Bowling attacks

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

[WEST INDIES BASHING MODE]

Never have i seen a worse bowling/fielding performance than todays by the west indies in Durbs'... They were absolutely dire, almost on a par with Bangladesh's recent efforts... Maybe they were distracted by the females in the stands...

What game were you watching? The bowling was not the part which let the West Indies down (bar Sanford - horrible) but rather the fielding. Agreed on the fielding, but I maintain that the bowling was made to look worse than it was.

They have a spearhead who has played just a handful of FC matches and sprays it around, Dillon and Drakes are not effective on flat pitches. And the rest.[/B]

Few bowlers in the world are.

Well? Ganga? He doesnt even bowl for his club.. They bowled filth nearly all day, and literally handed SA 100/200 runs in the form of dropped catches and long hops to the likes of Gibbs and Kallis... Even the usually dour Kirsten joined the party... I bet Andre Nel had his tongue out drooling at the thought of batting today! Sadly it was not to be..[/B]

See above comments. Sanford bowled filth all day, but I though Edwards was pretty decent in attitude and approach and Dillon bowled a decent line and length.

Lara aside, if they play like that again, the Zims will be hammering them , and even the Banglas will be looking for test win number one against them... It really felt for the guys who have grown up seeing a great West Indian side.. This one produced the most one sided day of test cricket i have seen... [/B]

A full strength West Indian side without the ridiculous selection would be much better than most people grant them.

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

My opinion. I certainly have not been impressed with the West Indian bowling so far in South Africa but I don't think we have the worst attack in the world because I don't think the attack is as bad as some make it out to be.

The West Indian attack/team is largely inexperienced and young. For the most part players are learning the game and I don't think anyone (bar Richard) can deny that the like of Edwards and Collymore are talented. Also, I think that too much scrutiny is placed on Dillon. He's led an admittedly inconsistent and largely unflattering attack for a couple of years now and hasn't done all that well. He's been solid when other bowlers haven't in tough conditions for bowling.

He was quite good without luck in Sharjah and Sri Lanka on some of the flattest pitches produced.

The West Indies team is a long way off from being a force again, but the tools are there and it's up to the players and powers that be to use them. The first issue at hand IMO is to improve the fielding.

Had Kirsten (137) been held on 23 (when he was dropped by Lara), and Kallis been held (simple chance to Drakes), South Africa would not have gotten anywhere near the size of lead which they had. We created chances all day, but the fielders didn't take them.

Against a team like South Africa, on a pitch like this, you need to take even the half chances and that means sharp fielding. Had the West Indies fought back and taken those chances to have South Africa out for 400 or less, would there still be the overly heavy criticisms of Langeveldt and the such? I think not.

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

Which says absolutely nothing.
:P

It does because after day 1 in the first Test the West Indian bowlers bowled quite well.

He has bowled well thus far in South Africa, but with little coming from the other end and flat wicket to toil on, it's largely not been rewarded.

 

[masterblaster]

West Indies, England, India...their all in the same category.

Any team playing against them racks up 500+ runs.
It doesn't mean that their bad....
It doesn't mean that their great either....

All it means is that they have more off days than good days.

Zaheer compared to Dillon compared to Anderson???

Agarkar compared to Drakes compared to Johnson???

Nehra compared to Edwards compared to Harmison???

Kumble compared to Banks compared to Giles???

Harbhajan compared to 'some other WI spinner (Ryan Hinds maybe)' compared to Batty???


I think their all not too great to be honest, except for Zaheer and Kumble...I have a lot of faith in their ability.

India comes out on top 3 out of the 5 really, only because England dont have decent spinners.

But bottom line is...their all in the same 'bread basket'.

 

[iamdavid]

