Australia played 89 tests under buchanan/waugh/ponting

they won an amazing 68 tests lost 10 drew just 11.

they also had a 15 game win streak and a 12 game win streak which are both one and two all time.

They also played 27 test series in that time.

they won 23 out of 27 series with 2 losses and 2 draws.

probably a better sign of how ruthless they were was that they clean swept 15 out of those 23 series(including 2 5-0 whitewashes)

I would love to post the players stats for this era but im not sure if stasguru can do that.

and this guy gets criticised? sure he had some of the finest players of alltime at his disposal but he should get some credit. good of ponting to mention him in his speech

I guess it depends, for a lot of people he was there at the right time and it was in fact people like waugh who created that win every single test attitude.

I guess you live and die on these sorts of stats as a coach though and these are some amazing stats.

Been an amazing last 12 or so years for australain cricket but the last 7 have been like a dream really.

p.s. i wonder how much off all this can be put down to adam gilchrist?

He not only scored big runs at 7 he scored them so fast that we turned games we should have lost not into draws but wins.

Hard to argue with his results.

Propellorhead or whatever.

He was an ideal Coach for a side that couldnt improve any further as far as technical skills were concerned. However, about 8 years back he was sacked as Middlesex Coach because he kept on churning out that left field Zen Warrior mental enlightenment gibberish when what the players really needed was batting and bowling lessons, which he couldnt provide.

quote:

Originally posted by Mr Watermelon:
He was an ideal Coach for a side that couldnt improve any further as far as technical skills were concerned. However, about 8 years back he was sacked as Middlesex Coach because he kept on churning out that left field Zen Warrior mental enlightenment gibberish when what the players really needed was batting and bowling lessons, which he couldnt provide.

How have Middlesex gone since then?

Well when Buchanan was Coach they were pretty much the bottom of the County Championship. Since he departed they have been a bit inconsistent but they have been in the first division more often than the second.

Does Buchanan plan to continue coaching? I heard something about him perhaps being employed by CA as an 'adviser' or something like that?

I suppose it's the other side of the Chivers Regal-dirty dishwater analogy I made on another thread about Flintoff.

Did Buck help meld a potentially unruly collection of individuals into a team? Or was he like Michael Schumacher, who didn't design or build, but merely steered, what was already the fastest car oin the track?

One of the things that stands out to me about this Waugh-Buchanan-Ponting era is the number of players who came back, Lazarus-like, from the scrap-heap. Langer, Hayden, Ponting himself, Martyn, Lehmann ... all out of the side and seemingly gone ... came back to perform at a higher level than they had ever achieved previously.

Maybe the zen stuff, the psychology, actually works?

Just a thought.

quote:

Originally posted by Fred Nerk:


Or was he like Michael Schumacher, who didn't design or build, but merely steered, what was already the fastest car oin the track?

I think that sums it up best.

I guess you could say border/taylor built the car and people like gilchrist and waugh as skipper provided the nitrous injection that took them so far ahead of the pack.

Nath is doing his Snoopy Dance.

Taily would be very happy.

.

When Buchanan took over as coach of Queensland there was a significant increase in the batting scoring rate. Then when he became Australian coach, the same thing happened. Under Buchanan, Australia has scored about 0.80 runs per over quicker than they had in the preceding 21 series. The presence of Adam Gilchrist in the team has undoubtedly helped that rate but it is definitely an tactic that Buchanan brought to the team.

However, I think he has held the position for too long. I'd have rather just seen him there for maybe three or four years.