Why Don’t I care more?

[Jamee999]

Not possible he could have improved as a spinner?

Oh, no, wait, I forgot that rule of life - a player's ability is decided on whatever small sample size Richard first sees (or reads the scorecard), and then they stay at that level of performance for life. Obviously.

 

[sledger]

Yeah, I think it's fair enough to form a negative opinion of a player, but to begrudge him any further success simply because you once thought he was rubbish is a bit off for mine. That said, if Richard does still view him as rubbish (and he obviously does) then I suppose it's fair enough. Raises an interesting question though, Richard, what would it take for a player you once wrote off to come back and get you to change your mind? Just out of interest. Seemed to remember you used to not rate Chris Tremlett at all, but then changed your views..

 

[Richard]

Not possible he could have improved as a spinner?

Oh, no, wait, I forgot that rule of life - a player's ability is decided on whatever small sample size Richard first sees (or reads the scorecard), and then they stay at that level of performance for life. Obviously.

Actually you forgot something far more real - the fact that just because lots of people say a player has improved based on a small sample size of improved figures, that doesn't actually mean they have.

I've said it a good few times - Hauritz is a nothing bowler now, same way he was a nothing bowler at every other point in his career that I've seen him in. Oh, AFAIC, of course.

 

[Richard]

Yeah, I think it's fair enough to form a negative opinion of a player, but to begrudge him any further success simply because you once thought he was rubbish is a bit off for mine. That said, if Richard does still view him as rubbish (and he obviously does) then I suppose it's fair enough. Raises an interesting question though, Richard, what would it take for a player you once wrote off to come back and get you to change your mind? Just out of interest. Seemed to remember you used to not rate Chris Tremlett at all, but then changed your views..

Well, I suppose I thought Tremlett was a bit of a waste of space for a while, and I certainly still don't think he's that good as things stand now. But I've been hoping, for 3-4 years, that he might, maybe, become very good. However, the years are falling by like the rain, and it's getting close to a now-or-never situation.

I tend to try not to write players off completely - ie, say they've no hope, ever, of being particularly good - because cricket's a very strange game and occasionally even the most awful players can make vast improvements. Certainly plenty of people tend to view me as "writing off" players who in reality I've done nothing of the sort, because of the strength of condemnation I tend to offer poor-quality players. Equally, IMO most people tend to change their mind on players too quickly. It generally takes a substantial period of good\poor performance before I'm going to decide that things have changed for any given player, especially if it's been preceded by a lengthy period of poor\good performance. Very often, in my perception, it results in me not getting things wrong that others do having jumped the gun.

Others view it as fence-sitting and insist that your arse gets sore the more you do of it. But it keeps me perfectly happy.

 

[sledger]

Well, I suppose I thought Tremlett was a bit of a waste of space for a while, and I certainly still don't think he's that good as things stand now. But I've been hoping, for 3-4 years, that he might, maybe, become very good. However, the years are falling by like the rain, and it's getting close to a now-or-never situation.

I tend to try not to write players off completely - ie, say they've no hope, ever, of being particularly good - because cricket's a very strange game and occasionally even the most awful players can make vast improvements. Certainly plenty of people tend to view me as "writing off" players who in reality I've done nothing of the sort, because of the strength of condemnation I tend to offer poor-quality players. Equally, IMO most people tend to change their mind on players too quickly. It generally takes a substantial period of good\poor performance before I'm going to decide that things have changed for any given player, especially if it's been preceded by a lengthy period of poor\good performance. Very often, in my perception, it results in me not getting things wrong that others do having jumped the gun.

Others view it as fence-sitting and insist that your arse gets sore the more you do of it. But it keeps me perfectly happy.

Fair enough, one does get the feeling that perhaps his time has passed, he seems to struggle a great deal with injuries, which have obviously hampered his development and opportunities massively. You never know though, all it would take would be one full season without injury and a string of good performances to make him a strong candidate for selection, in my book anyway.

 

[Pothas]

Hmm, i would say I find this Australian side quite bland if we are to talk about characters compared to sides of the past tbh. With the exception of Watson, Ponting and Siddle and quite possibly Clarke, its hard to see where the charisma comes from. But each person has their own preference I guess.

