• 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.

[My Article] The State of England Bowling

Hooper

School Boy/Girl Cricketer
The State of England Bowling
By Hooper


The aim of the game in Test Cricket is very simple… Bowl the opposition out twice within 5 days. Sometimes the England Cricket team has thrown away matches because of there inability to get vital wickets or put a stranglehold on batsmen. There have also been some dubious selections in the case of choosing a balanced bowling attack that is capable of getting 20 wickets. A quote that sticks with me by the great batsman and former Australian captain, Ian Chappell, is one that typifies how Test teams should be selected. He said “...You want a guy in your side who can either get you a hundred or take five wickets…” This quote seems simple, but I guess you could say that cricket is simple, when put in this context.

The England bowling attack in the past couple of years has kept the same nucleus and their bowling has been quite impressive. But there has also been some really wacky selections that have left not only there fans scratching their heads but also their own team!

The Main Stars

Recently it has been Durham fast bowler, Stephen Harmison who has lead the England pace attack as the spearhead who is most likely to get your first wicket. When he is on fire he has the potential to destroy teams in the matter of a few overs with his sharp pace and stifling bounce. But when will the Steve Harmison all England fans have been missing come back? His form in the past 12 months hasn’t been very convincing, he seems to have lost all control and just can’t seem to put balls in the right place consistently. Sure, he takes the odd two or three wickets an innings but he is picked as a strike bowler who should be devastating batting line-ups. It’s no secret that Harmison quit ODI cricket because he wanted to focus on his Test cricket, and I’m sure he is trying to improve his form. But he is starting to look like a bowler who is on the out. Harmison who turns 29 later this year is running out of time to prove to the England selectors that he can turn himself around and reclaim the number one bowling ranking in the world again. Don’t be surprised if you don’t see Harmy in an England shirt in ’09.

Harmison is trying hard but the end may be near

The England workhorse Matthew Hoggard is the most trying bowler they have had for years. He is a bowler capable of getting that 5-fer and also keeping it tight. Hoggard is the bowler in the England team who normally has to bowl into the breeze or uphill but never does it affect his mood or performance, he just jogs on and keeps trying hard. It’s hard to believe that he is now England’s 9th highest wicket-taker and their most consistent swing bowler. Hoggard will be the bowler that the England team is trying to build their pace attack around, as he is a reliable bowler who will always get you wickets no matter the conditions. Expect the mop-haired bowler to be there come Ashes ’09.

Hoggard is the bowler England must build around

Monty Panesar is the future for England spin bowling and there are no limitations on how much better he can get. He is a finger spinner that can extract so much bounce from the pitch and can the ball to really spit out of the rough when he wraps his long noodle fingers around the ball, making the ball seem as small as a gob stopper. He was once looked at as a good bowler but would never excel at international level until he improved his fielding and batting. He plays his cricket in the right spirit and when faced with this challenge he starting doing all he could do improve. He has tried hard at his fielding and is a boundary specialist, his trademark slide and wind up a crowd favorite. His batting technique has improved, thanks to studying his cricketing hero’s batting style, Sachin Tendulkar. At the tender age of 25 there’s no reason why he cant get 5 wickets a match, play 100 Tests and in turn claim 500 Test wickets. It may be big expectations, but he is a great player, and by the ’09 Ashes he will have already established himself as the premier spinner in the England team.

The only English spinner that has looked like claiming wickets on a regular basis, for years


The Support Cast

Well, the 3rd seamer position in the England cricket team has been shared around a bit in the past 18 months. There have been bowlers James Anderson, Sajid Mahmood, Simon Jones, Liam Plunkett, Stuart Broad and more recently Ryan Sidebottom.

Here is a little look at these fringe bowlers –


James Anderson: Has lots of talent and is capable of swinging the ball both ways, but taking Test wickets is another matter. He just hasn’t been able to cement his place in the team, despite many chances being handed to him by the England selectors. If he bowled as well as he did in the ODIs as Tests he would be something special. Needs to stay in the mix in the ODIs and improve his red-ball bowling to be even thought of for Ashes '09

Sajid Mahmood: Is capable of establishing himself in the Test arena, after showing some positive signs against Pakistan last summer. He just hasn’t been consistent enough and a summer against the Aussies destroyed his confidence. If he can keep the seam upright and maybe extract a bit of swing in good weather conditions, this matched with his great height could cause many problems for batsman. If Saj can improve in these facets he could well and truly be on his way to Ashes '09 alongside Freddie and Hoggard.

Simon Jones: Has been cut down with injury of late, but when he is fit and firing he is one of England’s best bowlers. He is special because he can swing the ball when its hard and new, but he can also make the ball go Irish when the ball loses its shine. When he gets fit, and shows a bit of form he should be a walk in to the team. But the selectors may have forgotten this English hero. The jury is still out, on whether he can recover and come back to his best. 50-50 chance for the '09 series.

