Ashes Blog - http://www.cricketweb.net/blog/asheshq/

[Uppercut]

Puts far too negative a spin on things for me. Yes, he's only taken six wickets in a tour match, but if one were pro Harmison one could equally say he's taken double the amount of either of his seam rivals have managed in their last outings. &, whilst it's obviously UC's own opinion, I really don't think of Harmison as a man who doesn't ever make one feel he's going to take test wickets when he comes on. It becomes immediately apparent if it's good Harmy or bad Harmy who's turned up when he's bowled his first couple of deliveries, but he has taken over 200 of them, so the hope is always there in my mind. It's a faint hope often tho and picking him is really dependent on whether the selectors are minded to gamble.

I think good Harmy is a bit overrated anyway. Typical Good Harmy bowling is what he did against South Africa last year, making batsmen uncomfortable, taking an important wicket or two and ending up with respectable figures like 4/120. It's been three years since he took a five wicket haul. Good Sidebottom bowling, on the other hand, is taking piles and piles of wickets with lethal inswing.

My question is, why gamble on Harmison playing well when you get much better value on Sidebottom? Sidey's surely more likely to hit form- after all, his peak was barely a year ago. And not only that, but if he does hit form, he'll be far more dangerous than an on-form Harmison will be. The value just isn't there with punting on Harmison.

Could make the same argument re: Onions if you prefer.

 

[BoyBrumby]

I think good Harmy is a bit overrated anyway. Typical Good Harmy bowling is what he did against South Africa last year, making batsmen uncomfortable, taking an important wicket or two and ending up with respectable figures like 4/120. It's been three years since he took a five wicket haul. Good Sidebottom bowling, on the other hand, is taking piles and piles of wickets with lethal inswing.

My question is, why gamble on Harmison playing well when you get much better value on Sidebottom? Sidey's surely more likely to hit form- after all, his peak was barely a year ago. And not only that, but if he does hit form, he'll be far more dangerous than an on-form Harmison will be. The value just isn't there with punting on Harmison.

Could make the same argument re: Onions if you prefer.

As I intimated, it depends entirely what slant one wishes to put on things. If I were anti Sid (I'm not, but for the purposes of illustration) I could equally point out that his reputation rests entirely on tests against the West Indies and New Zealand; against better quality oppostion (India, Sri Lanka & SA) his figures are mediocre at best. There's also the issue of his back and weight; bowling top pace seems to do horrible things to his back, weight comes on, pace goes down, swing negated.

Onions has a strong case for selection, he is the leading FC wicket taker in the country after all, but has been outbowled by Harmison in this match and, worringly, hasn't hurried the batsmen in the second innings as he did in the first. A pessimistic reading might be that having had a look at him and deduced he's faster than he looks his shock value has been reduced.

I'm not advocating Harmison's selection, I hasten to add, but I don't subscribe to what I'll call the Dickinson fallacy: that he's never been any good. He supports this by taking out the games where he's performed well and citing the subsequent mediocrity. It's the worst kind of reductive thinking because it's true of any player: good performances are dismissed as aberrations, bad ones that fit his position seized on as irrefutable proof. Sentences like "Steve Harmison, for all his supposed pace and bounce, isn't a man I ever feel is going to take any wickets when he comes on to bowl", seem to sail dangerously close to this.

 

[Uppercut]

As I intimated, it depends entirely what slant one wishes to put on things. If I were anti Sid (I'm not, but for the purposes of illustration) I could equally point out that his reputation rests entirely on tests against the West Indies and New Zealand; against better quality oppostion (India, Sri Lanka & SA) his figures are mediocre at best. There's also the issue of his back and weight; bowling top pace seems to do horrible things to his back, weight comes on, pace goes down, swing negated.

Onions has a strong case for selection, he is the leading FC wicket taker in the country after all, but has been outbowled by Harmison in this match and, worringly, hasn't hurried the batsmen in the second innings as he did in the first. A pessimistic reading might be that having had a look at him and deduced he's faster than he looks his shock value has been reduced.

I'm not advocating Harmison's selection, I hasten to add, but I don't subscribe to what I'll call the Dickinson fallacy: that he's never been any good. He supports this by taking out the games where he's performed well and citing the subsequent mediocrity. It's the worst kind of reductive thinking because it's true of any player: good performances are dismissed as aberrations, bad ones that fit his position seized on as irrefutable proof. Sentences like "Steve Harmison, for all his supposed pace and bounce, isn't a man I ever feel is going to take any wickets when he comes on to bowl", seem to sail dangerously close to this.

