Nah he's always been an out and out swing bowler, just lost it the last few months.My reaction too. He's normally the 'seam' man. Bond must have worked with him.
Eh?Saved by Hotspot, NZ lose a referral.
Given that most of SA's top order aerage more than NZ's total, I don't think they have too much to worry about.
They are wrong. NZ referred it.Eh?
CricInfo are saying that SA referred it. They're probably wrong though.
There's a huge difference between acknowledging the difference Taylor would've made in the batting line up, and using his absence as the reason for why we were bowled out for 45. That's what Hurricane is doing, and I disagree with him. I'm not a Hesson fan at all. Taylor should absolutely still be captain.I don't think anyone would claim NZ wouldn't have won if Taylor was there, but there's no way the team would be in the absolute sorry state of affairs they were leading into this tour if it wasn't for Hesson. If you can't see that, you can't see anything.
I first saw him in the Champions league with CD, he seemed to get swing then, but since then he seemed to be a more into the deck seam bowler. Trying to think back to his match winning spell against Aust as to whether he got more wickets due to seam or swing. I can't recall.Nah he's always been an out and out swing bowler, just lost it the last few months.
Well that deck was a greenie, so it was both iirc, but domestically his main weapon was always swing. It's only since coming into the Black Caps that the hit the deck traditional third seamer role has been trialled with him.I first saw him in the Champions league with CD, he seemed to get swing then, but since then he seemed to be a more into the deck seam bowler. Trying to think back to his match winning spell against Aust as to whether he got more wickets due to seam or swing. I can't recall.
Both. Some deliveries would swing like the one that got Huss, others jagged sharply like the one to castle Lyon.I first saw him in the Champions league with CD, he seemed to get swing then, but since then he seemed to be a more into the deck seam bowler. Trying to think back to his match winning spell against Aust as to whether he got more wickets due to seam or swing. I can't recall.
yeah despite his ordinary performances in ENG and AUS.Philander's record is so ridiculously awesome. 72 wickets @ 16.83.
Philander wasn't great here, sure (though he was good at Perth) but I don't think he was "ordinary" in England.yeah despite his ordinary performances in ENG and AUS.
Averaging 12 with the ball against us helped a bit.yeah despite his ordinary performances in ENG and AUS.
yeah despite his ordinary performances in ENG and AUS.
Ordinary is how you would probably describe him in England before the word "ordinary" was hijacked for poor.Philander wasn't great here, sure (though he was good at Perth) but I don't think he was "ordinary" in England.
Philander was extremely tight during the England series when the ball was not doing much and ****ing invincible when charged on.yeah despite his ordinary performances in ENG and AUS.