• 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.

The Art of Leg-spin (Wrist Spin) in a dfficult place ?

Andre

Andre

International Regular
Having played with him, the best way to put it would be that he was possibly a more gifted batsman than he was bowler, but certainly a more dedicated bowler than he was batsman.
 
SFB

SFB

Cricket Spectator
Prince EWS said:
Nah, absolute bull****. He was a bowler Canada used as a pinch hitter to open their innings, and because it came off they kept trying it, and South Australia tried it a few times in one day cricket as well. He was nothing more than an effective pinch hitter as a batsman though.

He played 31 First Class games or Victoria at the start of his career, in which he didn't bat above 8 once in the first innings of a game, regularly found himself coming at 9 below David Saker and/or Paul Reiffell and even spent a game batting 11 below Shane Warne. In that period he averaged eight with the bat in 42 innings. In his first game for South Australia (which happened after all that, obv) he batted 10 below Ryan Harris. He was 32 years old. You're going to tell me that a 32 year old who had played 30+ First Class games batting 8-11, bowling a ****load of overs every game and averaging 8 with the bat was a batting allrounder??

After that World Cup innings for Canada he did get some opportunities batting higher in one day cricket, and he may have even been picked to bat six or seven at some point in a First Class game after that (I cbf manually looking at any more scorecards though itbt) but it didn't work out at all - the innings was a flash in the plan - and all this happened in his mid to late 30s anyway. If he was ever a batting allrounder (which I contend anyway tbh) it was very late in his career.

The bloke was a bowler. His most famous/successful contribution came with the bat, but that doesn't change that fact.
Click to expand...
Prince EWS, his stats seemed to indicate he was more a bowler versus a batsmen, but with a bowling average of 45.61, he wasn't a great one.

benchmark00 said:
but MacGill has the classical leg spinners action, and more people should be trying to emulate his technique rather than Warne's. Warne is too high and it shouldn't be taught to kids like that.
Click to expand...
Agree totally. The problem with bowler's emulating Warne and his naturally high action is they don't seem to know he dragged himself around for months as a kid by his hands after having his legs broken at kinder. That strengthened his wrists significantly from an early age.
Macgill's action, more round arm and with a looser wrist, is what beginner's should experiment with to see the benefits of leg spin. (Drift, big break, bounce)
 
Last edited:
Prince EWS

Prince EWS

Global Moderator
Find me a human who thinks a bloke batting below Saker and Reiffel on a regular basis and Warne when available, averaging 8 with the bat over 30 games while bowling lots of overs in every innings is a batting allrounder and I'll show you a human talking out of his arse.
 
P

Pup Clarke

Cricketer Of The Year
Prince EWS said:
Find me a human who thinks a bloke batting below Saker and Reiffel on a regular basis and Warne when available, averaging 8 with the bat over 30 games while bowling lots of overs in every innings is a batting allrounder and I'll show you a human talking out of his arse.
Click to expand...
Regular Chris Tremlett this guy, lads.
 
benchmark00

benchmark00

Request Your Custom Title Now!
Cribb, you're genuinely wrong here buddy. You can read all the scorecards you want, you can look at all the stats you want, but there are people who actually watch him play, not just read cricinfo, who can tell you.
 
Top_Cat

Top_Cat

Request Your Custom Title Now!
Hmmmm, going with Andre and sPEWS on this one, remember Davison getting picked for Vic primarily for his bowling. Solid hitter but get the ball around his lugs was the mail on his batting, bowling was 'handy' but he got more opportunities because of it. SA picked him a little more for batting after the WC and that was a massive blunder, only hidden by the clown-car of blunders which accompanied it (lolFlower).
 
Last edited:
Andre

Andre

International Regular
benchmark00 said:
Ah fair. I know a few Glenelg guys and he batted around 4/5 for them. Was that before or after the world cup though? Not sure.
Click to expand...
His time in SA was a year or 2 pre and post 2003 World Cup. Spent 3 of 4 seasons in Sydney before he moved to Brisbane for the gig at the Academy.
 
Prince EWS

Prince EWS

Global Moderator
benchmark00 said:
Cribb, you're genuinely wrong here buddy. You can read all the scorecards you want, you can look at all the stats you want, but there are people who actually watch him play, not just read cricinfo, who can tell you.
Click to expand...
Batting 5 or 6 in grade cricket doesn't make you a batting allrounder if you're taking lots of poles as well and average 8 with the bat in the Shield batting in the tail below world class batsmen David Saker, Paul Reiffel and Shane Warne, all the while getting through ****loads of overs. Otherwise, come on down batting allrounders Jason Krejza and Nathan Hauritz.

There's no doubt he had some batting ability, but he was a bowler for the vast majority of his cricketing life and even after he played that World Cup innings he was still employed principally as a bowler in most of the cricket he played. That innings he played changed a lot of people's perceptions of him as a player so of course a lot of people are going to think he was a batsman or a batting allrounder, including the ****s you talk to no doubt, but it doesn't make it any less of a myth. In limited overs cricket he was probably more of an even allrounder by his mid to late 30s but he was certainly more of a bowler throughout his career.

You can tell me I'm wrong all I like and make assumptions about exactly how I could've become so misguided as to disagree with you but you're absolutely kidding yourself if you think John Davison was a batting allrounder.
 
Last edited:
benchmark00

benchmark00

Request Your Custom Title Now!
Top_Cat said:
Hmmmm, going with Andre and sPEWS on this one, remember Davison getting picked for Vic primarily for his bowling. Solid hitter but get the ball around his lugs was the mail on his batting, bowling was 'handy' but he got more opportunities because of it. SA picked him a little more for batting after the WC and that was a massive blunder, only hidden by the clown-car of blunders which accompanied it (lolFlower).
Click to expand...
That's the thing though. Having more than one string to his bow allowed him games at FC level in Australia, but he was seen as a batsman who bowled handily, not the other way around.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Top