Vernon Philander - Here to stay, or a Flash in the pan?

[Spark]

Aren't you guys completely ignoring the recently resurgent Siddle, Hilfenhaus, along with people like Pattinson? If Tremlett and Bresnan get a shoe-in on the back of ten odd Tests, and Finn who hasn't been in the playing eleven for some time, then I'm sure those three have an equal claim to the top bracket.

And there's no mention of a certain Ajmal who on current exploits is some distance ahead of Swann.

Pretty sure none of them are English or South African.

 

[Arachnodouche]

oops, missed the context.

 

[Ikki]

Don't mean to pick on this post, but I wonder if we're moving from the "The batsmen aren't good, the bowlers just suck" period of 2000-2010 to the "bowlers aren't good, the batsmen just suck" period of 2012-???

Haha, brilliant. Exactly; it just couldn't have been an era where there were just too many good-great batsmen...the bowlers sucked.

 

[Rasimione]

I agree. Without a doubt. Except for Steyn, Kallis and mabye Abdv our players dnt get the props they deserve and the response from some of the post give a biased view on Philander. I mean ffs the guy averages 19 in domestic cricket over a long time. Was that a fluke? Anyone who has playd at the ground in paarl,bloem an potchefstroom wil tell you those are not lively wickets. Granted he has had results oriented pitches, when he was in the test team, but others bowled on those same pitches. And based on his bowling style, he does not have to change a great deal when he goes to the SC so his stats should not take a big hit. Flash in the pan? Hell no.

 

[Ruckus]

Well how many of those England bowlers named would get a look in if the regular bowlers werernt injured.

Yeah exactly. Depth is obviously a good thing to have, but it doesn't necessarily ensure one teams top attack is better than anothers. For me, England=more depth, worse 'A' attack. SA=less depth, better 'A' attack. So unless Steyn or Philander are going to be injured often (which is probably unlikely), then SA will have the better attack the majority of the time.

 

[Furball]

Yeah exactly. Depth is obviously a good thing to have, but it doesn't necessarily ensure one teams top attack is better than anothers. For me, England=more depth, worse 'A' attack. SA=less depth, better 'A' attack. So unless Steyn or Philander are going to be injured often (which is probably unlikely), then SA will have the better attack the majority of the time.

I disagree, because I think such an analysis overlooks a side's weaknesses in favour of their strengths.

 

[Ruckus]

How so, I don't really get what you mean?

 

[Arachnodouche]

I think both sides have prime 'A' attacks. Broad's fitness history probably gives the SAffers an edge but if he's fit, then Anderson and him almost even out Steyn/Philander in English conditions. So yeah, depth will count alright, and England are fairly well insured on that front. It's just a question of which Morkel turns up.

 

[Ruckus]

I don't know why you are bringing English conditions into to it (because the discussion has meant to have been in general) but even so I don't really see why things would even out much more anyway (other than standard home advantage). Conditions conducive to swing bowling are obviously good news for Anderson, but also for Steyn...wouldn't fancy facing Philander bowling with the slope at Lords either...

Is England's depth really that good anyway? I mean the two main backups, assuming a first choice attack of Anderson, Broad and Bresnan, are Tremlett and Finn. Tremlett can be pretty awesome on his day, but he looks like he can have some pretty bad ones too. I haven't seen much of Finn since the Ashes, but if he is still pretty much the same bowler as he was back then, then I don't think much of him as it stands tbh. No doubt has a lot of potential though.

 

[Ruckus]

Just out of interest too, does anyone know who SA would call upon after de Lange and Tsotsobe (assuming they would be the top two reserves)?

 

[SeamUp]

Just out of interest too, does anyone know who SA would call upon after de Lange and Tsotsobe (assuming they would be the top two reserves)?

Chris Morris most probably. Burst on the scene this year. About 6ft5 or so. Bowls an awkward length for someone so tall. Nothing abnormal about his action at all and is capable of hitting mid 140's in games I've seen with the white ball but mainly around the 140 mark.

The selectors who saw him in the 4-day stuff at a flat Durban a couple of moths ago, said he just kept coming at the batmsen. The selectors have as good as said that they have acknowledged him.

I'm hoping he gets put into the limited overs squads initally as he is an all-rounder. He can give the ball a good smack.

 

[SeamUp]

I don't know why you are bringing English conditions into to it (because the discussion has meant to have been in general) but even so I don't really see why things would even out much more anyway (other than standard home advantage). Conditions conducive to swing bowling are obviously good news for Anderson, but also for Steyn...wouldn't fancy facing Philander bowling with the slope at Lords either...

Is England's depth really that good anyway? I mean the two main backups, assuming a first choice attack of Anderson, Broad and Bresnan, are Tremlett and Finn. Tremlett can be pretty awesome on his day, but he looks like he can have some pretty bad ones too. I haven't seen much of Finn since the Ashes, but if he is still pretty much the same bowler as he was back then, then I don't think much of him as it stands tbh. No doubt has a lot of potential though.

Couldn't have said it any better, mate.

I also remember Morkel being the leading wicket-taker, the last time we were in England. Strauss is certainly his bunny.

What I will say is, Finn looks like he could mature into a very good bowler and he is a very good find for England.

 

[Rasimione]

Funny thing about Morris is that he was a batting allrounder 2years ago. And now he is gunning it as a bowling one.

 

[Jacknife]

I don't know why you are bringing English conditions into to it (because the discussion has meant to have been in general) but even so I don't really see why things would even out much more anyway (other than standard home advantage). Conditions conducive to swing bowling are obviously good news for Anderson, but also for Steyn...wouldn't fancy facing Philander bowling with the slope at Lords either...

