-
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.
***Official*** South Africa in Australia 2012
- Thread starter Spark
- Start date
benchmark00
Request Your Custom Title Now!
If you're left handed and you're bowling 'round the wicket I feel bad for you son, you'll get 99 wickets but an LB ain't one.
Last edited:
vic_orthdox
Global Moderator
Yup. Especially for blokes who get some natural inswing.
Reverse swing time, head around the wicket.
Reverse swing time, head around the wicket.
Top_Cat
Request Your Custom Title Now!
Risk/reward. If you're not moving the ball and get straight (which is likely for most), the angle you send them down out will make you easy pickings off the hip/pads, almost worse than being hit for 4 and you take LBW out of the equation. And to get nicks, you're basically relying on moving the ball heaps away from the bat, the wrist position for the leftie's away-going ball from around the wicket being relatively easy to pick up. That or you're relying on beating the batsman and bowling him, pretty much, which takes bowling an absolute jaffa. Compare that to over the wicket where the natural angle gives you something to work with if the ball isn't moving much and, if it is, you're really dangerous. That and you've got a better chance of being economical.
Big movers like Wasim and Amir could make bowling around the wicket worth their while and it's how someone like Starc has done it of late too. But if you're not a big mover of the ball, bowling around the sticks is just a lot harder.
Big movers like Wasim and Amir could make bowling around the wicket worth their while and it's how someone like Starc has done it of late too. But if you're not a big mover of the ball, bowling around the sticks is just a lot harder.
TumTum
Banned
What's also interesting, how is Lyon going to produce the rough? Is "busy" meant to mean something?
uvelocity
International Coach
hit me ****
wellAlbidarned
International Coach
Around the wicket can be pretty effective with the older ball if you can get a bit of off-cut going, which is a pretty natural variation for an inswing bowler like Starc.
Having said that, the rationale for most here advocating for him seems to be
"I'm not saying he should be picked based on his ODI form, but we should definitely pick him based on his ODI form."
Having said that, the rationale for most here advocating for him seems to be
"I'm not saying he should be picked based on his ODI form, but we should definitely pick him based on his ODI form."
Burgey
Request Your Custom Title Now!
This is a great umpires' truism, though oddly enough it's never stopped the ****s firing me, a leftie, when a right armer goes around the wicket.
That's because they're arseholes.
I have never seen Quiney, but I'd have him over Warner.
Top_Cat
Request Your Custom Title Now!
Sourcing Dorries now? Have we really fallen that far?
Absolutely none of what Dorries says matches up with what anyone else has said about Watson. He won't play as a bat only, not because his batting isn't good enough but because if he's not fit to bowl, he's probably not fit enough to bat either. He injured his calf, that stuff usually stops people from doing stuff sorta integral to batting. Usual rubbish from Dorries.
Absolutely none of what Dorries says matches up with what anyone else has said about Watson. He won't play as a bat only, not because his batting isn't good enough but because if he's not fit to bowl, he's probably not fit enough to bat either. He injured his calf, that stuff usually stops people from doing stuff sorta integral to batting. Usual rubbish from Dorries.
Last edited:
That makes more sense.
howardj
International Coach
Prince EWS
Global Moderator
Yep. If Watson isn't fit to bowl then he's not fit overall, and while he may be able to bat he'd risk injuring it to a worse degree if he played. If a fit Watson decided to give up bowling he'd still be picked I imagine but they don't want to risk the whole package long-term for the possibility of half of it at half capacity right now.
Last edited: