*Official* England in South Africa

[BoyBrumby]

What if Hoggard starts the season like a rocket?

Perceived to have lost his nip and seems to have been unceremoniously dumped on the "yesterday's man" pile. I personally don't think we're so blessed in the seam dept we could afford to ignore a bloke with nigh on 250 test scalps if he started like a train (only one year old than Sidebottom after all), but I reckon he probablt burnt a few bridges with his public pronouncements after being dropped.

Personally suspect Harmison will be the bowler from the old school to once again be in the wickets rather than Hoggy.

 

[wpdavid]

Perceived to have lost his nip and seems to have been unceremoniously dumped on the "yesterday's man" pile. I personally don't think we're so blessed in the seam dept we could afford to ignore a bloke with nigh on 250 test scalps if he started like a train (only one year old than Sidebottom after all), but I reckon he probablt burnt a few bridges with his public pronouncements after being dropped.

Personally suspect Harmison will be the bowler from the old school to once again be in the wickets rather than Hoggy.

Aye. But what did he actually say about touring Aus next winter? iirc he was quoted along the lines of not being keen, but I might be remembering that wrong.

 

[Uppercut]

Perceived to have lost his nip and seems to have been unceremoniously dumped on the "yesterday's man" pile. I personally don't think we're so blessed in the seam dept we could afford to ignore a bloke with nigh on 250 test scalps if he started like a train (only one year old than Sidebottom after all), but I reckon he probablt burnt a few bridges with his public pronouncements after being dropped.

Personally suspect Harmison will be the bowler from the old school to once again be in the wickets rather than Hoggy.

We've not seen the last of Harmison. It never takes the selectors long to forget that he's not very good anymore.

 

[aussie]

An attack that has Anderson as its main senior fast bowler is not very good. The question is, is there anyone better? To which the answer may or may not be yes.

Yes currently Anderson leading the ENG attack is a bit like Vanburn Holder leading the West Indies post Hall/Griffith in the early 70s - not very superb.

But i certainly do believe Anderson has another gear to go in his bowling. If Hoggard a bowler who had less natural ability than Anderson can learn to reverse swing the ball & take 6 & 7 wicket hauls in IND & AUS - i certainly think Anderson can do that based on his exploits throught 2009.


Anderson by default is the leader of the ENG attack, unfortuantely there is no one better & certainly not Onions. Onions can be as lethal as Anderson when the ball is swinging - but he looks even worse than Anderson on a flat decks.

 

[aussie]

We've not seen the last of Harmison. It never takes the selectors long to forget that he's not very good anymore.

I think the selectors have given up on Harmison TBH. If they weren't going to pick him on this tour given he was going to get a pitch to his liking like we saw in Jo'Burg - plus not even call him up as potentially back-up to Anderson before the 1st test & went for Davies. Thats a clear sign they are done with him for me.

 

[Goughy]

But i certainly do believe Anderson has another gear to go in his bowling. If Hoggard a bowler who had less natural ability than Anderson can learn to reverse swing the ball & take 6 & 7 wicket hauls in IND & AUS - i certainly think Anderson can do that based on his exploits throught 2009.

Im sorry, not only do I not know what that means but I dont agree with the things I am guessing it could mean

 

[Manee]

Yes currently Anderson leading the ENG attack is a bit like Vanburn Holder leading the West Indies post Hall/Griffith in the early 70s - not very superb.

But i certainly do believe Anderson has another gear to go in his bowling. If Hoggard a bowler who had less natural ability than Anderson can learn to reverse swing the ball & take 6 & 7 wicket hauls in IND & AUS - i certainly think Anderson can do that based on his exploits throught 2009.


Anderson by default is the leader of the ENG attack, unfortuantely there is no one better & certainly not Onions. Onions can be as lethal as Anderson when the ball is swinging - but he looks even worse than Anderson on a flat decks.

Anderson is a bizarre one. He appears to have the basic tools of pace, a good bouncer, ability to swing the ball both ways, and yet he appears to underperform. One may posit that he is inaccurate and never will be accurate, but I feel a flaw must be more complex than that, to stop him becoming an expensive but prominant wicket taker - he appears to be neither, particularly expensive, nor potent with the ball.

 

[aussie]

Im sorry, not only do I not know what that means but I dont agree with the things I am guessing it could mean

I'm sure you remember how Hoggard burst unto the seen vs WI 2000. He looked like your typical useless 90s county seamer. Then between IND 2001 to Ashes 05, when he was in & out of the side he was only ever good when the ball was swinging (Christchruch 2002), Oval 05 & other instances of Ashes 05, Barbados 04, Jo'Brug 04. Its only when he learnt to reverse swing the ball in IND 05/06, that he became truly a complete bowler.

Anderson early career exploits in 2003 was far more lethal & enterprising that Hoggard, he always looked like he had the raw materials to be a good bowler. Like Hoggard since IND 07, Anderson has been a bowler who has been very lethal when the ball is swinging, but average on flat decks. So if he can add reverse swing to his game soon (which i have seen signs in 2009 that he can) he will be a real complete bowler.

 

[Manee]

Im sorry, not only do I not know what that means but I dont agree with the things I am guessing it could mean

Agreed - Hoggard was awesome!

