Do New Zealand have the worst luck with fast bowlers?

[NUFAN]

I'd never even heard of Bosch until now. Handy first Test wicket it must be said BC Lara.

 

[Top_Cat]

Yeah but so has Brett Lee always done - heck I remember you saying Greg Blewett did so a little while back. Ngam certainly had some fine natural assets but he's far from the first very-quick bowler to excite loads of people - many turn-out to be nothing of note and from what I saw of Ngam I reckon he'd have been more likely to go that way than become top-class.

Admittedly I didn't see a lot of him (no-one outside of SA did, really) but what I did see, his ability to hit the seam rather than raw pace was what made him a bit special. We'll never know now, of course.

And Bosch was a sad case indeed. Bizarre action, a more upright version of Malcolm Marshall, all arms flailing everywhere. My goodness was he sharp, though.

 

[Top_Cat]

I'd never even heard of Bosch until now. Handy first Test wicket it must be said BC Lara.

Back then, meh.

 

[Amobokobokoboko]

I didn't read the entire thread, but as Nz doesn't have that many world class cricket players like e.g. Australia, SA, ... An injury by one of the better players leaves a massive gab in the starting XI

 

[Craig]

Hadlee R > Kapil Dev though I think was the point he was making. Kapil like Hadlee R stands-out by miles from the crowd in terms of his own country, but India's best was merely very good; New Zealand's best was up with the finest ever.

True, but it is hardly like New Zealand were the West Indies of the 70's/80's where they had so many fast bowler's it wasn't funny. Imagine how good Daniel or Clarke would of been as Test bowlers if they weren't West Indian?. Anyway Hadlee retired 19 years ago, I don't see how that can be relevant to this current era.

 

[Migara]

I know little about Schultz but there's far from strong evidence of how good Ngam might've been

Schultz was left arm terrifyingly fast bowler, match Donald in his prime ball to ball with speeds. Schultz was less hittable of the two because I have seen Ngam went option less when Jayawardane launched a blistering counter attack. Never seen Schultz gone option less in his short stint, albeit bowling to two better players of pace than Jayawardane (de Silva and Jayasuriya). If Schultz did continue well, SAF would have taken #1 spot in the world toppling Aussies.

 

[aussie]

No Chris Harris?

Wasn't test quality..

 

[aussie]

Schultz was left arm terrifyingly fast bowler, match Donald in his prime ball to ball with speeds. Schultz was less hittable of the two because I have seen Ngam went option less when Jayawardane launched a blistering counter attack. Never seen Schultz gone option less in his short stint, albeit bowling to two better players of pace than Jayawardane (de Silva and Jayasuriya). If Schultz did continue well, SAF would have taken #1 spot in the world toppling Aussies.

Na. I saw Schultz once vs AUS 97 in 1 test. He looked superb, still have the tape of that test. But overall he wouldn't have made a difference, since there was many occassions between 1993/94 to 2005/06 (before SA actually beat AUS in 08/09) when Donald & co would run through AUS batsmen. But the Saffies batsmen weakness againts spin would then be always exposed by Warne - most famously Daryll Cullinan.

 

[Richard]

Wasn't test quality..

Nor really were Allott or McMillan. But both of them could've been in my estimation, and so could Harris.

 

[Richard]

Na. I saw Schultz once vs AUS 97 in 1 test. He looked superb, still have the tape of that test. But overall he wouldn't have made a difference, since there was many occassions between 1993/94 to 2005/06 (before SA actually beat AUS in 08/09) when Donald & co would run through AUS batsmen. But the Saffies batsmen weakness againts spin would then be always exposed by Warne - most famously Daryll Cullinan.

And their inability to catch...........

 

[bryce]

Nor really were Allott or McMillan. But both of them could've been in my estimation, and so could Harris.

There is no doubt than Shayne O'Connor was Test quality however, he was missed perhaps more than anyone.
Last season there was this South African playing in my team and he was really harping on about Ngam, sorta made me realise why he was elevated to the national side so hastily. Personally never seen him bowl though would love to see a video, but my general thought is that the actual magnitude of his talent was never really known outside of South Africa

 

[aussie]

Nor really were Allott or McMillan. But both of them could've been in my estimation, and so could Harris.

The reason i say i dont think Harris was test quality is that well, i dont recall him ever having a settled batting position for NZ in tests. Plus his bowling always looked below test standard.

