Stephen Harmison or Dominic Cork?

[Richard]

I can't believe Richard is only in his early 20's...thought he was a middle aged bloke. xD

So did most, TBH.

 

[Richard]

why did you start a thread asking for peoples opinions, and then when someone dares think differently to you, you just basically dismiss it as nonsense.

case of Richard loving the sound of his own keyboard typing again

No, I explain why it differs to my own, and why I think my own is right.

We all know I think Harmison>Cork would be a nonsense though, I wanted to see why thought it and, in the odd case, why.

My keyboard's pretty well silent, BTW.

 

[Jamee999]

The thing that sets Harmison apart from Cork is that I've only ever seen Cork run through a team once and that was on a **** pitch that lasted two days.

 

[Richard]

That being?

 

[Goughy]

Harmison, and its not even close.

Will post a full reason why after I sleep off the effects of Liverpools victory.

 

[Richard]

Ah, that's why it is.

And look forward to it.

 

[marc71178]

You shouldn't be so harsh on yourself, especially in third person.


Never pass on an open goal.

If only I hadn't given up the awards, that was a dead set skull.

 

[Richard]

Bud luck, fortunately Gelman has some taste.

(Watches as he awards that post the Skull for next week)

 

[Burgey]

I'm too young to remember 1999.

Probably the single most depressing thing I've ever read on CW, tbh. I'm old enught to remember 1979!!!

 

[adharcric]

Harmison by miles. I refuse to give reasons.

 

[Richard]

Probably the single most depressing thing I've ever read on CW, tbh. I'm old enught to remember 1979!!!

Yeah, know what you mean - it's really something taking IDs and realising that 1991 is now 16 and 1989 is 18. Doesn't seem like yesterday a 1985er like me was in both camps (not simualtaneously, of course).

 

[Richard]

Harmison by miles. I refuse to give reasons.

Then I refuse to accept your vote.

 

[thierry henry]

Well the head-position is hardly first-rate, there's trainers on instead of bowling boots, and there's probably hoes in tha parking-lot too, but I can't think of much else.

And nice EDIT too.

LOL wtf

*throw some d's on that bitch*

 

[social]

Cork was a fairly average county plodder that manged to play a few tests

Harmy can be a world beater but more often than not bowls like an average county plodder

 

[superkingdave]

Harmison.

Though I'm biased as the only thing I've heard of Corky is ICC and some rather dismal stuff for Lancs.

Cork's record for Lancs

FC 1343 runs @ 26.33, 123 wickets@28.04
OD 626 runs @21.58, 55 wickets@26.38 (ER 4.19)

It's hardly dismal tbph

 

[tooextracool]

Dominic Cork was an extremely average bowler with a decent outswinger and i can hardly see how anyone can consider him to be anything other than that. Yes he always gave it his best, but it is rather sad when his best was still rather ordinary for the international level.

Harmison on the other hand, as we all know can if he bowled at his best be a world beater and i think i'd rather have someone like that than a journeyman like Cork who had about 2 good test series in his whole career.

 

[tooextracool]

For me, Cork was always massively the more talented bowler and was only stopped from becoming one of England's best ever Test bowlers by his personal problems in the middle of 1996, and by relatively poor selection thereafter (most notably that winter and in the summer of 2002).

I'm not sure how cork is 'more talented' than Harmison. Talent is being 6'5, being able to generate a pace of 90 odd mph and being able to get the ball to the keeper at over chest high on most wickets. Talent is not bowling an outswinger at 75 mph no matter how well you bowl it, because as far as i am concerned, those are things that you learn as you play over the years. You dont learn how to bowl fast or get bounce out of surfaces, you either have it or you dont.

 

[tooextracool]

2) He's less fragile than Harmison - I don't recall homesickness being an issue?

Cork played a whole 3 series out of 13 away from home. I have no doubts that had he toured the subcontinent he would have been decimated by the likes of Tendulkar and Inzamam. The closest he came to doing so was on the 2000 tour to pakistan where he would have gone had it not been for injury, but unfortunately he managed to save his record by not doing so. On the rare occasions he did play away from home, he was hammered then anyways.

and while he did play for a less successful side, he played in more favorable bowling conditions and generally had the opportunity to bowl on seamer friendly wickets in England. Certainly helped him in those 2 good series he had against the WI.

 

[Arjun]

I haven't seen much of Cork, except that he needed favourable pitches, where his swing bowling would be very effective. Otherwise, he was yet another target on a flat track. Hopefully I'll get to see some recordings from the past on Zee. Harmison, on his day, is a top-notch strike bowler, but not every day is his day, and when it isn't, he's rubbish. The big downside is his ODI-sickness, which left the team with a bunch of no-hopers leading the attack in the World Cup. That's a good point someone made about balance, but neither seem very effective on the field, but I'd like a clarification on this. Harmison isn't much good in the outfield, but I haven't seen much of Cork, nor have I read all the pages of this debate, coming back after nearly a month.

 

[Matt79]

I voted Harmison, because both he and Cork are/were somewhat one trick ponies for me, both of whom are only going to be effective when that trick worked.

Cork generally displayed a better attitude by all accounts, but as has already been pointed out, played virtually 75% of his cricket at home - Harmison's attitude has always looked better at home than away.

Harmison, limited though he is, has easily the bigger upside IMO, and is more suited to a wider variety of conditions (assuming his head is right ), and that makes him the better choice for me.

And I take comfort in finding myself in agreement with Goughy when the issue at hand is fast bowling.