Alderman slags off Giles

[Richard]

Unless he's getting a lot of assistance, Giles doesn't bowl very many wicket balls.

Not at all - Giles only needs a pitch that's offering a bit to fingerspin and he'll immidiately be a force to be reckoned with.
If he doesn't have that, of course, he won't bowl any wicket-taking balls.

 

[Richard]

I can honestly never understand the criticism of Giles for his bowling on that tour. It's a slightly negative tactic to bowl outside leg-stump, yes, but it's a legitimate tactic and most importantly, it worked!

I'm always interested to hear how the tactics used in that Bangalore Test worked.
Yes, Tendulkar got himself in a flap because Sehwag was getting away with using his feet and hitting inside-out and lost his wicket - but he got 90 in the process and Giles got 1-74.
England's success in bowling India out for 238 owed far, far more to Hoggard and Flintoff exploiting the seam-friendly conditions.

 

[Swervy]

And on turners he's categorically not an average bowler and is in fact a World-class strike-force; and since summer 2003 he's been attacked well when it's not turning despite bowling the over-the-wicket line.
And if Harmison attacks anything Australian with too much success this summer I'll be astonished.

what would constitute success for harmison this ashes series then...i get the feeling that even if he took 50 wickets, you would find some reason why he didnt bowl well

 

[Richard]

It'd depend... on whether he bowled well.
But having seen Harmison this summer I'm almost convinced that he's never going to amount to much now - he's been too poor for too long.
If he manages to average even 30 I'll be very surprised.

 

[Richard]

He was bowling to a plan, and the plan worked - yet he gets lots of criticism for it!

And what is wrong in a bowler getting wickets by frustrating the batsman?

Well, if my name was Richard...

Interesting to see how many wickets Giles has actually got bowling like that, and what cost they came at.
Because I've not once said no-one will ever get a single wicket by restricting the scoring - I have said it'll not be a very successful tactic.
And amazingly - it hasn't been.
Only time Giles has ever got wickets is when he's been able to attack, with the turning ball.
Of course, when he has he's always been a very, very fine bowler.

 

[Richard]

I thought the reason for it was because he was bowling to a plan set up by the England management and Giles being a big team man was going along with it. Thant and he doesn't turn the ball a great deal (and yes I know what Richard's response will be).

Thing is, you know that I'm telling it like it is - an intelligent chap like you can notice that Giles does turn the ball lots on turners, and pitches it in the right areas, and as a result gets good figures whenever he bowls well on turners.
Yet when the over-the-wicket-foot-outside-leg tactic has been applied on non-turners it's never produced results, and the reasons for that are obvious.

 

[Swervy]

It'd depend... on whether he bowled well.
But having seen Harmison this summer I'm almost convinced that he's never going to amount to much now - he's been too poor for too long.
If he manages to average even 30 I'll be very surprised.

well if he does average under 30 with the ball, he will be only the third pace bowler in the last 11 series Australia have played in to average under 30 (the other two being malinga and lawson)....

Given that he is an out and out strike bowler, maybe how regularly he takes the wickets will be a better guide to how well he does this summer

 

[Richard]

And if he takes even 15 wickets at an average of 3 per Test I'll be surprised.

 

[Swervy]

And if he takes even 15 wickets at an average of 3 per Test I'll be surprised.

what would you say if he took those 15 wickets as follows:

the score in the series is 1-0 to Australia with 2 to go

Harmison takes 10 in the fourth test,which basically wins the match for England

In the fifth, he gets none in the first innings, then takes 5 of the top order in the second to enable England to win the match and the series

His average, thanks to no wickets in the first 3 tests is 35.

Would you consider that sort of performance a success?

I reckon the guy would be a cricket legend if he did that!!!!

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

However fast he was, I doubt anyone else will ever have the phenominal success he did in England in 1981 and 1989.

McGrath?

 

[tooextracool]

http://content.cricinfo.com/engvaus/content/story/210960.html

Very good comments from Terry. I think Giles is massively overrated by the Pommies on this forum.

so how many players are left who havent been slagged off by the aussies?

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

so how many players are left who havent been slagged off by the aussies?

Flintoff has got nothing but resounding praise so far from the Australian camp. Same with Strauss and Pietersen. The bowlers have been generally attacked though.

 

[Pratters]

is in fact a World-class strike-force

No, really no.

If Giles is as good as spinners like Warne, Murali and stuff who are indeed strike force on turners, we siee different games.

 

[tooextracool]

Flintoff has got nothing but resounding praise so far from the Australian camp. Same with Strauss and Pietersen. The bowlers have been generally attacked though.

strauss has?
first warne claimed that he saw a weakness in his technique against spin and then mcgrath has decided to target him.
they have gone OTT in praise for pieterson and flintoff though.

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

strauss has?
first warne claimed that he saw a weakness in his technique against spin and then mcgrath has decided to target him.
they have gone OTT in praise for pieterson and flintoff though.

Oh, true. Well, Warne said he could handle him, but I think being targetted by McGrath is a compliment more than anything else. He always targets the players he considers the bigges threat.

 

[aussie]

i dont whether to disagree or disagree with alderman's statement here. But one thing is for cetain its another pre-ashes niggle

 

[tooextracool]

Oh, true. Well, Warne said he could handle him, but I think being targetted by McGrath is a compliment more than anything else. He always targets the players he considers the bigges threat.

well perhaps so. personally though the further away simon jones stays away from the limelight before the series, the better. for me, hes going to be one of the key bowlers in the series.

 

[marc71178]

A very good point TEC - comfortably the under-rated man in our attack.

 

[steds]

i dont whether to disagree or disagree with alderman's statement here.

That spoilt for choice, eh?

 

[Richard]

No, really no.

If Giles is as good as spinners like Warne, Murali and stuff who are indeed strike force on turners, we siee different games.

And I've said he's as good as Warne and Murali where?
I have, however, said he's almost as good on turning pitches as they are, though, and it's true.
You simply cannot take Giles' career as a whole and say "he's average", because the fact is there are two different bowlers depending on the circumstances. Giles on a non-turner is obviously rubbish and nothing close to the bowler Warne, Murali and Mushtaq Ahmed (pre-1999 version) are. But on a turner he's very, very good indeed.
On the only 2 occasions Giles and Murali have both bowled well on the same pitch Giles came out with 16 wickets at 21.81 and Murali with 19 at 11.42, and given that Sri Lanka are far more accomplished at handling spin than England I'd say the difference was only fairly marginal.