Should we be patient with Michael Beer?

[Top_Cat]

I thought the argument was that he would pick up an extra 2-3 wickets a match as a trade-off. Wouldn't the extra 1-2 runs an over he concedes be worth it then? Every bowler has bad matches so I am not sure what that argument is about, it is the average over the career that counts.

Yeh and the 8-fer he took in India remains his only FC 5-fer. Truth is, he's not really much of a wicket-taker, big turning off-spin or not. Hauritz has him beat is just about every department.

 

[Spark]

Who was that massively anti-Hauritz, pro-Krezja guy? aussie? He'd love this thread...

EDIT: Also worth noting the way they performed after being dropped. Hauritz hit two tons and did pretty well with the ball (much better than he'd ever done in FC cricket before then, anyway). Krezja IIRC isn't even Tas's first choice spinner.

EDIT2: Yeah Hauritz's shield season: 19 wickets at 26.8 with one 5-wicket haul. Considering the pace-friendly wickets that's a decent effort.

 

[hang on]

oh, sorry to hear about casson's physical and mental travails. hope things are better now.

 

[Top_Cat]

Who was that massively anti-Hauritz, pro-Krezja guy? aussie? He'd love this thread...

EDIT: Also worth noting the way they performed after being dropped. Hauritz hit two tons and did pretty well with the ball (much better than he'd ever done in FC cricket before then, anyway). Krezja IIRC isn't even Tas's first choice spinner.

EDIT2: Yeah Hauritz's shield season: 19 wickets at 26.8 with one 5-wicket haul. Considering the pace-friendly wickets that's a decent effort.

Massively agree with this. After being dropped, Hauritz upped his whole game. Krejza, one freak ball to Khawaja and his T20 form aside, has regressed slightly.

And got a ODI World Cup spot.

 

[BoyBrumby]

I think that Hauritz is the better option, but...

We're talking about a guy who did this on Test debut. We're analysing how he bowled, what he did, in his first match of Test cricket against the best players of spin in the world. He genuinely got people out that match. But as soon as he took one step backwards in a Test vs South Africa, he was out on his arse. It was as though we said, he can't learn how to be better in Test cricket because he's played 30 FC games.

Now we find ourselves making Beer and Smith learn their games at Test level. They are having to do two "levels", as such, of learning - how to get to FC level as a bowler, and Test level, at the same time!

I guess your cricketing path must've crossed with Beer's at some point, vic? If so, did he strike you as a future test bowler in the making?

Who was that massively anti-Hauritz, pro-Krezja guy? aussie? He'd love this thread...

PEWS?

 

[Debris]

Yeh and the 8-fer he took in India remains his only FC 5-fer. Truth is, he's not really much of a wicket-taker, big turning off-spin or not. Hauritz has him beat is just about every department.

That is a different argument from the one where the complaint was that he was too expensive. If you don't think Krezja will take wickets, then you of course don't pick him.

 

[Spark]

But that's the point. He doesn't keep it tight and doesn't take that many wickets anyway. Why pick him?

 

[Debris]

Well, as I mentioned earlier in this thread I wouldn't pick either. I was just making the point that runs conceded per over is a bad criteria for picking a spinner.

 

[Daemon]

Well, as I mentioned earlier in this thread I wouldn't pick either. I was just making the point that runs conceded per over is a bad criteria for picking a spinner.

I replied saying that there are going to be games where not only will he not pick up wickets, bur will als give away runs at 4-5rpo. If he doesnt pick up wickets then the runs he gives away are going to be very very costly.

 

[Debris]

I replied saying that there are going to be games where not only will he not pick up wickets, bur will als give away runs at 4-5rpo. If he doesnt pick up wickets then the runs he gives away are going to be very very costly.

I could just as easily argue that Hauritz will have games where he will go at 4-5rpo and then his inability to pick up wickets is going to be very costly (we are assuming here that Krezja takes more wickets but is more expensive). You can't assume one player will have bad games and not the other. That is why I replied to you saying it would be the average over the career which would be important.

