Giles retires

[chaminda_00]

Giles did have many good games when the pitches were turning, and many poor ones when it wasn't (when most fingerspinners wouldn't be picked).

No, there weren't many - 2 or 3 at best.

Not fingerspinners. No fingerspinner has ever been much good on unresponsive surfaces.

No spinner takes wickets very often without turning the ball. Occasionally batsmen miss loads of straight balls like West Indies did at Lord's earlier this season, but that's very rare.

Mostly, if someone bowling at 50mph doesn't turn the ball, he hasn't got a hope in hell of taking wickets.

You seem to have a limited view of what finger spinner are capable, you can take plenty of wickets on pitches that don't turn if your good enough. Vettori has shown that a fair bit on NZ, even though to a very average level. But he does take wickets on a regular basic.

The thing that finger spinner struggle on with current pitches is lack of inconsistent bounce, compared to non-covered pitches not lack of turn. With the even ness of the bounce the variety have bowl with get nulified. Extra turn doesn't aways mean wickets for spinners, if the pitches have even bounce. If turn was the only factor then Pakistan and Sri Lanka would play 2nd spinners more often. But they usually play the 3rd seamers, as the pitches don't really give extra support unless the spinner is half decent.

 

[Matteh]

Am i the only one that recognises the ball barely turned of straight in that video?

Outside leg to top of the off stump is nearly straight? A foot of turn like that is great for a finger spinner.

 

[open365]

Outside leg to top of the off stump is nearly straight? A foot of turn like that is great for a finger spinner.

But it's not turn though, the ball was heading towards middle and off from the angle Giles was bowling at anyway.

 

[Richard]

That is far from a foolproof method though.

From my experience, even "non-turning" pitches do turn a little bit. I'm yet to see a pitch that literally offers no turn at all throughout the whole game - even if it isn't consistent turn. Hence, while it obviously helps to be a pitch that's a classified "turner" as a finger spinner, it's not a complete requirement. The odd ball will turn a little regardless of what the pitch is like, and a good bowler will use this in combination with his drift, flight, variation and accuracy to get wickets anyway. Not every pitch is going to suit you all the time as a bowlers, but the best bowlers overcome this a lot of the time anyway.

I've seen plenty of wickets where, for most of the game, someone spinning the ball purely with their fingers cannot get it too far off the straight. Yeah, you might get it to go a few cm, but that's barely even going to be noticed.

Obviously, like pace, "turn" is a linear scale, not a discrete on\off value, but there's one point on the scale that I like to simplistically call "turner" after and "non-turner" before.

 

[Richard]

But rarely in test matches are you ever going to have more than 3 spinners in any one game, spinners which i'm pretty sure outperformed Giles.

Even if you only have 1 other spinner aside from Giles\Panesar (whoever it be) that's plenty enough to tell.

 

[NUFAN]

But it's not turn though, the ball was heading towards middle and off from the angle Giles was bowling at anyway.

That was Giles top 3 dismissals in his career you've got to give the man a bit of credit for that one.

 

[Richard]

Again, there's no way you can accurately judge that the only turning wicket in the series was the WACA, especialy as Warne took 6 for in the second test.

Warne's a wristspinner FFS, wristspinners can turn it on almost anything. We're talking about 2 fingerspinners, Giles and Panesar.

 

[chaminda_00]

Warne's a wristspinner FFS, wristspinners can turn it on almost anything. We're talking about 2 fingerspinners, Giles and Panesar.

Chandana is wristspinner he never turned the bowl?

 

[Matteh]

But it's not turn though, the ball was heading towards middle and off from the angle Giles was bowling at anyway.

It's drifted to outside leg and turned in the rough. It's clearly not just angle.

 

[open365]

Even if you only have 1 other spinner aside from Giles\Panesar (whoever it be) that's plenty enough to tell.

No it wouldn't, at all.

I don't see why you seem to think that finger spinners are monotonous robots that bowl exactly the same every game and only get wickets when it turns. They are human, they bowl badly some times, they bowl well at others, their record is not soley determined by the pitch.