My assesment of the strength of the attacks of World Test cricket:
South Africa: Pollock, Ntini, Nel, Kallis, Adams would be my attack. Adams is the only one who can be a threat in any conditions, but the first 4 are all capable of being deadly in swinging, seaming conditions. Adams, of course, hasn't done especially well for a while now.
Australia: McGrath and Gillespie are both brilliant in seaming, swinging conditions. IMO Inness, as you know, could be the best of them all. Warne, when returning, is a genious obviously. As for the rest . That's all I've got to say about that. Harwood's a decent prospect but ATM far too wayward.
England: Caddick is basically the only decent bowler left with a chance of playing again. Don't think much of any of the supposed "promising" bowlers. Hoggard and Anderson are OK in swinging, seaming conditions but not as good as Caddick, Gough, Cork, White. Johnson could be good but still has only played one proper Test.
India: Kumble and Harbhajan are good in turning conditions, pretty useless elsewhere. Agarkar is brilliant in any conditions on the extremely rare occasion he bowls well. The rest are useless with Srinath gone. Sarandeep could be pretty good, far better than Kartik.
Pakistan: Shoaib is a class apart ATM, Kaneria could be similar, Shabbir has had a terrific start to his career and he's been pretty good in his recent domestic years. I rate him highly, but he's no Wasim or Waqar. Saqlain can be good in turning conditions if he ever gets back in the team.
Sri Lanka: Vaas is a genious, shame he's so spectacularly inconsistent. He could have been the second-best seamer ever IMO. Murali needs no comment. I rate Zoysa, Lokourachchi and Dharmasena highly, but none have especially impressive Test records, and Dharmasena's had countless chances. Zoysa still needs some work, but he was good on the A-tour of Kenya.
West Indies: I really don't think this optimism is very well founded. From what I've seen Edwards is quick, has a good seam and tries hard, but simply isn't accurate enough for Test-cricket ATM. Banks is an average fingerspinner. Taylor doesn't seem especially good, though no, I've never seen him. I never saw Brendon Julian, either. Collymore doesn't seem anything special, either. I thought Sanford was useless on figures and nothing has changed my impression in this Test. Why Drakes continues to gain selection I'll never know. His accuracy is somewhat overrated, it's not international standard. Never seen David Mohammed, but just because he's a wristspinner I'd guess he's the best prospect. Really can't comment on Ravi Rampaul but just from all the rest I'd guess he's not accurate enough. I've seen Tino Best and his bowling is an absolute joke IMO. Jermaine Lawson looks like a good one-day bowler at least, but until he follows that seven-for with some more Test performances of note, I'll reserve praise. Not heard much about him except his pace. Dillon simply isn't Test-class, either.
New Zealand: Vettori is the best fingerspinner in The World IMO, but he's not done much of late. On wickets that don't offer seam, Tuffey, Oram, Bond, Styris and any other seamer are a complete joke. On wickets that do offer seam, they're all pretty good, though not as good as Allott, Nash, Doull and Cairns were.

Im at about 75/25 agreeance with everything you say here , just couldnt be stuffed individually quoting what I dont agree with :wow: (thats a yawn).

By the way Harwood's 29 & have you ever seen him

 

[Tom Halsey]

It does because after day 1 in the first Test the West Indian bowlers bowled quite well.

He has bowled well thus far in South Africa, but with little coming from the other end and flat wicket to toil on, it's largely not been rewarded.

AHEM... Oh well, I am not in arguing mood, so I will tak your word for it. :P

 

[krkode]

It is interesting how the current state of West Indian bowling is in start irony to the 1970s and 80s.

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

West Indies, England, India...their all in the same category.

Any team playing against them racks up 500+ runs.
It doesn't mean that their bad....
It doesn't mean that their great either....

All it means is that they have more off days than good days.

Zaheer compared to Dillon compared to Anderson???

Agarkar compared to Drakes compared to Johnson???

Nehra compared to Edwards compared to Harmison???

Kumble compared to Banks compared to Giles???

Harbhajan compared to 'some other WI spinner (Ryan Hinds maybe)' compared to Batty???


I think their all not too great to be honest, except for Zaheer and Kumble...I have a lot of faith in their ability.

India comes out on top 3 out of the 5 really, only because England dont have decent spinners.

But bottom line is...their all in the same 'bread basket'.

Out of curiousity, have you seen Edwards and Banks? Also Hinds is not anything near a specialist spinner.

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

AHEM... Oh well, I am not in arguing mood, so I will tak your word for it. :P

To be quite honest, Drakes and Sanford have been quite disappointing, particularly Sanford, but I think that Edwards has been about as good as you'd expect at this stage in his career. Dillon has been solid and Collymore did pretty well considering he was struggling with injury. As I said before, the West Indian attack is certainly not world-beating, but the scores in South Africa don't accurately reflect the quality of bowling. It has been largely ineffective but not as bad as some make it out to be.

 

[Tom Halsey]

Dave Mohammad has got a good FC record, and looks a good prosepct, although I have not seen him. Liam, do you reckon he will play the 3rd Test?

