Can Sunil Narine become an all time great?

[marc71178]

I note that every sub par performance already has an excuse as to why it happened.

Difference being that ATGs don't need these excuses because they perform all over.

 

[viriya]

I note that every sub par performance already has an excuse as to why it happened.

Difference being that ATGs don't need these excuses because they perform all over.

ATG don't necessarily perform all over at 25. Spinners only get to their prime after 30.

 

[WindieWeathers]

I note that every sub par performance already has an excuse as to why it happened.

Difference being that ATGs don't need these excuses because they perform all over.

What was Warne's stats after ten tests?

Warne and Murali also never had much glory in India and Australia respectively so i'm not sure about that last point.

 

[Dan]

Sorry Dan i can't agree with that last notion at all. Imo Mendis got found out because batsmen were pretty much playing him like a medium pacer..and Mendis simply couldn't adapt. Meanwhile Sunil has several variations of how he delivers the ball...for example if you look at his last test HERE you'll find that some wickets he joggs in and delivers, others he just casually walks in and he can also change his action too...which he did for a few of those wickets he got. So for me comparing Mendis and Narine is just not really a fair comparrison as Narine's got more tricks up his sleeve...plus he's able to use his off-break as a stock ball which can rip pretty big when he wants it to.

Apologies for taking so long to reply, I've been out on a pub crawl followed by an all-night Disney marathon and had to catch some sleep some time. Arguing about Sunil Narine wasn't my first priority

I don't really think that a spinner changing their action is a mark for them. As we've seen with Ashwin, his "I'm going to stop mid-action and try to disrupt the batsman" ball seems to be hit for six a disproportionate amount of times. Not to mention the very first rule taught to a young bowler when they start trying variations is to deliver them with the same general action.

I think Narine is more skilled than Mendis and a better exponent of the art, and don't deny his ridiculous skills in getting a ball to do what he gets a ball to do. I just don't think that will necessarily translate into Test success, let alone ATG status.

Well what about Ajmal? he started his test career at age 30/31 didn't he? and he is the one i'd compare Narine too...so when you think about the impact Ajmal has made in his test career he can't have been anywhere near as talented as Narine is aged 25...so that's why i think Narine has a chance of really pushing on now.

This argument really makes no sense to me whatsoever. Extrapolating Narine's talent based on the assumption of Ajmal's talent 10 years ago, or what?

In all honesty Narine has only had two poor tests which were in Bang on very flat tracks...the one in england was a washout as i explained in the OP...other than that he's been excellent...and like i've said before Warne was poor at the start of his career and Swann was dropped for years before he returned at around 30 years old and really started to flourish...id also add that Ashwin has a great record at home but can't buy a wicket away from asia...that's not a problem for Narine which is another bonus for him at this stage of his career.

To be perfectly honest with you, I chalk up Narine's 6/91 in Hamilton more to him being the only competent bowler on the WI side than it being some watershed ATG haul of brilliant mystery spin bowling. Sammy/Best/Permaul were never going to trouble anyone, and basically the wickets have to fall to someone. NZ are good at lollapsing to average spin anyway - as others have said - and he bowled 43 overs in taking that 6-fer on a track that, by NZ standards, was rather helpful. It's not like he absolutely ripped through them and dominated the game - watching that Test it struck me that he was far and away the most dangerous of the WI bowlers (not saying much in that series tbh), but he was hardly unplayable.

Well for a start Ashwin has a better record and is only a year older...also Narine has played six tests compared to Lyon's 33..Nathan is doing great right now but it's clear he's just a conventional off-break spinner with no thrills while Narine has the ability to captivate people...and despite the great records ultimately that's what really seperated Warne and Murali from the rest.

If you actually look at Lyon's action, IMO he has the greater tools for consistent success. He's by no means an ATG off-spinner, but as far as I'm concerned he has a very, very strong action to bowl off spin at Test level. He drives through with his back knee and hip, which helps him to gain dip and bounce -- he isn't reliant upon beating batsmen off the pitch, which is good because he simply can't do that latter with any regularity. Narine's action really doesn't lend itself to getting overspin or drift, meaning he's reliant upon his turn to take wickets, rather than beating batsmen in the air.

