Best Last Over Bowlers

[JC_088]

Kyle Mills, Jeff Wilson, Daryl Tuffey or Ian Butler?

 

[wahindiawah]

:Havent you seen shoiab akhtar or rana in the last few overs with those reverse swingers?

In case of Naveed, whenever he bowls the poor fielders have a hard time chasing the ball all the way to the boundary.

Actually its not a bad either to have Naveed bowl most of the overs for Pakistan, as guys like Inzi might get thin by running around chasing the ball and Inzi might learn to run as well before the big guy hangs his boot!

 

[Mr Casson]

In case of Naveed, whenever he bowls the poor fielders have a hard time chasing the ball all the way to the boundary.

Actually its not a bad either to have Naveed bowl most of the overs for Pakistan, as guys like Inzi might get thin by running around chasing the ball and Inzi might learn to run as well before the big guy hangs his boot!

That's possibly one of the stupidest things I have ever read. Naveed-ul-hasan is excellent at the end of the innings.

Not letting your bias take over your tongue at all, are you?

 

[wahindiawah]

That's possibly one of the stupidest things I have ever read. Naveed-ul-hasan is excellent at the end of the innings.

Not letting your bias take over your tongue at all, are you?

Yeah there was some bias in it. I mean not only does he bowls well but the over also happens to be a nine ball one.

He provide good entertainment with the extra three deliveries!

 

[Mr Casson]

Yeah there was some bias in it. I mean not only does he bowls well but the over also happens to be a nine ball one.

He provide good entertainment with the extra three deliveries!

If he was Indian you'd want to have babies with him.

 

[Nate]

If he was Indian you'd want to have babies with him.

[Reubenmode] Word! [/Reubenmode]

haha Rich mate... thats just poor. Lee is bowling amazingly at the mo, not much else to say. And Harvey is good at the death, many years of watching him bowl Internationally (TVs Cup) and mainly domestically has proven it to me. my opinion.

haha and the last few posts here have been rubbish - from Unt. Guy to wahindias first. FaaipDeOiad excluded - you`re a legend mate!

 

[Richard]

That's possibly one of the stupidest things I have ever read. Naveed-ul-hasan is excellent at the end of the innings.

Not letting your bias take over your tongue at all, are you?

Ain't like it'd be extraordinarily unusual.
However, to be fair to him he's always praised the Pakistani bowlers who've been good in the past (Wasim, Waqar, Saqlain, Mushtaq, etc.) and it's madness to say that Pakistan's current attack isn't extremely poor - because it is. Even more so when there's no Shoaib.

 

[Richard]

Someone of Lee's pace is more often than not going to lack the accuracy of a McGrath or Pollock. The advantage Lee has is that he has a higher propensity to bowl wicket balls. The issue is not really whether he bowls a perfectly-pitched outswinger 5 or 6 balls an over, but whether or not his perfectly-pitched outswingers, when he does bowl them, get wickets, and of late he has been getting plenty of those.

No more than he was in 2002\03.

No, I say that whether or not any individual thinks they deserve them is completely irrelevant. The fact is that they got them. For all the poor deliveries that might get a wicket there's 50 good ones that beat the edge. Part of every sport in the world for every player is luck, and there's also more that goes into every wicket than just the ball that takes it. If Lee bowls 5 beauties in a row that swing away and beat the outside edge and then drifts onto the pads with his 6th and the batsman's eyes light up and he hits it straight down the throat of deep midwicket, there is a lot more to it than just luck, and to dismiss the wicket as undeserved is ridiculous.

No, it's not.
A poor delivery is a poor delivery, regardless of what's gone before.
Luck is part of all sports, yes - but that's all the more reason to remove it as much as possible when judging the players.

And yet just earleir you agreed with my scenario about Lee and McGrath taking early wickets leading to the batsmen being more cautious and hence scoring less in the first 15 overs. So which is it?

Oh, early wickets can reduce scoring in the first 15, no doubting that (except when chasing a big total).
Perhaps I should have been more specific and said that wickets in the middle and at the end don't cut the scoring-rate (in themselves, of course), they just reduce the likely total.

 

[Mr Casson]

They perform better without the Aeroplane... I know it's hard to comprehend, but they really do.

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

No, it's not.
A poor delivery is a poor delivery, regardless of what's gone before.

So, you judge all deliveries in a vacuum, do you? You place no faith whatsoever in a bowler's ability to think out a batsman or bowl to him with a plan? How many times has Warne got wickets by forcing a batsman into trying to hit over the top and letting him get himself out? Do you think he doesn't deserve those wickets? Good bowling gets wickets, the ball which takes it doesn't necessarily have to be good. Do you see the difference, and why the wicket can be deserved even if the ball is average? In the scenario I offered above, the bowler clearly earned the wicket through an over of fantastic deliveries. When the last one was poor, the batsman played a rash shot in trying to salvage something out of the over and got out. He did this because of good bowling, and that's all there is to it. Just because you sit and watch the highlights and decide on the basis of watching one delivery that the bowler didn't deserve the wicket does not make it so.

 

[Unattainableguy]

Well i would choose Sachin or Jayasuriya

And how idiotic would that be!

 

[Nate]

And how idiotic would that be!

cant state it enough!

 

[Jono]

If he was Indian you'd want to have babies with him.

LMAO! Great call.

 

[Jono]

I've still watched just about every delivery of his that's got a wicket to it's name.

Further evidence that you have no idea what you're talking about.

 

[Jono]

So, you judge all deliveries in a vacuum, do you? You place no faith whatsoever in a bowler's ability to think out a batsman or bowl to him with a plan? How many times has Warne got wickets by forcing a batsman into trying to hit over the top and letting him get himself out? Do you think he doesn't deserve those wickets? Good bowling gets wickets, the ball which takes it doesn't necessarily have to be good. Do you see the difference, and why the wicket can be deserved even if the ball is average? In the scenario I offered above, the bowler clearly earned the wicket through an over of fantastic deliveries. When the last one was poor, the batsman played a rash shot in trying to salvage something out of the over and got out. He did this because of good bowling, and that's all there is to it. Just because you sit and watch the highlights and decide on the basis of watching one delivery that the bowler didn't deserve the wicket does not make it so.

Believe me, people have tried that argument. He refuses to acknowledge it. Its a waste of time.

 

[PAKMAN]

If he was Indian you'd want to have babies with him.

hehehehe

 

[PAKMAN]

id give the ball to cheetan sharma (jus kiddding)

id go for mcrath ,akram or saqlain (with him it could go either way)
or even shoaib and lee whne they bowling fast and on target

out of this attack of pakistan without shoaib id go for rana

 

[wahindiawah]

out of this attack of pakistan without shoaib id go for rana

Yeah man, he's everyone's favourite, even the batsmen love him.

 

[PAKMAN]

Yeah man, he's everyone's favourite, even the batsmen love him.

hes a good depth bowler with inswinging yorkers

 

[Nate]

hes an aeroplane... wheeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee.............