NZTailender
I can't believe I ate the whole thing
A thread about three of my favourite players. Christmas has arrived early!
Is he?I think it's a given that Harbhajan is a better bowler than all three - he spins it as much, has better flight and unlike any of the three bowls a good Doosra.
Nah, Harby notably better than these three. He actually I feel can run through a batting side on his day, don't think the others are quite as good.Is he?
His figures are marginally better. I think Harbhajan Singh is a bit overrated these days.
Been winning his team some test matches lately, both home and away.Is he?
His figures are marginally better. I think Harbhajan Singh is a bit overrated these days.
Yes I did have E&E in mind actually. Although Croft and Such were good bowlers too, and certainly of comparable quality to Swann.People were saying that about MSP barely a couple of years ago. I don't doubt Swann is a bit better than Giles and certainly far, far more reliable than Tufnell (I'd still imagine Tufnell's best bowling on the exceptionally rare occasion he produced it is better than anything Swann can produce but he's got time to show otherwise yet) but I seriously dispute he's significantly if at all better Croft and even the county-spectator's favourite Such. He is currently better than MSP but I do still think MSP could potentially outdo him in the long-run, though that's looking less likely as time goes on.
I've never yet been truly familiar with how good or otherwise the Embureys and Edmundses were (obviously they didn't have the uncovered wickets advantage that their predecessors Illingworth and Underwood enjoyed for the first part of their careers) so I'll gladly not currently try to compare there, but I realise you may be calling Swann the best since Emburey so it may not be important anyway.
I think that's a bit unfair. He had a pretty good record when he started, although as I recall his record at home wasn't great compared with his success away from home.Nah Croft was a plodder at best.
No, Harbhajan's definitely better. I've posted this before. India isn't a particularly good place to bowl spin anymore, and Harbhajan does a seriously good job of it. At the very least he's vastly more proven than Swann, and I'd say he's better too.I think that Swann pushes Harbhaan. Harbhajan rarely bowls his doosra these days (maybe in an attempt to clean up his action), tbh and I think it is currently matched for effectiveness by Swann's arm ball. Although Harbhajan is a criminally underrated bowler in Tests, atm, Swann rarely goes two Tests without a very good spell - and he rarely gets tracks which overtly assist his bowling.
They're Steve Smith iirc.Lol at the underrating of Hauritz in this thread. Someone said there are three better spinners in Australia - name them please.
Dunno. They were pretty similar for mine, you could argue that either were more effective. But pre-Ashes expectations of them were so vastly different that Hauritz's performances appeared better and Swann's worse. England played Hauritz so, sooo much worse than Australia played Swann so it's not the fairest comparison, but I guess we can only judge them on how they did the task they were each presented with.I think the OP wanted to talk non-doosra bowling finger spinners, hence left out Harby deliberately.
Lol at the underrating of Hauritz in this thread. Someone said there are three better spinners in Australia - name them please.
I'm not saying he's better than Swann or Harris, although I think he outbowled Swann in the Ashes. But to say that he's not deserving of comparison to them, or is clearly massively inferior is wrong imo.
And Aussie somehow got confused on the point of whether Hauritz deserved his spot ahead of the potential fourth specialist quick in the Australian team with the question of how he compares to Harris and Swann
Hmm i'd be interested to know how TBH...I'm not saying he's better than Swann or Harris, although I think he outbowled Swann in the Ashes. But to say that he's not deserving of comparison to them, or is clearly massively inferior is wrong imo.
Ahh no i didn't. I said imo Hauritz is the most accurate of the three:And Aussie somehow got confused on the point of whether Hauritz deserved his spot ahead of the potential fourth specialist quick in the Australian team with the question of how he compares to Harris and Swann
me said:Hauritz i still think he is joke - but he no doubt has improved a great deal in 2009 & is the most accurate/economical of the three
We'll never really know, tbh. Leaving out the specialist tweaker for The Oval was one of the larger selectorial bollocks that've been dropped of late. Would've been nice to see how Haurie went under the shadow of the old gasworks, but it wasn't to be. As (IIRC) North took 4 wickets with his serviceable part-time stuff I think it's fair to assume Hauritz had his moment stolen from him.I think the OP wanted to talk non-doosra bowling finger spinners, hence left out Harby deliberately.
Lol at the underrating of Hauritz in this thread. Someone said there are three better spinners in Australia - name them please.
I'm not saying he's better than Swann or Harris, although I think he outbowled Swann in the Ashes. But to say that he's not deserving of comparison to them, or is clearly massively inferior is wrong imo.
And Aussie somehow got confused on the point of whether Hauritz deserved his spot ahead of the potential fourth specialist quick in the Australian team with the question of how he compares to Harris and Swann
If i give him any more credit i'd be over-rating him to be frank. Off all the useful/decent SA spinners that have played tests since readmisson in Symcox, Boje, Adams, Eskeen, Henderson all where better than Harris IMO. (although you can argue not much is between him and Henderson).Harris is a lot better than you give him credit for.