The reason I don't feel he's going to take any wickets is because he so rarely does. I'm not in agreement with Dicko that Harmison was never any good, but it was so long ago. Some people need to get over the fact that he's not who he was in 2005. When I talk about never feeling like Harmison will take a wicket, I'm referring to the present. Five years ago was a different (and completely irrelevant) story.

 

[BoyBrumby]

The reason I don't feel he's going to take any wickets is because he so rarely does. I'm not in agreement with Dicko that Harmison was never any good, but it was so long ago. Some people need to get over the fact that he's not who he was in 2005. When I talk about never feeling like Harmison will take a wicket, I'm referring to the present. Five years ago was a different (and completely irrelevant) story.

Fair enough and flashes have been thin on the ground since, yes. His selection depends whether one's minded to gamble, as I said. I personally wouldn't be because of what's gone before but equally it seems counter intuitive to say a bowler who has outperformed both of his main rivals doesn't ever give you the feeling he'll take wickets because, if he doesn't, why do they?

 

[Uppercut]

Fair enough and flashes have been thin on the ground since, yes. His selection depends whether one's minded to gamble, as I said. I personally wouldn't be because of what's gone before but equally it seems counter intuitive to say a bowler who has outperformed both of his main rivals doesn't ever give you the feeling he'll take wickets because, if he doesn't, why do they?

In Onions's case, because he's outbowled Harmison comprehensively for Durham all season. In Sidebottom's case, I don't really, but if he was fit then he certainly would, and if you're going to gamble on someone's fitness why not do it on Sidey's? He's the better bowler.

But I'd take Onions.

 

[Top_Cat]

From what I saw of the Lions game, Harmi looked like he was carrying. Any word on an injury of some sort?

 

[Uppercut]

From what I saw of the Lions game, Harmi looked like he was carrying. Any word on an injury of some sort?

Harmy just looks like that.

 

[BoyBrumby]

From what I saw of the Lions game, Harmi looked like he was carrying. Any word on an injury of some sort?

Said in the commentary that he was stretching his neck at one stage, but I've heard nothing official.

 

[Top_Cat]

Nah was more referring to his big drops in pace, etc. I mean, I'd be hesitant to pick him at Cardiff fully fit but if he's injured too, definite no.

 

[Uppercut]

Nah was more referring to his big drops in pace, etc. I mean, I'd be hesitant to pick him at Cardiff fully fit but if he's injured too, definite no.

Yeah, that's just Harmison. He's done that in every match he's played for years.

 

[BoyBrumby]

Nah was more referring to his big drops in pace, etc. I mean, I'd be hesitant to pick him at Cardiff fully fit but if he's injured too, definite no.

Yeah, pace did go down but he's a quick who's north of 30 now, some dip is probably inevitable. Never been what you'd call a natural athlete like Lee either.

Wouldn't be in my team either tho, no.

 

[Richard]

I'm not advocating Harmison's selection, I hasten to add, but I don't subscribe to what I'll call the Dickinson fallacy: that he's never been any good. He supports this by taking out the games where he's performed well and citing the subsequent mediocrity.

In reality, of course, I do nothing of the sort, but some will never let the truth get in the way of a good seeing what they want to see.

 

[GIMH]

Latest update, on the England squad

Cricket Web - Ashes HQ: The Lucky Thirteen

 

[pasag]

The five greatest Ashes ads

 

[Uppercut]

The five greatest Ashes ads

Some classics in there. Love this one:

YouTube - Sky Sports Ashes 2009 Advert

 

[superkingdave]

Love the big warnie one..was that for 0607?

 

[vogue]

Latest update, on the England squad

Cricket Web - Ashes HQ: The Lucky Thirteen

Dont usually post about cricket(cos everyone else who does post in here knows everything and I feel intimidated,to say the least!)... but have just read this piece by Martyn,and a few of the other blogs,and for me its a good idea cos I can keep up with whats going on with the Ashes,without appearing too dim! So shall be reading any others that are posted as the Ashes gets going....be a bit more educated about the game by August!...

 

[Uppercut]

http://www.cricketweb.net/blog/asheshq/14.php

What to expect from the English commentary. If in doubt, mention 2005.

 

[GIMH]

Enjoyed that, dunno what the '06-07' reference was meant to be about though

 

[superkingdave]

Couple more

- Any time a substitute fielder comes on the commentators will reference Gary Pratt's run out of Ricky in 2005.
- Any time a batsmen is asked if he is okay after being hit commentators will reference the great sportsmanship of the 2005 series.