Is Flintoff Overrated?

[luckyeddie]

Right, let's straighten this Craig White nonsense out.

When he came into the side in 1994, he made as much impact as a marshmallow. I'm sure if you look hard enough you'll find reasons or justification for this, you might even come back with 'But look. A fifty... and here's a threefer'. For two years, he was a weak link in a weak side.

Then he went downhill, if that was possible.

Six years later, he became a decent all-rounder and forced his way back into the side but was never endowed with consistency. Find a fifty or a hundred and you will find a dozen single-figure scores with just a twenty or two interspersed.

The bowling left a lot to be desired. Sure he could be quick, but 59 wickets in 30 games at 37? Again, these figures are much-improved by performances towards the end of his career.

I could almost be describing Andrew Flintoff.

All-rounders are good to have in a side - but more often than not you are picking less than half a batsman and less than half a bowler. It's called the 'Botham factor' - we are led and teased along by the media with the promise that such-and-such (not Peter Such) is the 'new Ian Botham' - then when they don't make an impact it's 'he will when he has settled into the side'.

For White read Cork, Flintoff, deFreitas, Lewis, Tudor, Clarke etc etc etc etc etc etc

 

[marc71178]

believe me his performances were far better than flintoff's have been so far

"Far better"?

Batting - CW - 1052 @ 24.46 (1 ton, 5 50's) vs AF 1293 @ 25.86 (2 and 6)
Bowling - CW - 59 @ 37.62 vs AF 62 @ 41.24

Looks fairly even to me, and add in ODI's and there's no comparison.

 

[tooextracool]

"Far better"?

Batting - CW - 1052 @ 24.46 (1 ton, 5 50's) vs AF 1293 @ 25.86 (2 and 6)
Bowling - CW - 59 @ 37.62 vs AF 62 @ 41.24

Looks fairly even to me, and add in ODI's and there's no comparison.

the key note here is "At his peak"....

CW
batting

1994 - 21.83
1995 - 6.50
1996 - 9.00
1997 - 0.00
2000 - 30.00(heres when he really started performing)
2001 - 22.60
2002 - 38.38

bowling
1994 - 32.25
1995 - 41.00
1996 - 38.50
2000 - 23.18
2001 - 78.29(injury)
2002 - 37.37

craig white had a really poor start to his career as did flintoff but he had definetly more potential with the ball than flintoff does ATM. At his peak in 2000 he was the fastest bowler in the english side reaching upto 90mph and this coupled with his ability to reverse swing the ball and get the ball to cut both ways was a serious asset. however injury cut short his bowling career.
with the bat he wasnt always that reliable but he did extremely well on the sub continental tours and also didnt do too badly against australia

 

[marc71178]

His peak there is hardly what I what would call great - an all-rounder who's bowling is very poor and doesn't score that many runs (his 2001) isn't much cop.

For the record Flintoff:

Batting:

1998 - 5.66
1999 - 26.60
2000 - 13.83
2001 - 5.20
2002 - 27.42
2003 - 40.42
2004 - 28.00


Bowling:

1998 - 112.00
1999 - 34.80
2000 - 99.00
2001 - 31.50
2002 - 49.10
2003 - 42.78
2004 - 18.80

Now Flintoff's peak is much better with the bat, and the figures don't tell the full story with the ball.

Also, it is ongoing...

 

[tooextracool]

His peak there is hardly what I what would call great - an all-rounder who's bowling is very poor and doesn't score that many runs (his 2001) isn't much cop.

For the record Flintoff:

Batting:

1998 - 5.66
1999 - 26.60
2000 - 13.83
2001 - 5.20
2002 - 27.42
2003 - 40.42
2004 - 28.00


Bowling:

1998 - 112.00
1999 - 34.80
2000 - 99.00
2001 - 31.50
2002 - 49.10
2003 - 42.78
2004 - 18.80

Now Flintoff's peak is much better with the bat, and the figures don't tell the full story with the ball.

Also, it is ongoing...

they dont tell the full story for craig white either because he was part of the all 3 tours to the sub continent and those bowling averages in the sub continent arent too bad.as i said his peak was cut short due to a major injury before the ashes which meant that he would never be the same bowler again. flintoff it seems did well last yr and has failed so far this year...not what i would call a peak yet

 

[marc71178]

A bowling average of 18.8 isn't a failure from what I can see.

I think it's also worth noting that he missed the 4 Test's against Zimbabawe and Bangladesh in 2003 - how much better would his figures have been had he played them?

 

[Tom Halsey]

Freddie Flintoff is most certainly NOT overrated.

He is one of the better batsmen you'll see against pace, and his batting averages have really improved lately.

His bowling average in 2004 is hopefully a sign that his luck is FINALLY changing.

 

[tooextracool]

A bowling average of 18.8 isn't a failure from what I can see.

I think it's also worth noting that he missed the 4 Test's against Zimbabawe and Bangladesh in 2003 - how much better would his figures have been had he played them?

i meant that he has failed with the bat this year compared to what he did last year....not what id call a peak.
and how much better would whites averages have been had he played against zimbabwe and bangladesh??
craig white was a much better bowler at his peak than flintoff will ever be but flintoff has more potential with the bat....something that he still hasnt proven yet

 

[SJS]

I think that he symbolises English Cricket - just not good enough.

And he is like the English team and each other individual English player .... HIGHLY OVER RATED !

PS : While this is mainly to rile my English friends here, its not far from the truth you know

 

[PY]

Oh the irony coming from an Indian cricket fan....

 

[twctopcat]

TEC loves craig white, no-one else does (not to his level by any means), end of story. This one is getting as repetitive as the old Ramprakash - test batsmen thread(s).

 

[tooextracool]

TEC loves craig white, no-one else does (not to his level by any means), end of story. This one is getting as repetitive as the old Ramprakash - test batsmen thread(s).

umm i posted that about 2 months ago.......

 

[twctopcat]

My apologies.

 

[Mingster]

Despite all this talk how Flintoff has improved over the past 2 years, the fact is that he has still averaged 40 with the ball like his career average. He just simply has not delivered.

If only his batting and bowling figures were reversed, more people would take him more seriously.

 

[Deja moo]

Iam the only person to have voted 'dont know' on the poll.
God bless third options.

 

[marc71178]

Despite all this talk how Flintoff has improved over the past 2 years, the fact is that he has still averaged 40 with the ball like his career average. He just simply has not delivered.

The improvement is in the last year (average of just under 37 then not counting this current game which would lower it further), not 2 years.

And in that year he missed the 4 "freebie" Tests.

How many times have you seen him bowl in that time?

 

[Mingster]

How many times have you seen him bowl in that time?

Enough to see he fully deserves his Test bowling average and that he is not an underrated bowler or batsman.

 

[tooextracool]

Enough to see he fully deserves his Test bowling average.

despite the fact that he has at least 1 catch dropped of him every match?

and that he is not an underrated bowler or batsman.

and hes definetly not overrated either

 

[Craig]

And in that year he missed the 4 "freebie" Tests.

Which is pure speculation how well he would have done.

After all Matt Hayden didn't excatly score big when he played Bangladesh.

 

[Neil Pickup]

Bowler success is far more consistent than batsman success...