Travis_Teh
International Regular
Hayden-like .... pity Ganguly isn't half the man Hayden is Doubt Sourav catch a cold, let alone a Marlin ^^706 runs in his 10 innings before the Champions Trophy. Average of 100.86. Not too bad...
Hayden-like .... pity Ganguly isn't half the man Hayden is Doubt Sourav catch a cold, let alone a Marlin ^^706 runs in his 10 innings before the Champions Trophy. Average of 100.86. Not too bad...
The man can field, and bowl occasionally. That's better than every England bowler not named Flintoff (or Vaughan).Dwayne Smith=crap IMO. Good to see Dave Mohammed getting a game though.
He's a slogger of a batsman and pretty average bowler, his fielding and supposed "all-round" ability are what gets him in the team.The man can field, and bowl occasionally. That's better than every England bowler not named Flintoff (or Vaughan).
He's a good bowler. On the good side of average. And his allround ability hasn't gotten him into an international team for about a year now. Get educated... the man has been picked for his bowling and fielding for months now, because he's been taking wickets...He's a slogger of a batsman and pretty average bowler, his fielding and supposed "all-round" ability are what gets him in the team.
Take away his cheap wickets against Zimbabwe and Bangladesh and he averages over 45. He has been poor in 2007 and his 2006 numbers would be quite poor without Zimbabwe there to get his average down. I wouldn't call him a good bowler, but you obviously rate him.He's a good bowler. On the good side of average. And his allround ability hasn't gotten him into an international team for about a year now. Get educated... the man has been picked for his bowling and fielding for months now, because he's been taking wickets...
He's turned in several quality performances with the ball over the past year. Having actually watched him bowl in international and domestic cricket, I can confidently state that he is a good bowler. Basically, I've seen him bowl far more often than you have. And given that last year I was disgusted with the mention of his name in any discussion of West Indies cricket, he's obviously done something right.Take away his cheap wickets against Zimbabwe and Bangladesh and he averages over 45. He has been poor in 2007 and his 2006 numbers would be quite poor without Zimbabwe there to get his average down. I wouldn't call him a good bowler, but you obviously rate him.
I'm not trying to question how much you have seen of him, that would be folly. From what I have seen of him at international level, which is a reasonable amount, he hasn't struck me as particularly good. Just keeping a specialist and better bowler out of the attack.He's turned in several quality performances with the ball over the past year. Having actually watched him bowl in international and domestic cricket, I can confidently state that he is a good bowler. Basically, I've seen him bowl far more often than you have. And given that last year I was disgusted with the mention of his name in any discussion of West Indies cricket, he's obviously done something right.
In certain conditions though, Dwayne Smith is a very potent option. And the West Indies selectors now realize that if they're going to use him in that role, he needs to be used effectively.I'm not trying to question how much you have seen of him, that would be folly. From what I have seen of him at international level, which is a reasonable amount, he hasn't struck me as particularly good. Just keeping a specialist and better bowler out of the attack.
In certain conditions being the key part of that, he can hardly be relied upon to deliver 10 quality overs if the pitch is a little flat or something like that.In certain conditions though, Dwayne Smith is a very potent option. And the West Indies selectors now realize that if they're going to use him in that role, he needs to be used effectively.
Did you read my comment in entirety? That's why I endorsed his selective use...In certain conditions being the key part of that, he can hardly be relied upon to deliver 10 quality overs if the pitch is a little flat or something like that.
I did read it, but I haven't seen how he is any more potent than some of the bowlers the West Indies are leaving out.Did you read my comment in entirety? That's why I endorsed his selective use...
In particular conditions he can be as potent, and given that he is a better batsman than most of the West Indies specialist bowlers, and a far better fielder than all, it's reasonable to include him. It's a very simple concept really.I did read it, but I haven't seen how he is any more potent than some of the bowlers the West Indies are leaving out.