Harmison - underachiever or overrated ?

[Salamuddin]

Well, as the title says, what do you guys think of the much maligned Steve Harmison ?

 

[Richard]

I think my thoughts are, well, fairly well-documented shall we say. Never thought Harmison was up to much, think those 7 games in early 2004 were a) nowhere near as good they were made-out and b) never something he was likely to repeat anyway.

I think people have clung to "he's mentally soft" and the like to avoid the conclusion that they completely and totally misjudged him in 2004 (and indeed before). Harmison was never any good at all, he's only ever had odd flashes in the pan (The Oval 2004, Lord's 2005, Old Trafford 2006), most of which have involved getting lots of tailenders and\or abysmal batting.

Harmison maybe could have been good, had he changed that awful action and looked to seam and cut the ball more. But no - people have got it into their heads that he can be effective without moving the ball sideways (Kev will insist this is possible I know) and simply by bouncing batsmen out, which, well, he simply cannot.

People have also got it into their heads that he can offer good control over extended periods of time. Again, he cannot. There's now ample evidence of this, I think.

 

[Son Of Coco]

An over-rated underachiever.

His action suggests he'd always need to put in a lot of work to get it right. It looks like he wasn't willing to. I've never bowled a ball to second slip in my life....but my action's probably better than Harmison's I'll also never bowl one at 90+ mph.

 

[Redbacks]

Good ability to intimidate batters with his bounce. Would appear that he hasn't put in the work to become a world class frontline bowler

 

[Salamuddin]

I think my thoughts are, well, fairly well-documented shall we say. Never thought Harmison was up to much, think those 7 games in early 2004 were a) nowhere near as good they were made-out and b) never something he was likely to repeat anyway.

I think people have clung to "he's mentally soft" and the like to avoid the conclusion that they completely and totally misjudged him in 2004 (and indeed before). Harmison was never any good at all, he's only ever had odd flashes in the pan (The Oval 2004, Lord's 2005, Old Trafford 2006), most of which have involved getting lots of tailenders and\or abysmal batting.

Harmison maybe could have been good, had he changed that awful action and looked to seam and cut the ball more. But no - people have got it into their heads that he can be effective without moving the ball sideways (Kev will insist this is possible I know) and simply by bouncing batsmen out, which, well, he simply cannot.

People have also got it into their heads that he can offer good control over extended periods of time. Again, he cannot. There's now ample evidence of this, I think.

Listening to Dickinson rant on about Harmy....priceless.

Especially when you consider Harmison was the hero of both Pickup and Robbins.

 

[BoyBrumby]

He has (or had) the tools to succeed at test level IMHO, the ability to propel the ball from his height at 90mph+ is not be be underestimated, but was also blessed with a heart the size of a pea. It's been widely reported that he gets a little mopey when he ventures south of South Shields, but he also seemingly lacks the discipline to work on his accuracy.

Let's be honest here, he's 30 (or very nearly) now, so it's a little rich to continue to pick him based on what he might do in some illusory future. Get Broad in for the 2nd test & cut our losses.

Well, one can but dream, anyway.

 

[Arrow]

I saw a summary of his yearly record and noticed only in one year did he average under 30 , in 2004 against the windies when he cleaned them up. From memory hes plus 30 for the rest of his career.

 

[Richard]

He has (or had) the tools to succeed at test level IMHO, the ability to propel the ball from his height at 90mph+ is not be be underestimated, but was also blessed with a heart the size of a pea. It's been widely reported that he gets a little mopey when he ventures south of South Shields, but he also seemingly lacks the discipline to work on his accuracy.

Or perhaps he simply lacks the ability, regardless of the amount of work he might have put in? Which, let's face it, none of us really know what that amounts to.

 

[Richard]

I saw a summary of his yearly record and noticed only in one year did he average under 30 , in 2004 against the windies when he cleaned them up. From memory hes plus 30 for the rest of his career.

Nothing, for mine, sums Harmison up better than this - his career (against Test-standard teams) with those 2 series in early 2004 knocked-out. Absolutely and totally awful.

 

[Redbacks]

Or perhaps he simply lacks the ability, regardless of the amount of work he might have put in? Which, let's face it, none of us really know what that amounts to.

Well before bowling the first ball of the 07 Ashes to second slip he didn't play in a tour game. Even including a game Botham refered to as "kicks and giggles" in a 14 a side game v NSW where he could have rolled 5 overs down and then gone home. Did seem like poor preperation, but hey we can't conclude he didn't work hard in the nets

 

[Richard]

The tour-game schedules since 2000\01 have been abysmal, no disputing that from me whatsoever. But I don't believe more tour-games would have made any difference to Harmison's overseas performances.

 

[GIMH]

I don't think it matters which he is - he should not have played for England in Test cricket again after the 06/06 Ashes. You can argue that maybe he should have been dropped earlier - but definitely afetr thats eries he shouldn't have played again.

What will happen is he will take a few eickets at some point, and everyone will say GBH is back - nah. I did it myself when we beat Pakistan at Old Trafford. Whetehr he has the talent or not, I doubt anyone will ever really know, but he obviously wasn't up to trying to be the world's best. GAGF harmison.

 

[Arjun]

I've said it once, and I'll say it again, Harmison is an underachiever. He may not look great, the McGrath or Donald you'd love to have, but he does his bulldozing job quite well. While he's not quite as capable as a certain Indian seamer similar to him in more ways than one, he's definitely had it a lot easier, playing for England, staying relatively injury-free and supported well by his bowlers, but this perceived homesickness, as well as his tendency to run out of gas a little too soon (bowling slower than that Indian) has weakened him a little. I'd say he's underachieved, especially when he's quit ODI's, leaving the lane open for some rather dire options- he's still better than Anderson, Tremlett and especially Mahmood.