Narine's only hope is that opposition batsmen can't work him out in Tests. If they can't read him by the time he's played 20-odd Tests (if he plays 20-odd Tests between T20 commitments), he might be very good indeed. If they can, he'll be of limited value on tracks that don't turn.

 

[Prince EWS]

I suspect at the end of his career he'll be remembered as a lot better than Tim May, but I genuinely believe it's only a matter of time before he is found out in Test cricket and becomes limited to being a highly effective option in the shorter (especially shortest) format of the game. Like a certain Sri Lankan who is comparable to Narine in almost every way bar nationality.

The big difference between Narine and Mendis is that Narine really rips his off break. He's not big on flight or drift because of how front on he is when he delivers the ball, but it really does break off the surface, giving him a genuine stock ball and a way to be threatening even if the batsmen read him. I don't think Mendis is as good a comparison as you're making out.

 

[Prince EWS]

Apologies for taking so long to reply, I've been out on a pub crawl followed by an all-night Disney marathon and had to catch some sleep some time. Arguing about Sunil Narine wasn't my first priority

I don't really think that a spinner changing their action is a mark for them. As we've seen with Ashwin, his "I'm going to stop mid-action and try to disrupt the batsman" ball seems to be hit for six a disproportionate amount of times. Not to mention the very first rule taught to a young bowler when they start trying variations is to deliver them with the same general action.

I think Narine is more skilled than Mendis and a better exponent of the art, and don't deny his ridiculous skills in getting a ball to do what he gets a ball to do. I just don't think that will necessarily translate into Test success, let alone ATG status.



This argument really makes no sense to me whatsoever. Extrapolating Narine's talent based on the assumption of Ajmal's talent 10 years ago, or what?



To be perfectly honest with you, I chalk up Narine's 6/91 in Hamilton more to him being the only competent bowler on the WI side than it being some watershed ATG haul of brilliant mystery spin bowling. Sammy/Best/Permaul were never going to trouble anyone, and basically the wickets have to fall to someone. NZ are good at lollapsing to average spin anyway - as others have said - and he bowled 43 overs in taking that 6-fer on a track that, by NZ standards, was rather helpful. It's not like he absolutely ripped through them and dominated the game - watching that Test it struck me that he was far and away the most dangerous of the WI bowlers (not saying much in that series tbh), but he was hardly unplayable.




If you actually look at Lyon's action, IMO he has the greater tools for consistent success. He's by no means an ATG off-spinner, but as far as I'm concerned he has a very, very strong action to bowl off spin at Test level. He drives through with his back knee and hip, which helps him to gain dip and bounce -- he isn't reliant upon beating batsmen off the pitch, which is good because he simply can't do that latter with any regularity. Narine's action really doesn't lend itself to getting overspin or drift, meaning he's reliant upon his turn to take wickets, rather than beating batsmen in the air.

Narine's only hope is that opposition batsmen can't work him out in Tests. If they can't read him by the time he's played 20-odd Tests (if he plays 20-odd Tests between T20 commitments), he might be very good indeed. If they can, he'll be of limited value on tracks that don't turn.

I do however agree with the entirety of this post.

 

[Flem274*]

Yeah the turn and the unreadability is what saves him from from batsmen coming down to meet him. He puts the ball in the same place every time, but if you're beaten by the turn or fail to read him you're stuffed.

 

[Dan]

What was Warne's stats after ten tests?

Poor. He was also a dumb, fat blonde prick at the time. But watching him bowl, you could tell that he had the skills (big turn, ability to beat batsmen in the air with ridiculous drift) to be successful in the long-term. It never meant he was guaranteed to become an ATG, but there was always the potential there that he would become very, very good indeed thanks to the tools he had at his disposal.

 

[Dan]

The big difference between Narine and Mendis is that Narine really rips his off break. He's not big on flight or drift because of how front on he is when he delivers the ball, but it really does break off the surface, giving him a genuine stock ball and a way to be threatening even if the batsmen read him. I don't think Mendis is as good as comparison as you're making out.

That's a fair point, actually.

