• Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

Four bowlers

John Barber

New member
it looks like 4 Australian bowlers may take all the England wickets that fall in the current series (barring run outs).
Has this ever happened before!?
 

Adders

Well-known member
Welcome to the forum, just fyi this is probably not the best place to have posted this question. Would have been more appropriate for Cricket Chat or even the Ashes subforum.

But anyhow, to answer your question no it hasn't ever happened before. The closest was actually the 2013 Ashes, when Johnson, Harris, Siddle and Lyon took the wickets but Steve Smith also bagged 1.
 

fredfertang

Well-known member
As England had six different wicket takers by the end of the third day of the first Test that must, presumably, means our bowling unit is better than Australia's, doesn't it?
 

John Barber

New member
Thanks!

Welcome to the forum, just fyi this is probably not the best place to have posted this question. Would have been more appropriate for Cricket Chat or even the Ashes subforum.

But anyhow, to answer your question no it hasn't ever happened before. The closest was actually the 2013 Ashes, when Johnson, Harris, Siddle and Lyon took the wickets but Steve Smith also bagged 1.
Thanks! Only joined today & didn't really know what I was doing! Anyway hope it happens!
 

Spark

Global Moderator
Smith got more than 1 in that series didn't he? Got a few at Lord's IIRC

It's still a wild stat nonetheless. Would not have guessed that, especially with Watson around.
 
Last edited:

TheJediBrah

Well-known member
Smith got more than 1 in that series didn't he? Got a few at Lord's IIRC

It's still a wild stat nonetheless. Would not have guessed that, especially with Watson around.
He's talking about the 2013/14 series.

The 2013 series in England Aus had a lot of different bowlers. Just off the top of my head Faulkner, Starc, Pattinson, Siddle, Harris, Lyon, Agar, Watson & Smith as you mentioned.

2013/14 series Aus had the same XI every game which of course helps
 

Spark

Global Moderator
No it definitely doesn't apply to the 2013/14 series because Watson and Smith got wickets in that series.
 
Last edited:

TheJediBrah

Well-known member
No it definitely doesn't apply to the 2013/14 series because Watson and Smith got wickets in that series.
I think Adders meant that series though, because that's the one where Siddle, Harris, Johnson and Lyon played all the games and no other bowlers did.

Australia had 10 bowlers take wickets in 2013 Ashes in England
 

Spark

Global Moderator
Haha true. But I did hear that stat yesterday too and thought it was kind of dubious
 

Adders

Well-known member
No it definitely doesn't apply to the 2013/14 series because Watson and Smith got wickets in that series.
!00% right mate. I heard this on ABC yesterday.....and I did check on crapinfo, but missed Watto's 4 wickets.

Edit:

So if anyone cbf that's more sober than me.....can they go check this **** out?

Edit 2:

Sorry really should have credited TJB for the correction not Spark....wac.
 
Last edited:

fredfertang

Well-known member
Someone else's work

I have done Australia and can confirm it is the lowest number in a 5-Test series for them. A close miss was in 1964 when Bob Simpson as the fifth bowler took one wicket.

I should also mention the three-Test series of 1888, when just three bowlers took wickets.
 

Spikey

Well-known member
pretty surprised australia didn't do this during the Warne/McGrath era, particularly when Ponting was the captain before the all-rounder era.
 
Top