Will McGrath AND Pollock still be playing international cricket this time next year?

[Richard]

Maybe it is because he has pace, movemoment, plus talent and potential.

If you get to see him play in the near future, then you can make your mind up.

Well, just because I've watched him doesn't mean I can automatically work-out whether he's going to be good or not.
David reckons he's got potential which is enough for me, but all I'm willing to say is at the moment he's pretty terrible!

 

[marc71178]

Well, just because I've watched him doesn't mean I can automatically work-out whether he's going to be good or not.

You normally claim it does...

David reckons he's got potential which is enough for me

So you'll take the word of him, but not Dennis Lillee.

 

[Richard]

You normally claim it does...

I can guess, like anyone, I can't be certain, like anyone.

So you'll take the word of him, but not Dennis Lillee.

I never said I disagreed with Lillee WR Harmison.
I have said I disagree with those who say Harmison is now a World-class bowler.

 

[luckyeddie]

I can guess, like anyone, I can't be certain, like anyone.

I never said I disagreed with Lillee WR Harmison.
I have said I disagree with those who say Harmison is now a World-class bowler.

Ahem...

The debate raged long and hard - and all the time, people were saying 'Harmison is in the England side on merit' and you were going 'nooooooooooo, for he is not a good bowler, he is but lucky, six numbers on the lottery is not enough for he, nooooo, he must have seven'.

Even when he climbed the rankings, top ten, top five, just behind murali and shoaib, still no-one was saying that he is world class. Now he is number one, that phrase 'World Class' only seems to get used by people who are at pains to say 'he is not....'

 

[Richard]

Well, all right, then, World-class is rather an unspecific term, like matchwinner, but I think you might have been able to guess that I meant "I disagree with those who say Harmison is as good as they do".

 

[Richard]

What an idiotic question this clearly was...

Given that both are still going strong 2-and-a-half years later.

See what I mean? Any fool can dig-up any thread and find inaccurate predictions.

EDIT: what pratt said Umar Gul might never play again? And Maharoof was going to be better than Malinga? And Malinga wasn't likely to get anywhere with that action because no-one's ever done it before?

Just a few selections from myself, others made far more gaffes...

 

[LongHopCassidy]

I always have, and still do, rate Ntini very highly. Impressive bowler IMO.

Harmison of course will become quality, not quite McGrath standard, but still good.

Gillespie will still be around. Hes awesome...we all know about Bond etc...

Up and coming...Cleary and Tait I think will become excellent bowlers, I actually think Cleary will be the best of the two. Anderson of England, Sami of Pakistan, (If he matures as a bowler) India have many who could become good, as do West Indes.

Actually I think pace bowling is on the way up. The last two years have been the lowest point in a long time, but I reckon in a couple of years time we could see some really good players.

An all-time Greigy methinks.

 

[Richard]

That's just the creme-de-la-creme.

There are more incorrect predictions in this thread than anything since... well, the last one that was dug-up yesterday.

Which was just the point I was making digging the thing up.

 

[Perm]

According to his player page, he is 31 years of age, McGrath is 34.

A very very strong chance of becoming the second South African to get 100 Tests, and at the rate Tests at played, and he is fit, I would not put it past him to get it next year, and get 400 Test wickets pretty soon (towards the end of next year or some time in 2005).

An amazing record, a great bowler, and you wouldn't put it past him to go to 2007 if fit.

Couple of good predictions regarding the 100 test and 400 wickets there Craig.

 

[Richard]

I thought that when reading it... that was about the only accurate prediction in the entire thing! Craig!!!

 

[dontcloseyoureyes]

Anderson still has time to turn himself around.

 

[Richard]

He did in 2003 as well... 4 years ago.

 

[dontcloseyoureyes]

Yep.

 

[Richard]

So therefore... with every year that goes by with him not managing to turn himself around... the prospect gets lesser...

Dare someone to post "it'll never happen" and get this thread dug again in 3 years' time with Anderson having a Test average in the 26s...

 

[dontcloseyoureyes]

I know what you were saying. I just have no desire to argue with you.

 

[Richard]

Err... so why reply?

 

[dontcloseyoureyes]

Have to try and not let you get the last word. It's more fun that way.

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

James Anderson is 24 years old. That is all.

 

[Richard]

Have to try and not let you get the last word. It's more fun that way.

What a strange attitude.

 

[Richard]

James Anderson is 24 years old. That is all.

Norman Cowans' international career was over at said age.