As the title of this thread goes, injuries prevented Allot from becoming a top bowler surely?. He probably was peaking after the 99 WC, then he kept getting injured..

Harsh on McMillan uncle Rich. He wasn't a world beater, but he was a very solid lower-middle order bat by NZ standards at least..

 

[Days of Grace]

Even now, Taylor, Ryder and McMillan at 4,5 and 6 would be THE AWESOME.

 

[DaRick]

I would say yes.

In about a decade, the careers truncated substantially through injury include Shayne O' Connor (who was dangerous in the right conditions), Simon Doull (who was fairly lively), Geoff Allott, Daryl Tuffey (although form slumps, off-field problems and typical condition-reliance didn't help him), Dion Nash, Chris Cairns (although he could spray the ball a bit), James Franklin (inconsistent and erratic though he could be) and of course, Shane Bond.

I think I know why, though.

Doull said something, not too long ago, about the wickets that they used to bowl on during practice. Apparently the turf on which they bowled on during practice was quite different to the turf out on the field. Their feet and bodies struggled to adjust, so they suffered more injuries. They're changing that now, apparently. Maybe that is why Tim Southee tends not to get injured all that much.

 

[Richard]

There is no doubt than Shayne O'Connor was Test quality however, he was missed perhaps more than anyone.

In case anyone should be in any doubt I certainly wasn't suggesting he unequivocally wasn't. I was however suggesting that he was a lesser bowler than the likes of Nash, Cairns and Doull.

Last season there was this South African playing in my team and he was really harping on about Ngam, sorta made me realise why he was elevated to the national side so hastily. Personally never seen him bowl though would love to see a video, but my general thought is that the actual magnitude of his talent was never really known outside of South Africa

I saw him bowl in 2000/01 and I could certainly see why he excited people but he really didn't bowl all that well - he just benefited from some poor batting from some weak batsmen. I remember Tillakaratne Dilshan being stupid enough to stick his tongue out at Ngam and Ngam knocked him over within a couple of deliveries with an yorker that was like an exocet, but didn't really swing at all - a better player could've kept it out.

As I say, don't anyone get the idea that Ngam was hopeless but he certainly never really demonstrated any level of excellence, even very briefly. I'd expect someone who was capable of getting fit at all to do that. I'm less sure about his potential than plenty seem to be.

 

[Richard]

The reason i say i dont think Harris was test quality is that well, i dont recall him ever having a settled batting position for NZ in tests. Plus his bowling always looked below test standard.

Harris in Tests was obviously a bowler of not that much note. In ODIs he was a very good bowler who could bat; in the longer game he was a batsman who bowled a bit. He was never given a real chance to bat in the top-order in Tests, which he should have been. No-one will ever know if he'd have been Test-class as a batsman or not, but anyone who claims he couldn't possibly have been is off their rocker.

As the title of this thread goes, injuries prevented Allot from becoming a top bowler surely?. He probably was peaking after the 99 WC, then he kept getting injured..

It is possible that Allott would've gone on to better things had he not suffered injury in 1999/2000, but equally he'd been around for a while before then and had always been incredibly dangerous in ODIs but lacked effectiveness in Tests. The point, merely, is that Allott had done far less to convince in Tests than the likes of Doull.

Harsh on McMillan uncle Rich. He wasn't a world beater, but he was a very solid lower-middle order bat by NZ standards at least..

He was a rank flat-track bully who was very good at cashing-in when the going was easy but who rarely if ever scored any really tough runs.

 

[bryce]

In case anyone should be in any doubt I certainly wasn't suggesting he unequivocally wasn't. I was however suggesting that he was a lesser bowler than the likes of Nash, Cairns and Doull.

I wasn't suggesting you were either, but I would openly disagree with your second statement given that in Test matches O'Connor offered us a combination of strikepower and variation that we desperately required, which also makes it markedly difficult to judge who is lesser/better. Doull was quite good in his prime but his effectiveness with the ball deteriorated as his career went on.

 

[Richard]

Personally I'd say that the main reason for said deterioration was due to the reason mentioned in this thread.

As for O'Connor he may have been different to Nash, Cairns et al in being a left-armer but I'd say both had more quality in terms of bowling at their disposal. That said, I only ever saw O'Connor actually bowl on a couple of occasions - The Oval 1999 and 'Gabba 2001/02.

 

[Zinzan]

.

He was a rank flat-track bully who was very good at cashing-in when the going was easy but who rarely if ever scored any really tough runs.

Actually, a totally fair assessment that