 

[Spark]

Hauritz will go for lots of runs far less often than Krezja because Krezja bowls far more dross than Hauritz.

 

[Daemon]

I could just as easily argue that Hauritz will have games where he will go at 4-5rpo and then his inability to pick up wickets is going to be very costly (we are assuming here that Krezja takes more wickets but is more expensive). You can't assume one player will have bad games and not the other. That is why I replied to you saying it would be the average over the career which would be important.

How many times in his test career has Hauritz gone at 4-5 rpo? Krejza does it far too often, even his FC economy is reaching 4.

 

[Debris]

Hauritz will go for lots of runs far less often than Krezja because Krezja bowls far more dross than Hauritz.

Again, only half the argument. The other half would be that Krejza will take wickets more often than Hauritz because he bowls more wicket-taking balls. I don't understand why people cannot see both sides of the equation. If this is true (and I am not sure it is), I would take Krezja over Hauritz because the extra wickets he takes would make up for the runs he concedes.

 

[Spikey]

But one fluke aside - given he has no other 5 wicket hauls in first class cricket I think I can call it a fluke - Krejza hasn't shown wicket taking ability either.

 

[Daemon]

Exactly. The fact is, when he's not taking wickets, he's not just going to be ineffective, he's going to leak runs and release all pressure off the batsmen maintained from the other bowlers.

If Hauritz doesn't pick up wickets, he wont be giving away as many runs so it won't be that costly to the team. And I doubt Krejza's 'wicket taking ability' is that much better than Hauritz as well. The difference in their FC SR is about 5 IIRC

 

[Debris]

But one fluke aside - given he has no other 5 wicket hauls in first class cricket I think I can call it a fluke - Krejza hasn't shown wicket taking ability either.

OK, I should have kept the names of actual cricketers out of it because it is confusing so many people and I was just using them as archetypes of the different bowling styles. There were a few posts arguing that we should pick a player for containment. My argument was as follows:

We have 2 players, player A who takes wickets at an average of 35 and concedes 2 runs per over and player B who takes wickets at an average of 30 and concedes 4 runs per over. I think you should always take player B.

 

[Kylez]

Should we be patient with Michael Beer? No, we shouldn't.

However, we should be patient with either Hauritz or O'Keefe. I'm not particularly fussed on which one gets picked, but that's the issue, they don't get picked unfortunately.

Krezja definitely showed some promise on the international stage but he hasn't been able to improve his bowling as his results for Tasmania proved. Krezja showed signs of being able to contain in the shorter formats but his FC form was just dire.

I'm hoping in some years to come that Lyon ends up cementing his place in the Australian Test team. I believe he has a bucket load of potential and he also reminds me a bit of Dan Cullen when he bowls. Lyon doesn't look to have any major flaws or weaknesses so far, whereas Cullen turned to dross eventually.

 

[vic_orthdox]

I guess your cricketing path must've crossed with Beer's at some point, vic? If so, did he strike you as a future test bowler in the making?



PEWS?

Played quite a bit against him. He was in the top few grade bowlers year on end.

He was the sort of guy who struck you as deserving of a chance higher. But whenever he played for Vic 2nds, he never did that well.

Basically, the same as what I've been saying in here, played against him heaps and his biggest weapon is the ball that heads straight on, gets lots of LBWs and Bowled from it. But that's not enough at the next level (even FC), you need to attack both edges, Beer really only attacks your inside edge.

 

[TumTum]

Should we be patient with Michael Beer? No, we shouldn't.

However, we should be patient with either Hauritz or O'Keefe. I'm not particularly fussed on which one gets picked, but that's the issue, they don't get picked unfortunately.

We have been "patient" with him for ages, such as waiting for his mysterious doosra he has perfected in the nets, or letting him get the confidence at Test level to put more revolutions on the ball. He sucks, end of story.

 

[Spark]

We have been "patient" with him for ages, such as waiting for his mysterious doosra he has perfected in the nets, or letting him get the confidence at Test level to put more revolutions on the ball. He sucks, end of story.

Strange how he's done fairly well at Test level then.