*Official* Tour Matches

[flibbertyjibber]

Once again though, 5 of his 5 wicket hauls have come against Bangladesh and Pak. If Hauritz had a record like Swann, I'd be saying exactly the same thing. I'm sorry but he is not 'bloody great'... that tag would be reserved for Warne and Murali etc. who are in leagues much beyond Swann.

Where have i said he is great?

I said he was good.

 

[andyc]

Think Swann's pretty ****ing good personally. Huge asset to the England team, could well be the difference between the teams come 5th day run chase.

 

[Jayzamann]

Think Swann's pretty ****ing good personally. Huge asset to the England team, could well be the difference between the teams come 5th day run chase.

I'd go so far as to say he's the difference between the teams full stop. When he had that thumb scare in the nets at the WACA I actually considered for two seconds what it would be like if he didn't play, and the whole perception of the Ashes was different.

 

[Ruckus]

Where have i said he is great?

I said he was good.

Sorry, misquoted you as saying "bloody great" instead of "bloody good", makes no difference though either way, both are too excessive for Swann. I think 'good' is appropriate.

 

[Ruckus]

Deus ex, I think your looking at it a bit too statistically.

People aren't just overhyping Swann because of his average, but due to watching him bowl.

For the first time in ages, he is an attacking fingerspinner who actually seriously rips the ball. Which is very admirable in this day and age. Hence the hype.

Na, I've seen him bowl a lot. I already wrote about how he was compared to Hauritz last ashes etc.

I think there is still a misunderstanding here though. I have never thought for a second Swann isn't a quality bowler. The argument is just based on a matter of degree. I think he is good, but not great, and no where near the leagues of players like Warne or Murali. I think he is of a similiar class to someone like Harbhajan. I also think his current average of 26 or so flatters him.

 

[vcs]

Na, I've seen him bowl a lot. I already wrote about how he was compared to Hauritz last ashes etc.

I think there is still a misunderstanding here though. I have never thought for a second Swann isn't a quality bowler. The argument is just based on a matter of degree. I think he is good, but not great, and no where near the leagues of players like Warne or Murali. I think he is of a similiar class to someone like Harbhajan. I also think his current average of 26 or so flatters him.

Bhajji has become a pretty defensive bowler in recent times.

 

[four_or_six]

I'd go so far as to say he's the difference between the teams full stop.

This. Last time we arrived it was Giles vs Warne. This time it's the one position in the team I don't think you'd find anyone saying we don't have a clear advantage.

 

[NasserFan207]

Giles vs Warne.

Good times.

 

[Jarquis]

He averaged 31.38 for that series. Hardly "royally destroying them". Its a good effort, but once again its just another example of him being overhyped.

I never said he royally destroyed South Africa. I said he's not just taken wickets against Pakistan and Bangladesh, he's royally destroyed them.
Averaging 31 against the second best Test side in the world, in their own back yard on unhelpful decks is a great achievement ffs.

 

[Jarquis]

He's not that good Marcuss. Some days he can serve up some real pies.

Yeah because no other bowler in the world does that FMD. You all basically circle-jerk over Johnson and he epitomises bowling dross.

 

[Jarquis]

Yeh except his average was a much more standard 30.69 before pakistan and bangladesh...whats his FC average? 31.84... not that good.

I already said he is probably the best spinner in the world atm, but he is no way near as good as people make him out to be.

Yay! Lets all punish a bloke for performing ridiculously well against substandard side!
If he'd averaged 30 against them then you'd be lamenting him for averaging 30 against them. FMD.
30 wickets @ less than 19 apiece is incredible near-regardless of the opposition.
If Pakistan are so crap how come Johnson averaged 73 against them in his own backyard, I mean obviously Johnson's far better than Swann

 

[Jarquis]

Once again though, 5 of his 5 wicket hauls have come against Bangladesh and Pak. If Hauritz had a record like Swann, I'd be saying exactly the same thing. I'm sorry but he is not 'bloody good'... that tag would be reserved for Warne and Murali etc. who are in leagues much beyond Swann.

So basically... if Hauritz had a good record, you'd call him good?
But because Swann has a good record, and we're calling him good.... he's somehow not good?
In the last 2 years only Mitchell Johnson has taken more wickets than Swann and of bowlers to take more than 50 wickets, only Steyn and Asif have taken them at a better average.
He is just that good ffs.

 

[social]

I'd go so far as to say he's the difference between the teams full stop. When he had that thumb scare in the nets at the WACA I actually considered for two seconds what it would be like if he didn't play, and the whole perception of the Ashes was different.

Off spinner in Oz?

No matter how much we've declined, we belt these guys for breakfast, lunch and dinner and he'll be no better than a slow-medium bowler on most days

No way, no chance he's the difference unless the series is decided by one batting collapse

20 odd wickets at 35-45 is the best he'll get

 

[social]

So basically... if Hauritz had a good record, you'd call him good?
But because Swann has a good record, and we're calling him good.... he's somehow not good?
In the last 2 years only Mitchell Johnson has taken more wickets than Swann and of bowlers to take more than 50 wickets, only Steyn and Asif have taken them at a better average.
He is just that good ffs.

And people still question Jonhson

 

[Son Of Coco]

Yeah because no other bowler in the world does that FMD. You all basically circle-jerk over Johnson and he epitomises bowling dross.

I wouldn't go that far, there are plenty of people who say Johnson bowls a lot of rubbish in amongst some good stuff. Don't think there's any reason for the toys to come out of the pram when someone points out they don't think one of your guys is as good as he is hyped up to be.

