Answering the critics

[Rik]

Re: That's not really the point.

There are many batsmen who've done better this year than Vaughan, Tres, Nasser et al. But I really don't think we'll be seeing Mal Loye in the Test side.

Yes, Harmison will be asked to do a different job for England, as I pointed out several posts ago. And yes, I do think he should be picked, not because these figures have completely answered his critics, but because I believe they've shown that the waywardness of the Ashes tour was a blip.

Caddick and Anderson with the new ball, a la McGrath and Gillespie, followed by raw pace in short, now more controlled bursts, a la Brett Lee.

And before you get all agitated, I'm not suggesting that any one of our three is fit to lace the boots of any one of theirs. Nor am I saying that just because it's their formula it should necessarily be ours.

But, it's a formula which has been shown to work, and is, I believe, the best we've got available at present. I'd certainly rather see Harmison in than Silverwood or Sidebottom, and I'm not convinced that Tudor is any less likely to chuck in one four-ball an over than he has been in the past.

Give Harmsion a go. Who knows, in another 45 Test matches his record might still bear comparison with Mr. Streak's. :P

Well at least Harmison has managed to do something that Lee is yet to, bowl fast and still have a good econ rate.

Harmison and Streak? I really doubt it, different types of bowlers, one can bat the other can't, one can field the other can't, one has a good action the other doesn't, one's fast one isn't. Harmison's figures are not amazing this season, and they don't answer the critics. To be fair only success in the Test Matches will, but then if your a really harsh critic you could say that Zimbabwe's batting is weaker than most county's! Let's leave this till after the 1st Test, because you say that I'm making hasty judgements on him on a few Tests whilst you are making judgements on a few county games, we both need more evidence to support an arguement, and it's not really getting anywhere. Harmison will have a chance to answer the critics this season, but in my view his poor strike rate is one indication that he has many questions still to answer.

As for Mal Loye, he's a talented batsman who's scored 100s against McGrath and Saqlain and who I rate very highly. I hope he's given a go sometime, although people will probably remember only his barren season. Other than that he's been very consistant over the years.

 

[Rik]

Just read something LE said. In Worcestershire's 1st innings of 395, which lasted 107 overs, only 1 wide was signalled. That requires amazing accuracy or very lenient umpires, I'm not saying it was the latter though, LE did. Although I cannot say for sure that it's true, but a lack of wides + a bowler having a very good econ rate and a very poor strike rate can often mean that the bowlers are bowling deliveries well outside the off-stump, the batsmen are not playing at them and the umpires are not giving them as wides. I'm not saying this is the case but LE's comment suggested it might be:

"Steve Harmison today produced the remarkable personal bowling analysis of 2-30 from 21 overs for Durham at Stockton. Amazingly, there hasn't been a single wide so far in the Worcestershire innings. Umpires Jones and Kitchen are taking up the offer of a free vision check at Specsavers later today."

But I'll just leave it for now until I see him bowling against Zimbabwe when I can get a proper idea.

 

[Frome Exile]

Re: Re: That's not really the point.

Harmison and Streak? I really doubt it

I'm pretty confident that if he does get his chance, and takes it to such an extent that he eventually gets 51 caps, he'll end those 51 games with more than 180 wickets (only 3.5 per game) at a strike rate better than 62.

That's a pretty poor return for a guy who's been basically his country's only genuine strike bowler for a decade!

 

[Frome Exile]

There's nothing AMAZING about it.

This happens regularly.

In the current game at Taunton there have been 594 runs scored so far with only one wide.

At Old Trafford 581 with only 3.

At the Oval 715 with only 5.

A wide in first-class cricket has to be unstrikable. The bowler is aiming for strikable, but with an element of risk. Low numbers of wides don't require either poor umpiring or exceptional bowling.

And Merv Kitchen is one of the most experienced and respected umpires on the circuit. And he was a batsman!


PS. Who or what is LE?

 

[Rik]

Re: There's nothing AMAZING about it.

PS. Who or what is LE?

Lucky Eddie, one of the most respected posters on this board. I didn't say anything about the Umpires, he did :P

Also as Rich said earlier, a wide in a OD game is classed as a good ball in CC. You can bowl the ball anywhere within the strip and not be wided. But with an attack including Danny Law and Harmison, 2 bowlers well known for spraying it around, 1 wide is pretty amazing, especially when Law went for a ton off 20odd overs. 1 wide...sorry but I think most people would find it fishy.

 

[Rik]

Re: Re: Re: That's not really the point.

I'm pretty confident that if he does get his chance, and takes it to such an extent that he eventually gets 51 caps, he'll end those 51 games with more than 180 wickets (only 3.5 per game) at a strike rate better than 62.

That's a pretty poor return for a guy who's been basically his country's only genuine strike bowler for a decade!

Streak has bowled more overs than most pace bowlers would be expected to bowl, also he's been their only strike bowler. He's bowled so much that now he's suffering from it and injuries and wear and tear have knocked his pace down. Harmison would never be expected to bowl as much as Streak has, he's had to bowl so much because his support bowlers have never taken any wickets. If your going to slag someone off then at least understand the reasons, especially someone like Streak. Now that Streak is suffering from being overbowled for years, luckly Zimbabwe have found someone to take some of the pressure off him in Blignaut.

 

[luckyeddie]

It was Devil Ducky who made the snide remark regarding Harmison's 'accuracy' (and Merv Kitchen's myopia).

