• 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.

Whatever happened to Copeland?

Spikey

Request Your Custom Title Now!
Arthur said there were some bowlers who he felt were benefitting out of some very friendly Sheffied Shield wickets over the past few years. I think there's little doubt that Copeland was one of the guys he was referring to.
Wasn't it Sutherland? I don't remember the Arthur one. I mean, he's right. I just don't remember him saying it.
 

Ruckus

International Captain
You've basically said he looks crap, therefore he is, and ignored any evidence to the contrary. Dire argument.

I don't think he's the greatest thing ever, or even necessarily test standard. I can only go by what I've read on here since I've never had the opportunity to watch him, but to write someone off because they don't look much is terrible logic.

Arguably the greatest seamer of all time, Glenn McGrath, was far from the prettiest in the traditional sense.
I don't think he looked 'crap' by any means in SL, but if you hadn't seen him bowl before then I could understand why you'd think he wasn't very good. After the new ball got older, he did struggle to get much movement... on pretty flat wickets mind. But he still bowled with extreme accuracy and created a fair bit of pressure, which I'm sure would of helped Harris to some degree. There's no doubt that someone like McGrath looks (and is) far better than Copeland though. What CWB said though was essentially crap imo...you can't judge him after one series on flat wickets and in conditions completely foreign to him. It was balls he was dropped after the SL series, cause the SA conditions in that series would have been ideal for him. But nonetheless he probably isn't the bowler some of us hoped he'd be, might struggle too much when the conditions don't suit. He isn't a bad bowler by any means though, and would make a fine back up bowler in the right circumstances. Think the main thing though is we just don't really need someone like Copeland at moment.
 
Last edited:

Prince EWS

Global Moderator
Wasn't it Sutherland? I don't remember the Arthur one. I mean, he's right. I just don't remember him saying it.
Nah it was definitely Arthur. He said it while he was coaching WA. No surprise the Copeland suddenly dropped about ten places in the pecking order as soon as he got the Australian job.

Gotta say though, I never really disagreed with him. I really like Copeland and always hope he does well because I think there's a cancerous pace bias in Australian cricket but there's no doubt that the pitches in Shield cricket in the 2009/10 and 2010/11 seasons comparatively favoured his bowling style overs others.
 

Spikey

Request Your Custom Title Now!
:laugh:

The children of these mothers must die inside when they see these articles. Surely the parents must have some inkling of what bitching in the media about their kid looks like?

Now I remember it, didn't Hauritz' old man slam the selectors as well?
I think he did, but his son had just been over-looked for Xaiver Doherty, so it was fair enough really.
 

Andre

International Regular
Arthur said there were some bowlers who he felt were benefitting out of some very friendly Sheffied Shield wickets over the past few years. I think there's little doubt that Copeland was one of the guys he was referring to.
Yeah agreed. He's a very good bowler but realistically his average will rise over time, he just doesn't have that extra gear required to get really good players in all conditions.

That said, it's one thing getting favourable wickets, it's another to perform on them so he is no mug.

All aside, he's a guy who has an opinion on a lot of things and rightly or wrongly I've heard that hasn't helped his cause. Can occasionally happen with country boys.
 

Spikey

Request Your Custom Title Now!
I'm pretty sure back in the U14's, they were kids who got over-looked for Doherty, and man their fathers did not take it well
 

Woodster

International Captain
What has Copeland done in the off season ? Surely a spell in county cricket on pitches that would have made his style of bowling more penetrative and eye-catching would have been ideal to give the selectors a strong nudge as to his credentials ?
 

Spikey

Request Your Custom Title Now!
Think he's getting married sometime, which is maybe why he's not there. His to-be wife is playing netball too isn't she?
 

uvelocity

International Coach
just on his poor shield season, the whole dropping thing wouldn't have put his head in a good place
 

NUFAN

Y no Afghanistan flag
Arthur was completely correct in his assessment and Australia has looked the better outfit ever since Copeland's fall from the Test team (and Johnson's axing).

Before Copeland's debut, I predicted he'd have a career similar to Adam Dale's and I stand by that. 2 Tests for 6 wickets and an exceptional first class bowling average for the pair of them.
 

Ruckus

International Captain
Arthur was completely correct in his assessment and Australia has looked the better outfit ever since Copeland's fall from the Test team (and Johnson's axing).

Before Copeland's debut, I predicted he'd have a career similar to Adam Dale's and I stand by that. 2 Tests for 6 wickets and an exceptional first class bowling average for the pair of them.
ha that's only because Siddle and co. decided to get their act together. Has nothing to do with Copeland not being there. A fair comparison is the bowling attack with Copeland in SL, compared to the one prior to SL. Give me the former any day of the week.

How can you call it a career anyway, it's a mere cameo. It shows, and means, absolutely nothing.
 

Top