Anyhow, cant really say that I've given a toss about charisma tbh. I'd just rather watch two extremely talented teams play each other and exhibit some of their extraordinary skills. Yes its great to have characters like Flintoff and Warne but at the end of the day would you rather watch Tendulkar bat or Flintoff?

Tendulkars batting has charisma, this is enough, none of Engands batsman (apart from KP) have this

 

[Pothas]

Fair enough, one does get the feeling that perhaps his time has passed, he seems to struggle a great deal with injuries, which have obviously hampered his development and opportunities massively. You never know though, all it would take would be one full season without injury and a string of good performances to make him a strong candidate for selection, in my book anyway.

Am really fearing for Tremlett's career now, he has always had injury problems but he has got so few wickets the last couple of years and rarely plays two consecutive games. Could have been a pretty decent test match bowler if he had stayed fit, could have been really good if he added a bit more pace and agression. Now I am more concerned with him even managing to be sucesfull at county level.

 

[Frakstar]

Not really. A person can't be a joke, TBH. Have a joke, sure, but I don't even do that very often.

A comment which expresses a personal feeling. You can't really argue against it, you can just say your feelings are different. I prefer to see rubbish players shown to be rubbish ones, not to be made to look better than they are, personally. Obviously, some people think differently, but that's their choice, not mine.

Not that I want to get into an argument Richard, but surely you would have to acknowledge that Haurrie has at the very least improved his bowling in the last few years. I would have even agreed 4/5 years ago he was downright rubbish, but he has now at the very least turned himself into a servicable test bowler, light years away from being rubbish.

 

[Richard]

No, I don't, as a matter of fact. As I said, every time I've watched Hauritz it's been the same story - his bowling has offered almost no threat whatsoever, even on a turning deck.

I've said it a fair few times in recent months, but if Hauritz continues to play Test cricket and batting against him reaches the standard seen at domestic level, his Test average will eventually move up toward the 50 mark, which is where it belongs.

 

[GIMH]

I've not seen him bowl that much like, but in our second dig at Lord's I thought he bowled really well

 

[Frakstar]

Well, we are all entitled to our opinions but 10 wickets @ 32 seems to me, to be quite a decent effort.

 

[Richard]

I've not seen him bowl that much like, but in our second dig at Lord's I thought he bowled really well

I thought he bowled reasonably, far better than I've ever seen him bowl at any other time, but he still managed to concede ~5-an-over.

 

[Richard]

Well, we are all entitled to our opinions but 10 wickets @ 32 seems to me, to be quite a decent effort.

It's a non-disastrous set of figures, but like his figures in 2008/09, and those in the single game in 2004/05, it flatters him enormously. He's bowled nothing like that well, and had he a) been played more competently by top-order batsmen and b) had less chance to bowl at tailenders his average would be around about the 50-60 mark.

 

[GIMH]

Yeah, but we did go on a declaration charge. Early on he had us in a bit of a shaky spot, got Strauss with a beauty

 

[Richard]

Yeah, but we did go on a declaration charge. Early on he had us in a bit of a shaky spot, got Strauss with a beauty

That Strauss ball is about the only Test wicket I've seen him get by genuinely bowling a good ball, rather than having batsmen make gross errors. The point was even despite bowling decently, he was still unable to punish England's quest for quick runs by taking 4-5 wickets (as, say, a MacGill would almost certainly have done, and in fact did, several times), nor stop them getting said quick runs.

 

[GIMH]

Got Cook with a good 'un in the same innings as I remember it.

He's not a world-class spinner but I do think you understate him somewhat, each to their own though

 

[Richard]

Got Cook with a good 'un in the same innings as I remember it.

As I said at the time - decent batsmen should not be expected to miss straight balls at 50mph unless others immeditately previously have been ripping square. And, purely and simply, they weren't - Hauritz hadn't even bowled that session. Cook just missed one he should've hit. Nothing good bowling about that wicket IMO.

 

[inbox24]

All it highlights is the ineptitude of the English batsman. A bowler like Hauritz should never be allowed to take wickets on any pitch against a test nation.

 

[DingDong]

Geez, even IPL was better than this crappy series...

 

[Burgey]

Got Cook with a good 'un in the same innings as I remember it.

He's not a world-class spinner but I do think you understate him somewhat, each to their own though

Yeah. TBF to Hauritz he's done what's been asked of him this tour, and has bowled as well as Swann for the most part.