Well, ok actually it was me.

For the benefit of both of the Somerset fans :P, Steve Harmison's trade-off between accuracy and, er, economy is a long-standing joke (a bit like me always describing Andy Caddick as 'The Kiwi with the FA Cup ears').

Anyway, don't rely on my judgement. I think Dominic Cork's a good cricketer.

 

[marc71178]

Re: Re: There's nothing AMAZING about it.

But with an attack including Danny Law and Harmison, 2 bowlers well known for spraying it around, 1 wide is pretty amazing, especially when Law went for a ton off 20odd overs. 1 wide...sorry but I think most people would find it fishy.

Well you find it fishy because it suits your argument.

I would say the fact Law went at nigh on 5 an over suggests he bowled too many four balls.

Also bear in mind this - if Glenn McGrath bowls over after over of balls which the batsman doesn't score off, and the other bowler then picks up the wicket of a frustrated player, McGrath gets praise.

If Harmison does the same he gets criticised.

 

[Rik]

Re: Re: Re: There's nothing AMAZING about it.

Well you find it fishy because it suits your argument.

I would say the fact Law went at nigh on 5 an over suggests he bowled too many four balls.

Also bear in mind this - if Glenn McGrath bowls over after over of balls which the batsman doesn't score off, and the other bowler then picks up the wicket of a frustrated player, McGrath gets praise.

If Harmison does the same he gets criticised.

Or I find it fishy because not even a Test Match goes by with just 1 wide given.

I read that Law couldn't bowl it straight, that's why he went for so many.

Glenn McGrath isn't Steven Harmison, and Glenn McGrath takes wickets. As I said before I am going to wait till the Zimbabwe Tests before I will believe that he has improved, although people will probably claim it was "nerves" if he cracks.

Anyway Marc, that is that for now, let's see what happens during the Test.

 

[luckyeddie]

Extracted from a match report....

Durham generally bowled too short on the slow pitch, although Steve Harmison performed with good control until his figures were spoilt by a last-wicket stand of 49 in five overs.

After 25 overs he had two for 35, but in four more overs thick edges and hopeful swipes saw him concede 34 more runs before he removed Nantie Hayward's off stump.

Sounds as though 'Speedy' had a good day. Let's leave it there.

 

[Rik]

Extracted from a match report....

Durham generally bowled too short on the slow pitch, although Steve Harmison performed with good control until his figures were spoilt by a last-wicket stand of 49 in five overs.

After 25 overs he had two for 35, but in four more overs thick edges and hopeful swipes saw him concede 34 more runs before he removed Nantie Hayward's off stump.

Sounds as though 'Speedy' had a good day. Let's leave it there.

Let's see if he can repeat it

Law though, I heard, bowled everywhere except straight...

 

[marc71178]

Continuing the comparing of Harmison with top bowlers

Compare Harmison's first five tests with those of another pace bowler (one
who's got a reputation for being more accurate than he has)

Name M O R W BB Avge 5 10
GD McGrath 5 212.1 484 12 3/65 40.33 0 0 (2 tests against 93-4
NZ and 3 against SA)
SJ Harmison 5 181.3 575 14 3/57 41.07 0 0 (1 against India and 4
against Aus)

Also think of the batsmen they had to bowl to in those games...

 

[Frome Exile]

Slagging off?

Streak has bowled more overs than most pace bowlers would be expected to bowl, also he's been their only strike bowler.

If your going to slag someone off then at least understand the reasons.

I'm not slagging anyone off! Just making what I believe to be a valid comparison. Here's another one.

Streak's workload has only averaged at 36 overs per Test Match, which isn't that excessive. A number of sides over the years have had to rely heavily on a single strike bowler.
Hadlee averaged 42 overs per Test, Srinath averages 38 overs per match, and both have better averages and strike rates.

I'm perfectly aware of, and sympathise with, Streak's heroic efforts on behalf of his nation over the last decade. However, it doesn't alter the fact that I think Harmison has THE POTENTIAL to be a far superior bowler given time.


PS. nice one marc71178! Wish I'd picked Walter for my comparison post earlier!

 

[Neil Pickup]

Look at the number of LBWs and bowled Harmison has this year and that tells a different story to someone who is tossing it up wide of off stump...

 

[Frome Exile]

Good point.

Eight CC wickets so far;

4 bowled, 2 lbw, 2 caught behind.

 

[jf2001]

Harmison Vs Johnson

Bias aside, Johnson offers accuracy and wicket taking and is no slouch though not quiite at Harmison's speed. If you don't use the CC as a guide at least, what's the point?? I would pick Johnson over Harmison but I think the ECB have invested time and energy into Harmison via the Academy etc so obliged to give him more of a chance.

 

[Rich2001]

Re: Harmison Vs Johnson

Bias aside, Johnson offers accuracy and wicket taking and is no slouch though not quiite at Harmison's speed. If you don't use the CC as a guide at least, what's the point?? I would pick Johnson over Harmison but I think the ECB have invested time and energy into Harmison via the Academy etc so obliged to give him more of a chance.

I think you will see C.Tremlett of Hampshire before long... like you say they spent alot of time and money with Harmision at the Academy and Tremlett has been there 2 years running... He is a simlar build to Harmision ie due to the height he has a very awkard line and lenght to face and at 85+mph his a handful.

I think Sliverwood dersvers another chance as well equally as quick as S.Jones