And TBF I am saying that Narine is better than Mendis

 

[NUFAN]

Poor. He was also a dumb, fat blonde prick at the time. But watching him bowl, you could tell that he had the skills (big turn, ability to beat batsmen in the air with ridiculous drift) to be successful in the long-term. It never meant he was guaranteed to become an ATG, but there was always the potential there that he would become very, very good indeed thanks to the tools he had at his disposal.

Care to explain this further? I don't think there was anything about his game back then that makes your statement correct.

 

[watson]

a dumb, fat blonde prick

The very obvious interpretation is inexperienced.

 

[Dan]

Personal bias

 

[NUFAN]

Fair enough.

BTW, if you remove Warne's debut and look at his stats from his next 10 matches, his record is actually very good.

30 wickets @ 26.83 - 2.45 rpo best bowling 7/52

The reason I'm bringing this up is that Narine needs to have a run of 10 consecutive Tests averaging around that mark before we can seriously start thinking about him as a good Windies Test spinner (let alone an ATG).

 

[social]

Fair enough.

BTW, if you remove Warne's debut and look at his stats from his next 10 matches, his record is actually very good.

30 wickets @ 26.83 - 2.45 rpo best bowling 7/52

The reason I'm bringing this up is that Narine needs to have a run of 10 consecutive Tests averaging around that mark before we can seriously start thinking about him as a good Windies Test spinner (let alone an ATG).

Would get a clearer picture if some of those tests are outside WI as some of their pitches are ridiculously in favour of spin bowling atm

 

[hendrix]

Nah Narine really did bowl beautifully in Hamilton. He had the ball on a string. Taylor and Williamson were in godly form and are actually good players of spin and they were visibly struggling. Every single ball was threatening for long spells. It was excellent bowling.

 

[Hurricane]

Nah Narine really did bowl beautifully in Hamilton. He had the ball on a string. Taylor and Williamson were in godly form and are actually good players of spin and they were visibly struggling. Every single ball was threatening for long spells. It was excellent bowling.

awta

 

[WindieWeathers]

Apologies for taking so long to reply, I've been out on a pub crawl followed by an all-night Disney marathon and had to catch some sleep some time. Arguing about Sunil Narine wasn't my first priority

I don't really think that a spinner changing their action is a mark for them. As we've seen with Ashwin, his "I'm going to stop mid-action and try to disrupt the batsman" ball seems to be hit for six a disproportionate amount of times. Not to mention the very first rule taught to a young bowler when they start trying variations is to deliver them with the same general action.

He doesn't use different actions because he's been found wanting like Ashwin has away from Asia...he changes action because one delivery is more slow (the one where he switches the ball between his fingers) which he had when he first played for us HERE and the other one is more conventional as seen in his last match HERE ...but both are equally effective and allows him to mix things up when he wants to.

I think Narine is more skilled than Mendis and a better exponent of the art, and don't deny his ridiculous skills in getting a ball to do what he gets a ball to do. I just don't think that will necessarily translate into Test success, let alone ATG status.

He's played six tests and only really failed in one or two at a push...and like i said before Warne started off poorly and so did Swann which is why i believe Narine has a chance to shine at test level.

This argument really makes no sense to me whatsoever. Extrapolating Narine's talent based on the assumption of Ajmal's talent 10 years ago, or what?

I'm not sure you fully understood what i meant Dan..my argument was Ajmal and Narine's style is very similar...Narine has had a headstart on Ajmal considering he's been playing international cricket for about three years now while Ajmal had to wait until he was in his 30s...therefore if they have a similar style and Ajmal has been class at test level why can't Narine do the same considering Sunil has had more top level experience at this stage compared to when Ajmal was 25?

To be perfectly honest with you, I chalk up Narine's 6/91 in Hamilton more to him being the only competent bowler on the WI side than it being some watershed ATG haul of brilliant mystery spin bowling. Sammy/Best/Permaul were never going to trouble anyone, and basically the wickets have to fall to someone. NZ are good at lollapsing to average spin anyway - as others have said - and he bowled 43 overs in taking that 6-fer on a track that, by NZ standards, was rather helpful. It's not like he absolutely ripped through them and dominated the game - watching that Test it struck me that he was far and away the most dangerous of the WI bowlers (not saying much in that series tbh), but he was hardly unplayable.