Liam Plunkett: In my view he has the most potential as a Test bowler. He can swing the ball huge amounts and can destroy line-ups in the matter of a few overs (just look at the Commonwealth Bank series final 2). Started his career promisingly but has recently been more effective in ODIs, expect that to change.

Stuart Broad: Well, he has a lot of followers this 21 year old, and so far he hasn’t disappointed in the ODI format. It was a good move that the England selectors didn’t just expose and throw Broad in the deep end during the Ashes series or the West Indies Test matches. He is no doubt going to be a future England star. Will surely have played Test matches by the next time they take on the old foe, but whether he hold his own is another matter, will surely be in the mix for a '09 Ashes berth.

Ryan Sidebottom: Well, Ryan, enjoy it while it lasts. In his late 20’s Sidebottom has come into this team and played well, but he better keep playing well because he is at his peak and it seems that he is just there to play well while other players develop. He is a good left arm bowler, and has just jumped into the scene and hasn’t looked fussed. Dont expect him to be here come '09.
People of PlanetCricket have seen this before probably, but I'm going to be visiting these forums as well. So please read and then discuss.8-)
 

honestbharani

Whatever it takes!!!
Well, I am just a casual observer of the England team but from whatever I have seen, I agree with you that Plunkett looks the most promising of the young lot. He has a few kinks in his action and stuff that he needs to rectify but if he can do that (and it is surely not impossible), I think he will be a really really good bowler at the test level. The sad thing is, it is still possible that he could just become another James Anderson.
 

Flem274*

123/5
Plunkett reminds me of James Franklin. They both started out as guys that could swing it hugely but had no control. Franklin is now gaining alot of wickets in tests and his ODI performances are starting to improve. I expect Plunkett with a bit of work could well end up like Franklin. Though perhaps not as much of an allrounder.
 

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
Ian Chappell said:
You want a guy in your side who can either get you a hundred or take five wickets
Nah, I disagree, that's too simplistic. Different matches have different scenarios, and no-one can make big innings without some support, and it's hard to take a big haul that results in a low total without some support.
 

Prince EWS

Global Moderator
Haha, was wondering about that myself. Seems an odd choice of smiley.
People seem to use the rolleyes to "point" to earlier parts of their post - often a quote - or even the post immediately above it. It's completely wrong, but it is often done.

If you really want to see some bad eye-rolling though, read Graham's ICC thread. :p
 

Scaly piscine

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Hoggard is always painted as the workhorse who has to slog his through the crap conditions he gets and always keeps it tight... bollocks. Hoggard is the guy that gets the prime conditions to bowl in bar none and is taken off before he gets carted (ie when the ball gets older) - give most county pros his times to bowl and they'll do something, Sidebottom is a prime example. They are exploit the conditions bowlers, if there are no conditions... they're screwed - fine you want the odd bowler like that but they're not some bloody unique heroic workhorse. In fact I think Sidebottom could do as good a job as Hoggard if not better because he's a variation and a more awkward to hit. Then of course Hoggard is always compared as being a much better player than Harmison - unless he's completely undercooked (which is what pushes Harmison's bowling average to around what Hoggard's is) then Harmison should be ahead of Hoggard in the pecking order. He bowls during the crap times when most county pros would be fodder, he rattles batsmen and he can get anyone out at anytime as opposed to just one or two bunnies when the ball swings which is what Hoggard tends to do and Harmison is a better batsman.

The article loses yet more credibility saying how there's no limit to what Monty can do... err yes there is he's an orthodox finger spinner - that's as crippling a limitation as being a medium pacer in modern day Test cricket. The stuff about Saj and Simon Jones is just wishful thinking, not sure why you've not discussed Freddie properly in the article since he's been our best bowler for a while.
 
Last edited:

Hooper

School Boy/Girl Cricketer
Plunkett reminds me of James Franklin. They both started out as guys that could swing it hugely but had no control. Franklin is now gaining alot of wickets in tests and his ODI performances are starting to improve. I expect Plunkett with a bit of work could well end up like Franklin. Though perhaps not as much of an allrounder.

The only similarity between Plunkett and Franklin is that they can both swing the ball. I beleive that Plunkett will become a far better bowler.

Nah, I disagree, that's too simplistic. Different matches have different scenarios, and no-one can make big innings without some support, and it's hard to take a big haul that results in a low total without some support.
Well, if your squad is full of guys who can make hundreds, then you would expect to have some sort of support from your other hundred makers;)

Haha, was wondering about that myself. Seems an odd choice of smiley.
I dunno, just looked at the smileys on the side panel and that one looked the best:)
 

Perm

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Hoggard is always painted as the workhorse who has to slog his through the crap conditions he gets and always keeps it tight... bollocks. Hoggard is the guy that gets the prime conditions to bowl in bar none and is taken off before he gets carted (ie when the ball gets older) - give most county pros his times to bowl and they'll do something, Sidebottom is a prime example. They are exploit the conditions bowlers, if there are no conditions... they're screwed - fine you want the odd bowler like that but they're not some bloody unique heroic workhorse. In fact I think Sidebottom could do as good a job as Hoggard if not better because he's a variation and a more awkward to hit. Then of course Hoggard is always compared as being a much better player than Harmison - unless he's completely undercooked (which is what pushes Harmison's bowling average to around what Hoggard's is) then Harmison should be ahead of Hoggard in the pecking order. He bowls during the crap times when most county pros would be fodder, he rattles batsmen and he can get anyone out at anytime as opposed to just one or two bunnies when the ball swings which is what Hoggard tends to do and Harmison is a better batsman.
Haha.

