Furball
Evil Scotsman
Whilst it's an appaling decision, I have little sympathy for any batsman dismissed lbw when not offering a shot.
-
Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.
You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.
Players who handled one type of bowling awsomely but failed against the other.
- Thread starter Kylez
- Start date
tooextracool
International Coach
No matter how many times this is said, it simply does not explain how Hick scored runs by the bucket against all of the best pace attacks of his day bar Waqar/Wasim between 93 and 96.
Hick's failures were almost entirely down to poor man-management. I wish he had made a better fist of things when he finally got a proper run in 2000-01 but by that time he was well and truly finished.
Top_Cat
Request Your Custom Title Now!
I'll have a crack; only one of the tons he scored in that period was against a full-strength attack. He played on some utter belters too.
His weaknesses against pace weren't physical, they were mental and largely driven by the occasion. He's admitted as much so, well, there's not really much more to say other than it's not a myth.
His weaknesses against pace weren't physical, they were mental and largely driven by the occasion. He's admitted as much so, well, there's not really much more to say other than it's not a myth.
Last edited:
tooextracool
International Coach
I dont really think its particularly relevant as to whether they were full attacks or not. If you have Walsh and Bishop in an attack, and Ambrose out, theres no way anyone can suggest that that is not a formidable pace attack. And realistically you could throw in his 98* against Fleming/Mcdermott if it werent with the daft and rather inconsiderate declaration by Atherton.
I also don't think that he's a flat track bully. These might not have been 100s, but they were all game changing knocks in tough conditions against Ambrose and Walsh:
HowSTAT! Match Scorecard
HowSTAT! Match Scorecard
HowSTAT! Match Scorecard
Either way, The guy was averaging about 45 for a period of 4 years or so whilst playing against Ambrose, Walsh, Bishop Donald, Pollock, Fleming, McDermott. If you are telling me his conversion ratio is poor thats fine, but theres no way in hell that he couldn't play pace.
Top_Cat
Request Your Custom Title Now!
Once again, you're jumping on the defensive against something no-one has said. You can have a weakness against something without being abysmal. Not only that, whether someone can do something or not can change as their career progresses. So Hick had a good couple of years, he also failed plenty often against good pace, usually against guys who made a point of getting into his head like Merv Hughes.
So what's the judgement? I'll tell you what it's not; it's not "He simply can't play pace." but neither is it "Hick's weakness against pace is a myth." Life isn't binary.
So what's the judgement? I'll tell you what it's not; it's not "He simply can't play pace." but neither is it "Hick's weakness against pace is a myth." Life isn't binary.
Last edited:
tooextracool
International Coach
True, perhaps I did jump the gun a little bit. Hick was a better player of spin than pace no doubt, it just particularly rankles me that he's frequently classified as a flat track bully or when hes considered to be an outright failure at the test level - which whilst no one has suggested so far is the palpable general sentiment. He was mentally fragile, and the Atherton/Illingworth combination at the helm at the time were especially poor at giving him any kind of assurance.
Top_Cat
Request Your Custom Title Now!
Agree with that. He looked a million bucks in '98/'99.
TT Boy
Hall of Fame Member
Loved Bryce McGain though.Ashwell Prince takes the biscuit I think. Only two fast bowlers have dismissed him more than twice, but seven spinners have. Including Chris Gayle. Shane Warne got him out eleven times.
TT Boy
Hall of Fame Member
Really? Thought it was the other way around. Steyn use to have Vaughan's middle and off on tap and remember Brett Lee among others clean bowling Michael a fair few times.
flibbertyjibber
Request Your Custom Title Now!
That was after his main knee problem, before it went in winter 05 he was brilliant against it. Never the same player after that winter.
TumTum
Banned
Who didn't?
Himannv
Hall of Fame Member
Definitely more confident in home conditions but I dont think he's as bad as people think against swing bowling.
Shri
Mr. Glass
Bad timing.
Outswinger@Pace
International 12th Man
Thilan spared me the effort of writing a paragraph there!Bad timing.
It's not the dismissal itself, but the fashion in which he got out (feet rooted to the crease and wafting outside off) that summed up what I was saying earlier.
Last edited:
Furball
Evil Scotsman
Batsmen have a bat for a reason. Use it.
PhoenixFire
International Coach
I hate that attitude. It's a shocking excuse for umpires to give poor decision. Why shouldn't they be allowed pad the ball away with having to worry about being sawn-off by crap decisions?
zaremba
Cricketer Of The Year
I couldn't agree more. Umpires deciding on LBW shouts are not acting as moral arbiters. And even if they were I don't understand why it's such a sin to leave a ball that you think is going to miss the stumps.