 

[jwebber86]

True on all counts. It'd be helpful if someone could dig out Anderson's stats for this series and last year's Ashes, but I'm guessing they won't be flattering. It's not just his inability to theaten when conditions don't suit that's frustrated me - that's true for 90% of test bowlers afaics. But in this series he had helpful conditions on several occasions and not once took advantage. I suppose I'd be more sympathetic if he hadn't shot his mouth off about being the 'leader' of England's attack when actually I'd like him to stfu and learn how to take wickets at an acceptable tick at this level. Agreed with Scaly & Brumby about Onions. For once, I agree with Fatboy taking the mick in his postmatch interview about how daft it was to drop him. We know from past experience that SB doesn't cut it unless he's playing WI or NZ, and even then in helpful conditions. Onions has regularly looked threatening and just needed to find a bit of luck. Given the prematch talk was more about bounce than swing, it was ludicrous to ditch him. Maybe his stock will rise from missing this particular debacle.

As I mentioned the other day, picking our pace attack now will be an interesting exercise. Whoever plays should look good against Bang and at home to Pakistan's fragile batting lineup. I wouldn't be wanting to miss out on the Bang tour if I was one of them. And if I was Tremlett, Plunkett or any other young quick with more than a smidge of ability I'd want to make damned sure I started the season like a rocket.

The Ashes (Australia in England), 2009
overs: 158.0 maidens: 38 runs:542 wickets: 12 BBI: 5/80 BBM 6/127 Ave: 45.16 econ: 3.43 SR: 79.0

Basil D'Oliveira Trophy (England in South Africa), 2009/10
overs: 162.5 madiens: 22 runs: 548 wickets 16 BBI 5/63 BBM 8/161 Ave: 34.25 econ: 3.36 SR 61.0


neither average is particularly complementary given he is supposed to be englands strike bowler



there was abit of talk on the radio about a young fast bowler at yorkshire, micheal vaughan and geoffrey boycott both rated him. so that another possiblity for the bangladesh tour. but probably more likely to play for the lions first. i think it was Ajmal Shahzad but that was just a guess from looking at the squad list of yorkshire

 

[Manee]

there was abit of talk on the radio about a young fast bowler at yorkshire, micheal vaughan and geoffrey boycott both rated him. so that another possiblity for the bangladesh tour. but probably more likely to play for the lions first. i think it was Ajmal Shahzad but that was just a guess from looking at the squad list of yorkshire

He seems like a good bowler, from what I've seen of him. He is still a bit raw for England, though.

 

[Pothas]

Perceived to have lost his nip and seems to have been unceremoniously dumped on the "yesterday's man" pile. I personally don't think we're so blessed in the seam dept we could afford to ignore a bloke with nigh on 250 test scalps if he started like a train (only one year old than Sidebottom after all), but I reckon he probablt burnt a few bridges with his public pronouncements after being dropped.

Personally suspect Harmison will be the bowler from the old school to once again be in the wickets rather than Hoggy.

Think Hoggard must have done something to upset someone before he started talking publically about it, think after the Pattinson afair that he realized that for whatever reason he had been dumped for good. No idea why, was a much better test bowler than Harmison.

Would not be an English summer without Harmison playing well for Durham and they talking about his possible England inclusion but I just think that our current pace attack will be good enough against Bangladesh and Pakistan in England to stop that from a recall actually happening.

We are a very strange side it must be said, enjoyed the series though.

 

[Goughy]

I'm sure you remember how Hoggard burst unto the seen vs WI 2000. He looked like your typical useless 90s county seamer.

In the late 90s he was the fastest young bowler on the county scene (he won the pace contest) and he was accurate and swung the ball and was highly thought of. Also he had spent time the perivous two winters playing FC cricket in SA (and doing very well).

 

[aussie]

In the late 90s he was the fastest young bowler on the county scene (he won the pace contest) and he was accurate and swung the ball and was highly thought of. Also he had spent time the perivous two winters playing FC cricket in SA (and doing very well).

Haa never heard of this. He must of lost that pace of his youth come his debut, since as you should remember in test career he was always in the 77 - 82 mph range, capable of bowling 85 at his fastest.

 

[zaremba]

Well done Saffas. Unlucky not to win the series. England have to be pretty happy with the draw overall.

 

[Scaly piscine]

Think Hoggard must have done something to upset someone before he started talking publically about it, think after the Pattinson afair that he realized that for whatever reason he had been dumped for good. No idea why, was a much better test bowler than Harmison.

Yea of course, much better when he averaged about the same despite having all the best times to bowl and little of the worst times. As well as having zero psychological effect on a batting lineup.

 

[GIMH]

Haha Scaly, I knew once I read Pothas' post that you would say that.

To be fair, I do think you have a case, I think Hoggard gets an easy ride compared to some other bowlers. I like Hoggy as much as the next man but he does seem to get a bit of special treatment from a lot of fans.

 

[Goughy]

To be fair, I do think you have a case, I think Hoggard gets an easy ride compared to some other bowlers. I like Hoggy as much as the next man but he does seem to get a bit of special treatment from a lot of fans.

In what regard?

 

[zaremba]

Yea of course, much better when he averaged about the same despite having all the best times to bowl and little of the worst times. As well as having zero psychological effect on a batting lineup.

He never once made an entire opposition team piss themselves laughing with the opening ball of a series, for instance.

 

[Pothas]

Yea of course, much better when he averaged about the same despite having all the best times to bowl and little of the worst times. As well as having zero psychological effect on a batting lineup.

Yes beacause Hoggard always just got easy wickets never had to work for them or anything


Adelaide in 2006, Nagpur earlier in the same year and Johannesberg in 2005 are three examples of Hoggard completely outbowling the rest of the side (including a certain Durham fast bowler)

We all know the deal with Harmison and there is not much point going into again, saying Hoggard was much better was probably a bit of an exaguration but I think it is pretty fair to say that everything considerd that Hoggard was the better test match bowler.