Again i can't agree...he earned his wickets and it's not the first time he's ran through NZ as he done the same in the caribbean in both the tests and the one dayers...granted there wasn't much competition for him in our side but shouldn't that have meant NZ could have just played him with caution and milked the others? in the end we had an innings lead because of Narine.

If you actually look at Lyon's action, IMO he has the greater tools for consistent success. He's by no means an ATG off-spinner, but as far as I'm concerned he has a very, very strong action to bowl off spin at Test level. He drives through with his back knee and hip, which helps him to gain dip and bounce -- he isn't reliant upon beating batsmen off the pitch, which is good because he simply can't do that latter with any regularity. Narine's action really doesn't lend itself to getting overspin or drift, meaning he's reliant upon his turn to take wickets, rather than beating batsmen in the air.

He has started to flight the ball much more now since working with Mushy...and that's proven to be lethel in the IPL...we will have to wait and see how that translates into the tests this year but in truth he flighted some balls for the 6fer he got aswell...as for Lyon...the question i ask is how many games has he actually WON for the Aussies? that to me is what defines a good spinner...we all know how many games Warne, Murali, Swann, Ajmal etc won for their teams and that's why they were special.

Narine's only hope is that opposition batsmen can't work him out in Tests. If they can't read him by the time he's played 20-odd Tests (if he plays 20-odd Tests between T20 commitments), he might be very good indeed. If they can, he'll be of limited value on tracks that don't turn.

Not sure that's gonna come to pass imo...the guy just has too many tricks for that...same with Ajmal...Narine has played three IPL's and his wickets are all over the internet and yet you still see top class batsmen being made to look foolish..no doubt he's gonna have some bad games where someone takes to him...but the guys mental strength is also another quality that can seperate him from the rest of his generation...he just keeps coming back for more.

 

[WindieWeathers]

Poor. He was also a dumb, fat blonde prick at the time. But watching him bowl, you could tell that he had the skills (big turn, ability to beat batsmen in the air with ridiculous drift) to be successful in the long-term. It never meant he was guaranteed to become an ATG, but there was always the potential there that he would become very, very good indeed thanks to the tools he had at his disposal.

And this is what i'm saying Dan...Narine has the potential to be an all-time great at tests imo purely down to the skills and mental ability he has..is it certain? of course not..but the way he's developing i can only see him improving from here on.

 

[Maximas]

as for Lyon...the question i ask is how many games has he actually WON for the Aussies? that to me is what defines a good spinner...we all know how many games Warne, Murali, Swann, Ajmal etc won for their teams and that's why they were special.

It's hardly the role for an Australian off-spinner to win matches for the team given the conditions he has to play in most of the time, but he made significant improvements to his action leading up to the winter ashes and has played very well in the 11 matches (I think) he has played since then - all of them in conditions where spinners would struggle to put in match-winning performances, taking key wickets and occasionally taking substantial hauls, you could almost argue his MCG five-for was a matchwinning performance, probably not though. When Australia tour the UAE later this year he will have a better chance to go head to head with Ajmal and win games for the Aussies.

 

[Dan]

It's obviously pointless continuing this discussion, it's going around and around in circles with the goal posts shifting every time.

You're never going to accept even the slightest criticism of Narine, and I guess there's no reason why I shouldn't let you believe he's the next Murali. By all means come back to me in ten years time with 'I told you so' if Narine ends up with 500 Test wickets at 20, but AFAIC the likelihood of that happening is tiny.

Speculating that Sunil Narine could become a Test ATG on the basis of his ability to bowl in T20 cricket, 6 Test matches containing one performance above the level of half-decent, and in spite of his complete inability to beat batsmen in flight because of his front-on action (flighting the ball fractionally more than David Hussey =/= beating the batsman in flight, ftr) is completely ludicrous.

"Is Narine going to be a Test quality bowler?" is one thing to ask after 6 Tests and a bowling average of 40. "Is Narine going to favourably compare to Warne, Muralitharan, O'Reilly, Grimmett, Bedi or Laker" is a whole other question. The former is a debate worth having. The latter is ridiculous.

Narine is good at what he does, and he'll go down in history as one of the most remarkable T20 bowlers we've ever seen. But in Test cricket, I suspect he'll be solid yet wholly unmemorable.