Is England's depth really that good anyway? I mean the two main backups, assuming a first choice attack of Anderson, Broad and Bresnan, are Tremlett and Finn. Tremlett can be pretty awesome on his day, but he looks like he can have some pretty bad ones too. I haven't seen much of Finn since the Ashes, but if he is still pretty much the same bowler as he was back then, then I don't think much of him as it stands tbh. No doubt has a lot of potential though.

Finn's improved loads since the Ashes and he seems to have impressed everyone that's watched him, he's added even more pace and just generally bowls tighter with more control and that should continue to develop as he matures.

Never seen Tremlett have too many really bad days, that's the key thing with him, even when he doesn't take wickets and not at his best he just doesn't go for runs and is always a handful for any batsman. One of his main assets is his accuracy, add to that he's six foot ten tall and gets alarming bounce from just about any pitch, with a great repeatable action as well. When fit he'd be one of England's first choice attack imo, I rate him very highly, shame his body lets him down.

 

[GIMH]

I don't know why you are bringing English conditions into to it (because the discussion has meant to have been in general) but even so I don't really see why things would even out much more anyway (other than standard home advantage). Conditions conducive to swing bowling are obviously good news for Anderson, but also for Steyn...wouldn't fancy facing Philander bowling with the slope at Lords either...

Is England's depth really that good anyway? I mean the two main backups, assuming a first choice attack of Anderson, Broad and Bresnan, are Tremlett and Finn. Tremlett can be pretty awesome on his day, but he looks like he can have some pretty bad ones too. I haven't seen much of Finn since the Ashes, but if he is still pretty much the same bowler as he was back then, then I don't think much of him as it stands tbh. No doubt has a lot of potential though.

So Tremlett 'looks like' he could have bad days and you've not seen Finn play in close to a year and a half...this is pretty worthless analysis mate. Zero substance.

 

[Furball]

I don't know why you are bringing English conditions into to it (because the discussion has meant to have been in general) but even so I don't really see why things would even out much more anyway (other than standard home advantage). Conditions conducive to swing bowling are obviously good news for Anderson, but also for Steyn...wouldn't fancy facing Philander bowling with the slope at Lords either...

Is England's depth really that good anyway? I mean the two main backups, assuming a first choice attack of Anderson, Broad and Bresnan, are Tremlett and Finn. Tremlett can be pretty awesome on his day, but he looks like he can have some pretty bad ones too. I haven't seen much of Finn since the Ashes, but if he is still pretty much the same bowler as he was back then, then I don't think much of him as it stands tbh. No doubt has a lot of potential though.

England have 3 bowlers not curently in their XI who all average under 30 for their 50ish Test wickets and have two spinners who would walk into most international sides. If we take Anderson, Broad, Bresnan and Swann to be England's 1st choice attack, the reserve attack of Tremlett, Finn, Onions and Panesar has in excess of 200 Test wickets between them, and is a better attack than most team's first choice attack.

South Africa have Imran Tahir in the XI and Marchant de Lange and Lonwabo Tsotsobe as their 2 backup bowlers.

 

[Ruckus]

So Tremlett 'looks like' he could have bad days and you've not seen Finn play in close to a year and a half...this is pretty worthless analysis mate. Zero substance.

I said 'looks like' because he has only played 11 matches...nothing to do with how much of him I've seen (seen at least parts of every match he has played since his return in 2010). And I'm not gaga over him like some people are. I see a bowler who, when on song, is very effective because of his natural attributes but who has a tendency to lose his rythmn fairly easily (can bowl exceptionally well in one innings, and poor in the next). Overall he is still a good bowler, and an excellent backup to have, but I don't see him as a world beater or anything, especially considering his injury issues. As for Finn, yeah I already admitted I am ignorant of his recent form, so I'm happy to reserve my judgement there until I've seen him again.

England have 3 bowlers not curently in their XI who all average under 30 for their 50ish Test wickets and have two spinners who would walk into most international sides. If we take Anderson, Broad, Bresnan and Swann to be England's 1st choice attack, the reserve attack of Tremlett, Finn, Onions and Panesar has in excess of 200 Test wickets between them, and is a better attack than most team's first choice attack.

South Africa have Imran Tahir in the XI and Marchant de Lange and Lonwabo Tsotsobe as their 2 backup bowlers.

I actually think de Lange has a lot of potential, and I quite liked what I saw against NZ (despite his poor returns). Tsotsobe isn't great, but I think SA probably have a fair few better backups than him anyway, they are yet to call upon. I wouldn't be overly concerned with SA's depth, they seem to pump out quality fast bowlers at a level probably only second to Pakistan.

 

[FBU]

How does Philander's success affect Morkel and Steyn. Morkel used to open the bowling with Steyn but now is first change.

Morkel at
1/2 - 68 wickets at 25.80
3 - 58 wickets at 34.53

Steyn's 5fer count will go down. Since Philander made his debut the only 5fer Steyn got was when Philander didn't play. Pre Philander Steyn was taking 5fers every 2 or 3 Tests.

 

[Zinzan]

How does Philander's success affect Morkel and Steyn. Morkel used to open the bowling with Steyn but now is first change.

Morkel at
1/2 - 68 wickets at 25.80
3 - 58 wickets at 34.53

Steyn's 5fer count will go down. Since Philander made his debut the only 5fer Steyn got was when Philander didn't play. Pre Philander Steyn was taking 5fers every 2 or 3 Tests.

Interesting that in a radio interview with Ross Taylor this morning when asked who was the most difficult of the SA bowlers he mentioned that it was clearly Steyn & Morkel and went on to say whilst Philander is a fine bowler, he felt he got many wickets on the back of the pressure the former two had applied.

 

[Flem274*]

Will have to respectfully disagree with Taylor there.

But I'm starting to get the impression few New Zealander's outside cw rate a bowler unless they bowl a million miles an hour. If they can then they're automatically fantastic.