I'm a little reluctant to call swing bowlers unlucky for the amount batsmen play and miss them because it generally shows they're bowling too short. If he was getting dropped all over the place like Sidebottom in 2007 it would be a different story.
Sometimes, he has been. I too am reluctant to call, well, any bowlers really, unlucky for getting constant play-and-misses, because as I've noted, the best bowlers also get that all the time, but they still get the figures in the end. If you're eliciting irregularly-common play-and-misses you need to bowl fuller and, most of all, straighter. Because a play-and-miss to a straight ball = out. Steyn, as a matter of fact, has been something of a master of this in recent times.
Anderson has done it - he just hasn't done it as often (anywhere near so in fact) as Steyn has. Anderson has done it a couple of times, Steyn eight or nine.
Nah, he's ****y & it'll get worse unless we give him a lesson.
Not from what I've seen of him. But maybe he's appeared more on your TV's since he started his county stint. I think some people confuse ****y with confident though. If he wasn't confident he wouldn't be there.
Yeah because players ALWAYS say publicly what they're thinking privately.
Against Aussie state bowlers, most of whom aren't too good and wouldn't get a test place in your second XI. Let's not kid ourselves.He may not have faced the "quality" of these (english)bowlers, but he has performed in almost every match he has ever played; and most of these matches were played against Australian bowlers. Is my memory a little hazy or has it not been proven again and again and again and again over at least 20 years (and for most of the last 100 years) that Australian bowlers are of a higher "quality"?
Well, that's certainly a convincing argument. If you're going to attack the guy's character, at least back it up with some kind of evidence.Nah, he's ****y & it'll get worse unless we give him a lesson.
Tendulkar is confident.
I don't mind ****iness, hell Pietersen is a ****y bastard too.
But Hughes is as ****y after only 3 tests & some big innings against mediocre bowlers.
Yeah because players ALWAYS say publicly what they're thinking privately.
Nah, he's ****y & it'll get worse unless we give him a lesson.
Tendulkar is confident.
I don't mind ****iness, hell Pietersen is a ****y bastard too.
But Hughes is as ****y after only 3 tests & some big innings against mediocre bowlers.
Yeah because players ALWAYS say publicly what they're thinking privately.
Against Aussie state bowlers, most of whom aren't too good and wouldn't get a test place in your second XI. Let's not kid ourselves.
Also, what does the past have to do with the present?
As far as I know, Lillee, Thomson, McGrath, Gillespe, Warne have all retired. Or is my memory a bit hazy?
And come on, If you saw Anderson's bowling over the last 18 months you'd concede he is 1 quality bowler nowadays. I'd take Mitchell Johnson over him all things considered, but Anderson is WAY above any other Aussie bowler of the present so Hughes WILL be tested.
And, btw- I'm a Phillip Hughes fan. He showed great character in South Africa. But Matthew Hayden only averaged 34.50 in England and in 2001 & 2005, he was far more acomplished a batsman than Hughes is atm.
sounds correct even if it means sfa.
Anderson has bowled well of late, but you're making him sound like the best thing to come out of England since Grand Designs.
If you're not good enough to play for Australia you're not good enough to play for England. Test-class bowler is Test-class bowler whoever you're playing for. Amjad Khan may have been picked for England but he wasn't good enough to be picked for England. Just because England may mistakenly pick loads of nothing bowlers doesn't mean they're all good enough to be picked.
I won't get into the what I may consider laughable about that statement in its enitirety, except to say that I was mainly having a dig at the English selectors for picking rubbish bowlers (Pattinson anyone).
I'd go as far as to say that Bichel or Kasper would have got a game for England when they were 12th man or missing out for Australia so that statement's not entirely true. Some countries will have a wealth of talent in one area at some stages when others are struggling. Just like the Aussies would have loved some of the left over Windies quicks in the 80's I'd imagine.
Are you thick or something?
No, because it's abudently clear to anyone with a 3-figured IQ.
That's clever, did you think of that by yourself?
Too late.
THINKING privately.
Looks like he's not the only ****y one. You've got every reason to be though I suppose....
Just out of interest...how do you know what he's saying privately?
Na, Aussie state bowlers are everybit as bad as our career county bowlers. No county/state cricket without it's international players is any good.
Anderson has bowled excellent of late. Anyone who knows anything about swing bowling would agree. The fact he bowled on dead wickets in the West Indies in the winter has messed up his stats.
Oooohhhh! We've got one of the snidey ones!Are you thick or something?
Even for an Aussie.
It's abundently clear he's ****y- but then Australian modest = everyone else's ****y so it's all relative.
No, because it's abudently clear to anyone with a 3-figured IQ.
That's clever, did you think of that by yourself?
THINKING privately.
It's just what sportsmen do.
1 example, Adam Gilchrist never said anything about Muralidaran's action being suspect while he was playing and the second he retires from international cricket, he admits he was thinking it.
Are you really that naive to think what people say on camera is the truth?
Na, Aussie state bowlers are everybit as bad as our career county bowlers. No county/state cricket without it's international players is any good.
Don't sugar coat Aussie state cricket. It's everybit as bad as our county stuff, the difference is English people admit it.
Anderson has bowled excellent of late. Anyone who knows anything about swing bowling would agree. The fact he bowled on dead wickets in the West Indies in the winter has messed up his stats.
When you take into account that people equate a batsman's average of 45 being the "old" 40, you have to take off 5 runs from the bowler's average to be consistent.
While Anderson doesn't have Steyn or Johnson stats (and I'm pretty sure I never said he was a world beater, just that he'll test all batsmen in England when it swings) his stats are very good nevertheless.
Have a guess at what the WORST thing to come out of England is...
* A clue. It begins with an "A" and rhymes with Bostralia.
Have a guess at what the WORST thing to come out of England is...
* A clue. It begins with an "A" and rhymes with Bostralia.
got to love the pre Ashes prejudice
I don't know what Hughes is thinking privately (I never said I did), but sportsmen don't admit what they're really thinking for the majority of the time. Sportsmen/women are actually coached into what type of things to say to the media (in England) and more importantly what NOT to say.
Yeah, just thought I'd hot it up a bit with so many Aussies on the forum.
I haven't questioned Hughes mental ability in that regard. I think he showed great mental strength to come back from the first over duck in South Africa.
Indeed; we more semites in the Three Lions! The campaign starts here.
Ha ha, never even noticed that typo.
your posts are Sus dear!Ha ha, never even noticed that typo.
