Sajid Mahmood vs Mark Gillespie

[Flem274*]

These two 140+ lads have often been picked for their respective teams to cries of misery from fans. Lethal on their day, as Pakistan and South Africa discovered, these two never really turned it on for more than a couple of innings in their careers.

So, if you had to pick one, who would you pick?

Was trying to think of other similar bowlers with similar careers and CW opinions of them so feel free to bring some other names out. For this poll though its just the two of them.

 

[DingDong]

I wouldn't call Gillespie a 140+ bowler. he hit 140 once in a while but not very often.

 

[Zinzan]

I wouldn't call Gillespie a 140+ bowler. he hit 140 once in a while but not very often.

That's not fair Ding Dong, like Patel, he always tried his best

 

[Zinzan]

On the thread itself, bloody hard to say considering both are so utterly ordinary

 

[DIRK-NANNES]

Gillespie easily
He may have not won matches with the ball, but he has with the bat

 

[Hurricane]

I will just comment on Gillespie. He was a proponent of bowling fast low full tosses at the death because they couldn't be hit for six. They used to go for 1 or 2 every ball and he would go for ten off his over and the commentators would praise his bowling and his tactic. I don't see anyone else in the world bowling fast full tosses. I wonder why.
Why not bowl a yorker or at least try to.
I watched him bowl at a game in Queenstown once and watching live he was noticeably quicker than our other bowlers that day. But the batsman just picked him off every time he bowled a bad ball.
He is also famous for going through lots of pairs of shoes - he has to wrap tape around his shoes to stop them from splitting and they still split on him.

 

[four_or_six]

I'm sure there's still a fair bit more to come from Saj Mahmood (and Plunkett for that matter) as he was picked so early. I'd have him.

 

[andyc]

Gillespie. Saj was really ****ing ordinary from what I saw the last Ashes series, just really pointless stuff.

 

[Smudge]

No contest.

"Guess you better slow your Mustang down".

 

[SioneNZ]

I'd go with Gillespie, on his day he was quite good but other than that his bowling was rubbish. From what I have seen from Sajid Mahmood he is a very ordinary bowler as well.

 

[pasag]

When I first got foxtel, turned the TV on and the first thing I saw was Mahmood bowling beautifully vs Pakistan. Getting swing, pretty accurate and taking wickets. Looked like a real talent. Turned out to be the exception to the rule. Gillespie pretty easily.

 

[PhoenixFire]

I cannot bring myself to vote for Mahmood even though I've only seen Gillespie bowl about 5 times.

 

[_Ed_]

Gillespie easily
He may have not won matches with the ball, but he has with the bat

That is true.

 

[Pratters]

Mark Gillespie, purely based on football skills.

 

[sledger]

Mark Gillespie is pretty darn mediocre, which is several steps up from Saj Mahmood.

 

[Manee]

mark gillespie is pretty darn mediocre, which is several steps up from saj mahmood.

awta.

 

[BoyBrumby]

Gillespie for my money. Always love tubby quicks. Bowls full (of length, not lard), swings it at a decent lick.

Sajid favours more of a scattergun approach.

 

[GIMH]

I'm sure there's still a fair bit more to come from Saj Mahmood (and Plunkett for that matter) as he was picked so early. I'd have him.

He's 28, though, hard to see him improving too much. Plunkett is a bit younger so there might be hope for him yet though he doesn't seem to have done much these past couple of years.

Mahmood's Test debut was great, he took about 3-9 in his first spell. Shame about the rest.