one of the greatest teams in the history of the game. The 89 Aussies were a good team, but nothing special. As to dodgy selections, the 4 seamers in Calcutta in 92/93 takes some beating.
Emburey was playing for his batting more than his bowling from about 1987. Unbelieveable that he played his last test in 95. 2 off spinners though does seem strange. Salisbury and Tufnell would have been the other spin options I guess. However, I can remember when England took 3 off spinners to Australia in 82/83 (Hemmings, Miller and Marks). Bloody hell. 1989 and 1993 were disasters. At least in 93 we looked a bit better. Although Illot and Bicknell though. Jesus.
If watching Mark Waugh bat gives me a stiffy, does that make me gay?
Yeah, 4 sure. Maybe Gower is the only one I’ve seen who can compare, but you’re right, Mark’s better.
It was terrible. In the 1989 and 1993 series we really scraped the barrel. The strange thing about this game was that Emburey batted quite well, so sort of justified his selection. But picking two off spinners? And Emburey was pushing 40 and had long ceased to be dangerous at test level. Looking back the lack of strategic thinking in English selection at that time is remarkable.
That was some fearsome bowling lineup, wasn’t it. Although I can’t remember Emburey being talked about as our answer to Warne. I reckon it was Liz Hurley.
what a player…so easy on the eyes…really enjoyed seeing mark waugh and also Damien Martyn bat.
ive never been cool.
Rob Your Turning Into A Bit Of A Wanker Ive Got To Admit,You Used To Be Cool
Arrogant bastard. He was my favourite player by a long way but he was as arrogant as hell and also lazy – contrary to what he says. He would get on top of attacks, then get out because of boredom or whatnot. Utterly dominated in the World Cup because it interested him. He simply was “too” good, and knew it.
2000th test century, Mark Waugh 137 vs England 1993
Pretty rubbish captaincy. Bouncy track but still spinning enough, and Mark Waugh so strong on the off side against spin and pace, especially playing the late shots, but still no third man despite being 200 runs ahead. Steve Waugh being troubled by the sharp bounce off the cracks several times but no man in close, or even a backward man at all. God I miss Aussie players like the Waugh twins; Steve could dig Australia out of almost any hole and Mark was patient but ruthless, silky but powerful.
great crowd
Now we’re talkin Rob…Gold Waugh boys, Mark is by far my favorite alltime cricketer, and Steve wasn’t to shabby either. I used to love when the boys batted together, I guess everyone did. How ever I recall that their communication wasn’t as strong as you would expect, arn’t they supposed to minds?
If you are then I am
That is pretty terrible, and I can’t think of anything worse to represent England. Watching Capel was always peculiarly depressing. The ‘next Botham’ tag was always invidious, but it seemed particularly absurd when applied to him.
This is worse. The bowling attack at the Oval in 1989. Small, Igglesden, Pringle, Capel, Cook, Atherton, Gooch. DeFreitas and Foster were alright. Lewis had his moments. Malcolm could be pretty devastating given the right conditions. Even Pringle was occasionally handy. However, I reckon that 1989 Oval attack could out crap the other 2 attacks any time.
thanks rob found it but that video quality is really bad. Would be mighty grateful if you could upload a better version.
You set my curiosity running. Compare:
(i) Calcutta 92-93: Devon Malcolm, Paul Jarvis, Chris Lewis, J.P. Taylor, Ian Salisbury
(ii) Headingly 89: Phil DeFreitas, Neil Foster, Phil Newport, Derek Pringle
It’s hard to say which one is worse. On statistics it’s Calcutta 92/93, but at least that attack had a bit of variety (I confess that I’d completely forgotten about J-P. Taylor). The Headingly 89 is mediocre and incredibly dull. Botham getting bowled by Hohns was priceless.
Yes, 89 was terrible. The Aussies weren’t great. They were certainly far better than anything England had to offer. I think we might have had a good session at Lords but I might be deceiving myself. My personal highlight was when Botham charged down the wicket to Trevor Hohns and got bowled. We played 4 seamers at Headingley in 89. 5 if you included Gooch. I bet those 4 seamers in Calcutta was better than what we had at the Oval in 89.
9:37
What was that missing?
type in Pakistan NZ 1993
pretty sure the whole test is on youtube already.
Rob mate got any footage from 1993 pakistan vs newzealand test at hamilton. It was an only test and boy did our boys (wasim and waqar) give the kiwis a hiding of a life time. Been looking for it a long time. Please upload the last innings from this match where kiwis were bowled out for 93.
I think you’re right that 89 was worse than 93 – we had some decent periods of play in 93, but I can hardly remember a decent session in 89. In fact, 89 is probably the most depressing series I can remember. At least in 84 we were thrashed by one of the greatest teams in the history of the game. The 89 Aussies were a good team, but nothing special. As to dodgy selections, the 4 seamers in Calcutta in 92/93 takes some beating.
Emburey was playing for his batting more than his bowling from about 1987. Unbelieveable that he played his last test in 95. 2 off spinners though does seem strange. Salisbury and Tufnell would have been the other spin options I guess. However, I can remember when England took 3 off spinners to Australia in 82/83 (Hemmings, Miller and Marks). Bloody hell. 1989 and 1993 were disasters. At least in 93 we looked a bit better. Although Illot and Bicknell though. Jesus.
If watching Mark Waugh bat gives me a stiffy, does that make me gay?
Yeah, 4 sure. Maybe Gower is the only one I’ve seen who can compare, but you’re right, Mark’s better.
It was terrible. In the 1989 and 1993 series we really scraped the barrel. The strange thing about this game was that Emburey batted quite well, so sort of justified his selection. But picking two off spinners? And Emburey was pushing 40 and had long ceased to be dangerous at test level. Looking back the lack of strategic thinking in English selection at that time is remarkable.
That was some fearsome bowling lineup, wasn’t it. Although I can’t remember Emburey being talked about as our answer to Warne. I reckon it was Liz Hurley.
what a player…so easy on the eyes…really enjoyed seeing mark waugh and also Damien Martyn bat.
ive never been cool.
Rob Your Turning Into A Bit Of A Wanker Ive Got To Admit,You Used To Be Cool
Arrogant bastard. He was my favourite player by a long way but he was as arrogant as hell and also lazy – contrary to what he says. He would get on top of attacks, then get out because of boredom or whatnot. Utterly dominated in the World Cup because it interested him. He simply was “too” good, and knew it.
serioulsy? I have almost every series man.