 

[Richard]

You seem to have a limited view of what finger spinner are capable, you can take plenty of wickets on pitches that don't turn if your good enough. Vettori has shown that a fair bit on NZ, even though to a very average level. But he does take wickets on a regular basic.

Vettori's never taken a big bag on a non-turning pitch, because, yes, he's a fingerspinner.

The thing that finger spinner struggle on with current pitches is lack of inconsistent bounce, compared to non-covered pitches not lack of turn. With the even ness of the bounce the variety have bowl with get nulified. Extra turn doesn't aways mean wickets for spinners, if the pitches have even bounce. If turn was the only factor then Pakistan and Sri Lanka would play 2nd spinners more often. But they usually play the 3rd seamers, as the pitches don't really give extra support unless the spinner is half decent.

Yes, and there have been plenty of average spinners to play for both. If there were more of the skill of Saqlain or Iqbal Qasim, though, there'd have been more.

Inconsistent bounce is all well and good but a good spinner doesn't need it to take wickets. Any bowler will do better with uneven bounce than with even, but if you can turn it you don't absolutely need it.

 

[NUFAN]

Why are we just comparing him with Panesar?

Anyways this is how it is..

Panesar > Giles bowling

Giles > Panesar fielding

Giles > Panesar batting


Giles would be up there with the Mark Waugh and Carl Hoopers of the world in the bowling department.

 

[Richard]

Chandana is wristspinner he never turned the bowl?

Well he did actually, but Chandana (like Kumble) is hardly an orthodox wristspinner is he?

 

[Matteh]

Why are we just comparing him with Panesar?

English SLA bowler. Could only really compare him with Vettori + Panesar.

 

[Richard]

No it wouldn't, at all.

I don't see why you seem to think that finger spinners are monotonous robots that bowl exactly the same every game and only get wickets when it turns. They are human, they bowl badly some times, they bowl well at others, their record is not soley determined by the pitch.

It's like this:

Non-turning pitch: no chance
Turning pitch: chance; if they bowl well, they'll do well, if they don't, they won't.

No fingerspinner can turn the ball unless the pitch offers him sufficient help, it's basic restraints of the human body. Without turn, no spinner can be very effective.

 

[Richard]

Giles would be up there with the Mark Waugh and Carl Hoopers of the world in the bowling department.

Giles was a better bowler than both in his sleep.

 

[open365]

Again, you only assume it's a non turning pitch because the bowler isn't turning it, watching on tv is no way accurate enough to tell the qualitites of a pitch.

And like you said, it's a consistent scale, meaning Panesar who spins it more than GIles will turn it on more pitches than Giles will.

 

[chaminda_00]

Vettori's never taken a big bag on a non-turning pitch, because, yes, he's a fingerspinner.

Yes, and there have been plenty of average spinners to play for both. If there were more of the skill of Saqlain or Iqbal Qasim, though, there'd have been more.

Inconsistent bounce is all well and good but a good spinner doesn't need it to take wickets. Any bowler will do better with uneven bounce than with even, but if you can turn it you don't absolutely need it.

Vettori has taken wickets on non turners, none of pitches that he took 5-fer against Australia were on turners. Anyone who watched the games would know they hardly turned at all.

The point I was making about Pakistan and Sri Lanka, was that all those spinner would have turned the bowl on those pitches. But they still wouldn't have taken many wickets cus you need more then turn to be a good spin bowler. It doesn't matter if you can turn the bowl a foot, you need more then just turn to be a good bowler. Chandana for example has played many matches on massive turners in Sri Lanka, but he bowled his best on bouncy pitches in Australia.

Good spin bowlers make the most of varing conditions and Giles was useless on pitches that offered no support, so there his crap. regardless of how well he bowled on turners.

 

[NUFAN]

Giles was a better bowler than both in his sleep.

Yeah I don't doubt that, but then when he woke up..

 

[Prince EWS]

Without turn, no spinner can be very effective.

I think the concept of "no turn" is a myth, though, really. I've been watching cricket for quite some time and I'm yet to see a pitch that offers absolutely 0.