2011?? Your team

[marc71178]

You can. If you're a rubbish bowler at the domestic level - which Khan mostly is - your chances of international success are close to zero.

And how exactly do you know how rubbish someone is without watching him then?

I'm guessing you've seen little or none of Onions as well...

 

[Richard]

And notice I haven't actually said Onions will be perennially rubbish, although such a thing is certainly perfectly possible.

Amjad Khan, on the other hand, cannot be much good if he cannot even average under 30 at the English domestic level... except for a single season where he managed the wondrous average of 28.

Not to mention the economy-rate of all-but 4-an-over over the career.

 

[Spitfires_Fan]

I actually think Khan's record is pretty decent, when you take into account such factors as the fact that he's only ever played 1st Division FC cricket, he bowls for half the season on Kentish pitches under Kentish sunshine (doesn't often get much assistance from dodgy wickets/weather and he opens the bowling with the license to attack, with steadier, more defensive bowlers such as Saggers and Cook supporting him from the other end.

It's a moot point at the moment really, seeing as he's out for 9 months and quite possibly won't be the same player when he comes back. Reminds me a bit of Fulton and his eye injury a few years ago. Put Dean Headley in with them and you have a growing group of Kent cricketers that have had their prospects of an England career either starting or flourishing thwarted by injury over the past few years.

Then of course you have the likes of Igglesden, McCague and our very own GoJo who just haven't been quite good enough to cut it.

Min Patel and Ealham as well actually, come to think of it.

The list goes on and on.

 

[Richard]

I simply cannot believe Khan was ever or would ever have been close to Headley's class.

 

[pup11]

Isn't ECB dreaming about global-domination by 2011, but looking at their bench-strength atm thats look pretty tough.

 

[Richard]

ECB is always setting a certain date for Global supremacy, and it's a very bad idea IMO. If you become something at a certain point, you will always cease to become so at a later one.

You should simply aim to be the best you can in every way, at every time.

 

[Spitfires_Fan]

I simply cannot believe Khan was ever or would ever have been close to Headley's class.

You're putting words in my mouth, or whatever the forum equivalent of that is.

Khan has been mentioned with regard to playing for England, but before he had a chance to get there, he sustained a serious injury. Headley played for England and did very well, but his career was cut short by injury, thus preventing him from flourishing and becoming one of the best seamers England have had in recent years.

The point I was making was that Kent players, for one reason or another, don't seem to have had much luck in international circles.

 

[Richard]

OK, misunderstood you.

I still think, though, that Khan would not have got too far had he played for England, and unless he'd been better than he has to date would not have made it at all.

 

[Spitfires_Fan]

I still think that he can get into the side and do well, but much depends on how he recovers from this injury. Hopefully he won't be left with any lasting handicap, unlike Fulton with his eye injury.

I guess at the end of the day only time will tell - maybe we'll have this discussion again in 10 years and see who's right!

 

[pup11]

Adil Rashid is being projected as the next big thing after Warne (in english country circuit), now i haven't seen this guy bowl so can anyone tell me how good he really is and more importantly is he good enough to be compared to Warne.

 

[pup11]

Do you guys consider Monty Panesar a good enough ODI spinner and are there are any better spin options in England to replace him in the ODI side atm.


Won't Batty or Blackwell be a better options compared to Panesar.

 

[Richard]

Batty, God no, Blackwell, at present has done more than Panesar to deserve selection, but I do not see either him or Giles (if he ever gets back in) as particularly good ODI spinners, and both of them are flattered by their records to date.

As for Rashid - he's barely played half a First-Class season yet, never mind a one-day one, and talking about him as a certain Test prospect is still completely premature, never mind as a ODI one.

 

[SJS]

Do you guys consider Monty Panesar a good enough ODI spinner and are there are any better spin options in England to replace him in the ODI side atm.

.

I think Monty's problem seems to be that he is not much of a thinker. I could be wrong but thats the feeling one gets. Spinners, in one dayers even more so, can do quite a bit by out-thinking a batsman and being clever and smart. Thats why so many much less gifted players (mostly batsmen) have had so many moments as bowlers in the limited overs game. The names are too many to recount. Gayle, Richards, Sehwag, Sachin. Jayasuriya, Arjuna come immediately to mind.

Amongst current bowlers, Vettori is a fine example. I think Giles was much less gifted than Monty but much smarter than him (except when his skipper decided he would use him in a totally negative mode).

 

[pup11]

Yeah i also think Monty goes into bowl with a pre-set plan that this is where i would ball and when he starts getting smashed he has no second plan to dismiss a batsman or stop the runs from leaking (that could be due to lack of experience).



Is there any realistic chance of Giles playing ODI cricket for England in the future.

 

[Scaly piscine]

Panesar's ODI bowling is completely devoid of variation, it's just flat and quick ball after ball after ball. Vaughan's a part-timer and he pretty much outbowled him just because he bowled some obscenely slow deliveries that messed the batsmen up.

 

[Pup Clarke]

Vaughan's a part-timer and he pretty much outbowled him just because he bowled some obscenely slow deliveries that messed the batsmen up.

Very slow deliveries are actually harder for the batsmen to put away. As I say especially for a spinner the slower you bowl the harder it is to time the ball, get to the pitch of the ball and make good connection. Once the ball goes above the batsmen's eyeline it becomes nigh on impossible to judge length thus meaning that there's more likelihood of a miscue or top edge.

 

[Richard]

Or at least that's the theory of it.

If it was true, Jeremy Snape would have an awesome economy-rate. But he doesn't.

Some batsmen can smash the sort of stuff Vaughan generally tends to bowl out of the park. But sometimes it's as if he's bowling a ping-pong ball.

 

[Richard]

I think Monty's problem seems to be that he is not much of a thinker. I could be wrong but thats the feeling one gets. Spinners, in one dayers even more so, can do quite a bit by out-thinking a batsman and being clever and smart. Thats why so many much less gifted players (mostly batsmen) have had so many moments as bowlers in the limited overs game. The names are too many to recount. Gayle, Richards, Sehwag, Sachin. Jayasuriya, Arjuna come immediately to mind.

Amongst current bowlers, Vettori is a fine example. I think Giles was much less gifted than Monty but much smarter than him (except when his skipper decided he would use him in a totally negative mode).

Correct me if I'm wrong, but is being smart not a gift?

 

[SJS]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but is being smart not a gift?

Intellect is. Smartness is related but not completely. There are some very clever blokes (which is really what we are talking of here) who dont have great IQ's.

Tricks can be learnt and it is these tricks of the trade that will make a bowler smarter. A bowler needs to be kind of street-smart if you see what I mean rather than just come and do his stuff by 'rote'.

Anyway for the sake of this argument it doesnt matter wether being unsmart is Monty's fault or his parents'

 

[Richard]

I still think that there's an element of that "streetwise" quality which helps any spinner so much that will come naturally and will often be damn hard to learn.

IMO it's a gift that someone like Vettori simply has. He's always been like it as long as I can remember.