 

[sledger]

tbh I think its a case of both, the guy is both overated and has underachieved, there is no way he is the world class dangerous paceman that so many claimed he was, but yet despite this I feel he still should have performed better than he has done.

To be Frank his control is dreadful, and imo it always has been, his action is similarly bad. The fact that he has now lost a great deal of his pace makes the entire situation even worse, as now his greatest asset seems to have vanished. Its a shame as I think he has it in him to be a decent enough option for england for a while yet, and is a handy enough bowler when he's on the money, but one feels that if he doesnt turn his performances around quickly his time may well be up.

 

[pup11]

For me Harmision is just not good enough to play international cricket, he is just not mentally tough enough to keep going at the highest level, he feels home-sick when he is on a tour and he gets frustrated pretty soon and starts showing negative body-language when things don't go his way, he has technical issues with his action and all but those are things that can be worked on but when a cricketer is not mentally strong to survive the hardships of being a professional international cricketer, then even heaps of talent won't help him, in Harmision's case he was never as good as he was made out to be, in some given conditions he is capable of bowling a hostile spell but that's it, he just lacks the consistency or accuracy to trouble batsmen at the top level, so he is (or should i say was, because i don't think many people rate him too highly nowadays) just highly overrated in my book.

 

[Manee]

Dennis Lillee (and Bob Willis, presumably quoting the same data) notes in his (their) book(s) that the ideal height for a fast bowler is between 5ft 9 and 6ft 4. Under 5ft 9 is too short to generate disconcerting bounce and over 6ft 4, and people tend to lose coordination.

Harmison has little coordination of his limbs when he bowls poorly. It would seem that a run of poor games has caused a change in his base action which has him pointing to second slip and having to put the ball on the spot. The timing of Harmison's action is all wrong too; subtly, it is visible that he is not really using his run up to the full potential and seems to be trying to shoulder the ball down whilst overcompensating for the front arm and trying to put it on the right spot rather than bowling it...

A tricky situation to say the least.

 

[Woodster]

I have generally stood by Harmison in the past, in the belief/hope he will return to the form of 2004, where contrary to what others say, he did bowl exceptionally well.

But everytime he is in the side there is always something that is not quite right and he is persevered with to no avail. Whether he is lacking match sharpness, is homesick, has technical issues, there is a list as long as you like of reasons/excuses why he is not delivering.

People, myself included, stick by him because of what he can offer. On the rare occasion he appears to relish bowling, rather than nervously running in and hoping it goes somewhere near the right area, he can be so difficult to keep out. His height producing prodigious bounce, the pace up around 90mph, it is a batsmans nightmare. However, these days are so infrequent England may have to cut their losses, sooner rather than later.

His latest showing in this Test was so frustrating. Averaging pace-wise just over 80mph! There are better options out there for England if we require a bowler at this pace, preferably one that swings/seams the ball and lands it in the right areas more frequently than Harmy.

It would still give me great pleasure though, to see him charge in again and unsettle batsman with quick deliveries. That kind of performance may be restricted to County Championship cricket soon.

 

[Richard]

Dennis Lillee (and Bob Willis, presumably quoting the same data) notes in his (their) book(s) that the ideal height for a fast bowler is between 5ft 9 and 6ft 4. Under 5ft 9 is too short to generate disconcerting bounce and over 6ft 4, and people tend to lose coordination.

Harmison has little coordination of his limbs when he bowls poorly. It would seem that a run of poor games has caused a change in his base action which has him pointing to second slip and having to put the ball on the spot. The timing of Harmison's action is all wrong too; subtly, it is visible that he is not really using his run up to the full potential and seems to be trying to shoulder the ball down whilst overcompensating for the front arm and trying to put it on the right spot rather than bowling it...

A tricky situation to say the least.

Interesting, a depth of analysis I've rarely if ever read before.

I somewhat doubt he'd be up to much had he 3 or 4 inches shorn, anyway, but the lack of coordination is hardly a big secret.

 

[BoyBrumby]

Dennis Lillee (and Bob Willis, presumably quoting the same data) notes in his (their) book(s) that the ideal height for a fast bowler is between 5ft 9 and 6ft 4. Under 5ft 9 is too short to generate disconcerting bounce and over 6ft 4, and people tend to lose coordination.

Harmison has little coordination of his limbs when he bowls poorly. It would seem that a run of poor games has caused a change in his base action which has him pointing to second slip and having to put the ball on the spot. The timing of Harmison's action is all wrong too; subtly, it is visible that he is not really using his run up to the full potential and seems to be trying to shoulder the ball down whilst overcompensating for the front arm and trying to put it on the right spot rather than bowling it...

A tricky situation to say the least.

McGrath, Gillespie, Ambrose, Walsh & Garner all seemed to cope pretty ok with being over 6' 4".

Funnily enough, WRT Harmy I remember him saying this: "I want to be bowling at 90 mph, not 80 mph. I've taken some steps back up the ladder but I'm not back to the top yet" (linky-poo) after the Windies series. One wonders why the sudden volte face?

 

[Jamee999]

Full-whack, aggressive, bouncy, fast Harmison is a good bowler. He can almost afford to be a little wayward, if he's bowling quickly, and putting in good bouncers, yorkers etc.

At 80mph, bowling long-hops outside off stump, he's pretty useless. In modern international cricket, if you want to bowl at 80mph, you need to have swing and be deadly accurate.