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

He has to. If they play Sanford again................

 

[Tom Halsey]

I can just imagine that...

 

[NikhilN]

West Indies

 

[Tom Halsey]

By a distance

 

[Bazza]

I voted for WI because they were rubbish the other day and looked disitinctly beaten. They relied on Sarwan in the end.

Saying that, England aren't much better most of the time and I think India are quite weak, and Sri Lanka without Murali would be screwed. New Zealand aren't great either.

At the moment Australia look alot weaker than normally, so overall maybe only Pakistan and South Africa (ie Pollock and Ntini) are the most threatening at the moment.

 

[masterblaster]

Out of curiousity, have you seen Edwards and Banks? Also Hinds is not anything near a specialist spinner.

Yes I have seen them both. Fox Sports Australia is getting live coverage of WI vs South Africa. Edwards has got that distinct 'round arm' slingy action, he looks dangerous at times but is quite erratic at other times.

Banks, I saw when WI played Australia (once again Fox Sports Australia got the coverage). He is a decent spinner, and a good fighting batsman, but he is not near Harbhajan Singh just yet. He maybe better than him in the future, but that remains to be seen.

So yeah, I've seen the young crop of West Indies cricketers play, and like India their more inconsistent than consistent, but they can be occasionally brilliant. But like India they certainly are talented.

 

[Richard]

1/ Edwards - agreed, but I think he should still be playing to get experience.
2/ Banks - you've never seen him!
3/ Taylor - :rolleyes:
4/ Collymore - excellent judgement on one Test match where he was struggling with a hamstring injury (which he's had since the start of the 1st Zim Test) and bowled superbly in the 2nd innings. You never cease to amaze me.
5/ Drakes has been poor in South Africa so far, but he was very solid against Australia earlier this year and bowled superbly in the period before that.
6/ Dave Mohammed - he's certainly talented. Whether that will translate though...
7/ Rampaul - talented and seems good for the future, but not ready yet.
8/ Best - is talented. He has pace and gets bounce but needs alot of work to refine him.
9/ Surely if he's good enough to have the Aussies ducking and weaving for 7 wickets he'd got something. That said, I respect your judgement. At least you're willing to give him an opportunity (unlike Taylor...)
10/ Dillon - it may just be me, but I think he's been our best bowler in South Africa so far. He's been far more consistent than he was against Australia. No, he hasn't taken wickets as such, but conditions have hardly been favourable.

I'm really bewildered as to how you consistently judge players who you haven't seen or have barely seen and yet you praise certain substandard players (who shall remain nameless) whom you have seen.

ALL RIGHT!!! I won't say another thing about Collymore until I see him play another Test when fit.:saint:
But as for Banks, I don't need to see him. He's a fingerspinner, that's all that matters. Very few wickets outside Sri Lanka, Bangladesh and India suit fingerspin (and according to you they don't help spin in West Indies as much as it seemed they did). Fingerspin is no longer an art practised in international cricket outside these countries.
Regarding Edwards, I don't think he should be playing unless he's doing well. It can only do bad to his confidence by playing and being hammered. Cricket is not learned on the field, it is learned in the nets. Yes, it's impossible to compare to two (apparently Brett Lee can hit 6 out of 6 on the top of middle in the nets) but that's sort of what domestic cricket is for.
When is The Carib Beer Cup? Is it before your Tests against us, and is it after you get back from SA?

 

[Richard]

Im at about 75/25 agreeance with everything you say here , just couldnt be stuffed individually quoting what I dont agree with :wow: (thats a yawn).

By the way Harwood's 29 & have you ever seen him

Really? He looked younger than that when I saw him.
You remember I told you that I saw Inness when he came to play for Northants and in another game for Vic, in some strange thing they did on Sky talking about cricket in Australia? It wasn't ball-by-ball, but sort of extended highlights without the extensive after-delivery things (there was no commentary). In that game him and Harwood opened and they appeared to bowl well with the new ball and again with the older one. They both took wickets with good deliveries throughout both innings.
Craig also told me a bit about both of them. So Inness is younger than Harwood?

 

[Tom Halsey]

Harbhajan Singh

So you rate Harbhajan as the best fingerspinner in world cricket?

[/Amits mode] No, Ashley Giles is the best fingerspinner [/Amits mode off]

 

[Richard]

There's no / in the first part of the [].........[]
Is this Amits mode your answer to <quack>?