How Many Centuries Will Phil Hughes Score?

[Athlai]

I'd like Bell to have some arrogance.

Well if he wasn't so obviously dire then he very well could be.

Ohhhh I went there.

 

[Redbacks]

Being brought-up in Australia doesn't make you a better bowler than being brought-up in England.

Australian bowlers aren't simply of higher quality than English ones purely because they're Australian.

That's not what they teach us a school

Perhaps the absence of swing in Australian conditions is favourable during development as a state bowler will need to develop consistency or be exposed. An Anderson type bowler with an old ball downunder becomes easy pickings if the consistency doesn't hold up and the fear of the 'jaffa' every 6-12 balls is subdued.

 

[Redbacks]

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.

One things these tests can't reveal is the ability of self-deception, sure someone can determine the next number in a sequence but it falls down if you then exhibit conformational bias to an extreme level in your endeavours.

It's why no doubt some people cringe at nationalism, team following etc. because they essentialy require excluding something else to justify our faith in the concept, (in your case this may be rational though ), or a personal arrangement of facts that best satisfies our own opinions of our critical reasoning, rather than a direct search for 'truth' as you may put it

 

[Richard]

That's not what they teach us a school

I know - Australians who don't believe Australia > UK purely because that's the way it is are, in my experience, in a minority. Doesn't make the school of thought right though.

Perhaps the absence of swing in Australian conditions is favourable during development as a state bowler will need to develop consistency or be exposed. An Anderson type bowler with an old ball downunder becomes easy pickings if the consistency doesn't hold up and the fear of the 'jaffa' every 6-12 balls is subdued.

That's perfectly true, but the best bowlers whose principal weapon is swing are perfectly capable of getting the ball to do something off the pitch if there isn't any swing. Malcolm Marshall didn't exactly struggle in Australia, nor did Richard Hadlee, nor Wasim Akram... I could name any number of others.

 

[Burgey]

I know - Australians who don't believe Australia > UK purely because that's the way it is are, in my experience, in a minority. Doesn't make the school of thought right though.

Nor does it make it wrong...

 

[rivera213]

your posts are Sus dear!

Sus?

Well if he wasn't so obviously dire then he very well could be.

Ohhhh I went there.

Well he isn't dire. We've had plenty of dire batsmen though. He just for some reason has brain farts. In effect it's the same thing.

Although maybe not statistically true, it seems as though he gets himself out much more than the bowler getting him out. If Dale Steyn bows a 90mph ripper and takes off stump then there's nothing you can do, but Bell often edges or goes for too expansive a shot when the deliveries aren't worthy of a wicket.

It's annoying since aesthtically, he is 1 of the best. Similar to David Gower in that regard, though Gower was much better.

One things these tests can't reveal is the ability of self-deception, sure someone can determine the next number in a sequence but it falls down if you then exhibit conformational bias to an extreme level in your endeavours.

It's why no doubt some people cringe at nationalism, team following etc. because they essentialy require excluding something else to justify our faith in the concept, (in your case this may be rational though ), or a personal arrangement of facts that best satisfies our own opinions of our critical reasoning, rather than a direct search for 'truth' as you may put it

There's a whole different test for sports IQ.

I agree following a team, or being biased towards a particular country, can hinder genuine judgement but (and I can only speak for myself) I realize Pietersen is ****y whereas I get the feeling the general concensus in Australia is that Ponting ISN'T ****y.

I really think the majority of Australians (when it comes to sport) are ****y, that's the way they come off in interviews etc. Even Ian Thorpe spoke with an arrogant overtone and he's a glorified fish!

* BTW- the estimated average IQ per person in the UK is 100, in Australia it's 98 hence the 3-figured part which nobody seemed to pick up.

 

[Burgey]

Bell is one of those conundrums. He looks a million bucks technically, looks composed at the crease for the most part, but there's something missing that's stopping him being the complete package right now.

I wonder if he's too correct int he way he plays.

 

[Richard]

Nah, his shot-selection is just decent but far from outstanding. And as we know from many past experiences, shot-selection is far more important than technique and a faultless or near-faultless technique is little use with merely moderate shot-selection.

A technically average player like Gary Kirsten or even a merely pretty good one like Michael Atherton is streets ahead of the technically near-perfect Bell, and the only reason is because their shot-selection was so much better.

 

[Burgey]

Yeah, that's probably it.

 

[Richard]

Nor does it make it wrong...

That doesn't make it wrong - the fact that it's wrong makes it wrong.

 

[Son Of Coco]

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.

You're really naive man. Seriously. Wake up and smell the barby, blue.