That is all.
 

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
Then of course Hoggard is always compared as being a much better player than Harmison - unless he's completely undercooked (which is what pushes Harmison's bowling average to around what Hoggard's is) then Harmison should be ahead of Hoggard in the pecking order. He bowls during the crap times when most county pros would be fodder, he rattles batsmen and he can get anyone out at anytime as opposed to just one or two bunnies when the ball swings which is what Hoggard tends to do and Harmison is a better batsman.
A tip for the original poster: this one (ie, the one who posted the above quoted) is well-known to all regulars as a Durham-phile. Don't take this remotely seriously, anyone who genuinely argues that Harmison is better than Hoggard because they bowl at the wrong time very obviously doesn't have a clue what they're on about. And he's not joking, he honestly does believe this.
 

Salamuddin

International Debutant
A tip for the original poster: this one (ie, the one who posted the above quoted) is well-known to all regulars as a Durham-phile. Don't take this remotely seriously, anyone who genuinely argues that Harmison is better than Hoggard because they bowl at the wrong time very obviously doesn't have a clue what they're on about. And he's not joking, he honestly does believe this.
Dicko, that's one of the funniest posts I've seen from you :laugh:
 

Scaly piscine

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
A tip for the original poster: this one (ie, the one who posted the above quoted) is well-known to all regulars as a Durham-phile. Don't take this remotely seriously, anyone who genuinely argues that Harmison is better than Hoggard because they bowl at the wrong time very obviously doesn't have a clue what they're on about. And he's not joking, he honestly does believe this.
Unlike some people who spend most of their time having digs at another member while using terms like 'this one' because they're trying to avoid using any obvious insulting language.

Just for the record Richard here rated Harmison's performance in the 2005 Ashes lower than Ian Bell.
 

pasag

RTDAS
A tip for the original poster: this one (ie, the one who posted the above quoted) is well-known to all regulars as a Durham-phile. Don't take this remotely seriously, anyone who genuinely argues that Harmison is better than Hoggard because they bowl at the wrong time very obviously doesn't have a clue what they're on about. And he's not joking, he honestly does believe this.
Cut it out Richard.
 

steds

Hall of Fame Member
Monty Panesar is the future for England spin bowling and there are no limitations on how much better he can get.
There are, actually. It's called being an orthodox finger spinner.

James Anderson: Has lots of talent and is capable of swinging the ball both ways, but taking Test wickets is another matter. He just hasn’t been able to cement his place in the team, despite many chances being handed to him by the England selectors.
What chances? The guy has been totally pissed about with by the selectors and never been given a proper run since 2003. Add to that all the injuries he's suffered it's no wonder he's not performed as well as he could have.

Sajid Mahmood: Is capable of establishing himself in the Test arena
No he isn't.

Liam Plunkett: In my view he has the most potential as a Test bowler.
If he first manages to bowl more than a whole 8 straight balls a spell, then we'll talk.
 
Last edited:

Prince EWS

Global Moderator
There are, acutally. It's called being an orthodox finger spinner.


What chances? The guy has been totally pissed about with by the selectors and never been given a proper run since 2003. Add to that all the injuries he's suffered it's no wonder he's not performed as well as he could have.


No he isn't.


If he first manages to bowl more than a whole 8 straight balls a spell, then we'll talk.
AWTA really. All of it.
 

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
Perhaps, but it wasn't really neccessary, especially given he's already been spoken to about not trying to incite long slanging contests between himself and SP.
Cut it out Richard.
Absolutely no intention whatsoever of doing said, if I didn't say it someone else might well do. That was an unfair piece of criticism (stating something that was wholly ludicrous) aimed at a fairly reasonable attempt from a new member, and I called it as such.

I've read his offering in reply, and have no intention of saying a thing to it, as, as Rob mentions, there's only one thing it'd result in.

There are parts of that article I disagree with, pretty much exactly what Bennett said, but that passage was IMO pretty out-of-order.
 
Last edited:

GIMH

Norwood's on Fire
People seem to use the rolleyes to "point" to earlier parts of their post - often a quote - or even the post immediately above it. It's completely wrong, but it is often done.

If you really want to see some bad eye-rolling though, read Graham's ICC thread. :p
The worst use of the rolleyes was at the end of my post in OT where I said that my missus was pregnant. Meant to use the proper smile tbh, don't quite know how it happened!
 

Top