Swann is a good bowler, maybe he has improved since last time. He was ok then, but not outstanding. Maybe he'll be great this time. I can understand people having reservations though for a few reasons. I have them too. The main reason is last series we heard all about how good certain players were coming off a series against the West Indies, and how others had improved out of sight...while the end result was England winning The Ashes, the players in question only occasionally impressed (which turned out to be enough).

I'm not saying Swann will be in any way comparable to those player's efforts, but there were a few players we heard about that didn't live up to the hype.

Most spinners have traditionally struggled in Oz of late, that includes Murali, someone who has probably been a bit better than Swann to date. If Swann does come out and tear things up out here then good luck to him. He'll get the accolades he will so rightly deserve.

I don't think too many people are saying 'Swann's crap' though, as that's clearly not the case.

 

[Jarquis]

I wouldn't go that far, there are plenty of people who say Johnson bowls a lot of rubbish in amongst some good stuff. Don't think there's any reason for the toys to come out of the pram when someone points out they don't think one of your guys is as good as he is hyped up to be.

Swann is a good bowler, maybe he has improved since last time. He was ok then, but not outstanding. Maybe he'll be great this time. I can understand people having reservations though for a few reasons. I have them too. The main reason is last series we heard all about how good certain players were coming off a series against the West Indies, and how others had improved out of sight...while the end result was England winning The Ashes, the players in question only occasionally impressed (which turned out to be enough).

I'm not saying Swann will be in any way comparable to those player's efforts, but there were a few players we heard about that didn't live up to the hype.

Most spinners have traditionally struggled in Oz of late, that includes Murali, someone who has probably been a bit better than Swann to date. If Swann does come out and tear things up out here then good luck to him. He'll get the accolades he will so rightly deserve.

I don't think too many people are saying 'Swann's crap' though, as that's clearly not the case.

Look, I'm trying to hold my tongue with what I say but to me there's a quite obvious dismissive attitude among some posters of non-Australian players, with some exceptions.

Johnson does bowl a lot of rubbish and has done quite regularly, he was woeful over here and then averaged over 70 against Pakistan on home soil. He does go badly missing at times, but when Swann does it in one innings of his first tour game in Australia after coming back from a thumb injury, he's criticised. Yeah, he didn't bowl well to today but to write him off because of it, the fact he's "only taken wickets against Pakistan and Bangladesh" and the fact he performed pretty averagely 18 months ago is just stupid.

I'm not saying Swann will average 20 in this Ashes series ffs, the fact of the matter is that bowling finger spin in Australia is a tough, tough ask. So it's perfectly legitimate to say "I don't think Swann will have a great series as the conditions are stacked against him" but to say "He's just not that good" is completely and utterly wrong. He's been arguably the best bowler in the world for the last 2 years or so, so whilst it's unreasonable to expect him to take 12 wickets every match, I'm pretty confident in saying that there is no other spinner more likely to succeed in Australia than Swann (with Murali's retirement) and then only a handful of pace bowlers who I feel would be more likely to fare better.

If that means "he's just not that good" then blow me.

 

[tooextracool]

I wouldn't go that far, there are plenty of people who say Johnson bowls a lot of rubbish in amongst some good stuff. Don't think there's any reason for the toys to come out of the pram when someone points out they don't think one of your guys is as good as he is hyped up to be.

Swann is a good bowler, maybe he has improved since last time. He was ok then, but not outstanding. Maybe he'll be great this time. I can understand people having reservations though for a few reasons. I have them too. The main reason is last series we heard all about how good certain players were coming off a series against the West Indies, and how others had improved out of sight...while the end result was England winning The Ashes, the players in question only occasionally impressed (which turned out to be enough).

I'm not saying Swann will be in any way comparable to those player's efforts, but there were a few players we heard about that didn't live up to the hype.

Most spinners have traditionally struggled in Oz of late, that includes Murali, someone who has probably been a bit better than Swann to date. If Swann does come out and tear things up out here then good luck to him. He'll get the accolades he will so rightly deserve.

I don't think too many people are saying 'Swann's crap' though, as that's clearly not the case.

Im really not sure who you are referring to that was 'hyped up' before the last Ashes. We had lost a series to a pretty dismal WI side earlier that year and beating them at home wasnt much of an accomplishment so if anything confidence in this England side was pretty much at an ebb.

 

[Son Of Coco]

I think it's because we're used to you guys going bananas over someone when they do well against weaker teams leading into an Ashes series (Bopara...Bell...Swann to an extent last time...there's quite a list), we feel someone has to restore some sanity to proceedings

There have been some very, very good spin bowlers to tour Australia recently and not go so well. If Swann does better than all of them then he will deserve to be heartily praised at the end of the series. He has played very well against SA, and did much better than our bowlers could manage against Pakistan, so he may well perform better than any other spinner recently has in Australia.

I find it understandable that people have their reservations though. I think this current Australian side will probably offer Swann and the other English bowlers some assistance, so he may well take a bag. There's a massive difference between saying, "I think he's good, but maybe not great" and writing him off too.

 

[Son Of Coco]

Im really not sure who you are referring to that was 'hyped up' before the last Ashes. We had lost a series to a pretty dismal WI side earlier that year and beating them at home wasnt much of an accomplishment so if anything confidence in this England side was pretty much at an ebb.

Bopara ring a bell? It's understandable that he'd have been forgotten by now.

 

[tooextracool]

I don't really buy into this attitude of Johnson being Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde either. I can understand that hes taken a lot of wickets but by and large much like the accusation that was made against Harmison during his career, hes been played pretty poorly. Yes hes more wayward sometimes than on other occasions, but by and large even when hes accurate its not like hes bowling jaffas left and right. Hes got very little variety in his bowling or the cricketing intelligence to work a batsman out. Hes lucky that he bowls with his left hand because the fact of the matter is that thats the only novel thing he has going for him.