Yes, you're right. I am naive, but then travelling to 30 countries will do that to you.

Agree with someone else here who said you sound eerily familiar...

 

[andyc]

Hey, I'm a ****

Fixed.

 

[vic_orthdox]

Fixed.

Andy, please refrain from abusing other members. Just because you don't agree with him, and he has very parochial viewpoints, doesn't mean that he doesn't have the right to post here.

 

[Athlai]

Well he isn't dire. We've had plenty of dire batsmen though. He just for some reason has brain farts. In effect it's the same thing.

Although maybe not statistically true, it seems as though he gets himself out much more than the bowler getting him out. If Dale Steyn bows a 90mph ripper and takes off stump then there's nothing you can do, but Bell often edges or goes for too expansive a shot when the deliveries aren't worthy of a wicket.

It's annoying since aesthtically, he is 1 of the best. Similar to David Gower in that regard, though Gower was much better.

One word:

Ganga

 

[Son Of Coco]

Bell is one of those conundrums. He looks a million bucks technically, looks composed at the crease for the most part, but there's something missing that's stopping him being the complete package right now.

I wonder if he's too correct int he way he plays.

To me Bell always looked unsure of whether he was good enough to be there in the first place. When he walked out to bat in The Ashes in 06 he almost looked apologetic. He obviously has some talent, but mentally I think maybe he's lacking a bit of belief.

 

[Uppercut]

To me Bell always looked unsure of whether he was good enough to be there in the first place. When he walked out to bat in The Ashes in 06 he almost looked apologetic. He obviously has some talent, but mentally I think maybe he's lacking a bit of belief.

That's the popular opinion of Bell- personally i think he's just not very good, more prone to making mistakes than others when faced with good bowling. It's not a technical problem, he just doesn't have the consistent ability to get to 100 without hitting one to a fielder.

The other thing that confuses me a bit is when pundits say things like, "He's got the technique, so he just needs to get the mental side of his game sorted out and he'll be fine." Mental problems are invariably harder to sort out than technical ones, and I'd much rather they chose someone whose head is in the right place and worked on the technical side of his game than someone whose head is ****ed but is technically perfect.

 

[vic_orthdox]

That's the popular opinion of Bell- personally i think he's just not very good, more prone to making mistakes than others when faced with good bowling. It's not a technical problem, he just doesn't have the consistent ability to get to 100 without hitting one to a fielder.

The other thing that confuses me a bit is when pundits say things like, "He's got the technique, so he just needs to get the mental side of his game sorted out and he'll be fine." Mental problems are invariably harder to sort out than technical ones, and I'd much rather they chose someone whose head is in the right place and worked on the technical side of his game than someone whose head is ****ed but is technically perfect.

They aren't two independent variables. The more tight your technique, the more that you tend to trust it. Bell doesn't trust his own game, it's how he gets out in front of the wicket so often forcing the pace. And people find that annoying and frustrating, because people with a technique not nearly as tight manage to find that trust in their own game and technique.

 

[Burgey]

That doesn't make it wrong - the fact that it's wrong makes it wrong.

Nah, it's right. Your ****ty climate has a lot to do with it imo.

(Runs off to let water out of flooding pool)

 

[Son Of Coco]

That's the popular opinion of Bell- personally i think he's just not very good, more prone to making mistakes than others when faced with good bowling. It's not a technical problem, he just doesn't have the consistent ability to get to 100 without hitting one to a fielder.

The other thing that confuses me a bit is when pundits say things like, "He's got the technique, so he just needs to get the mental side of his game sorted out and he'll be fine." Mental problems are invariably harder to sort out than technical ones, and I'd much rather they chose someone whose head is in the right place and worked on the technical side of his game than someone whose head is ****ed but is technically perfect.

I wasn't aware of that to be honest. I don't take a hell of a lot of notice of what Bell's up to unless he's playing against Australia.

Personally I think not having enough faith in yourself and your ability is a pathway to other mental issues that will ultimately affect your game. His technique never looked amazing either though in my opinion. Certainly didn't stand out from anyone else batting to me.

 

[Son Of Coco]

They aren't two independent variables. The more tight your technique, the more that you tend to trust it. Bell doesn't trust his own game, it's how he gets out in front of the wicket so often forcing the pace. And people find that annoying and frustrating, because people with a technique not nearly as tight manage to find that trust in their own game and technique.

I was just trying to think of how to say something similar to this in the post above. Was thinking of a game where he seemed to be going along ok and then hit one in the air straight to Ponting (I think) at short cover on about 50. Came out of nowhere.

I don't think Bell knows what approach to take and tries them all.