Most underrated and overrated players in the world?

[Richard]

Really? That's interesting...have you ever heard the saying that you 'bowl in partnerships' Richard? I think you'll find that one bowler bowling well without support (in the form of tight bowling) from the other end will generally struggle more than if two bowlers are bowling well in tandem. Racking up maidens from both end will create a lot more pressure than one bowler can achieve on his own.

I'm glad you said 'whatever' though - I didn't want to question how much you actually know about the game without some factual basis.

Aha - so, we have established, yes, that it's not all down to McGrath? Even if nothing else?

 

[Son Of Coco]

And I think some people need to look more closely at what does happen rather than what assumptions would suggest.
Outswinger-inswinger-outswinger-inswinger-outswinger-inswinger is predictable, but outswinger-outswinger-outswinger-inswinger-outswinger-inswinger-inswinger-outswinger, or whatever, isn't.
If you can show me some instances where McGrath has constantly beaten batsmen on inside then outside edge by using cutters (or even swing) rather than seam I'll retract everything I've ever said about him on flat pitches.

Cutters are seam!

Oh, and McGrath constantly beats the outside edge, but I have seen him cut a batsman in half (not literally of course) with one that jags back too. You don't have to mix it up that much with balls seaming in and out all over the place to be effective.

I'm glad you mentioned looking at things a little more closely Richard rather than assuming - advice you possibly should take on board yourself.

 

[Richard]

Because a ball bouncing more than usual isn't necessarily short Richard!!! You seem to be assuming that if a ball bounces due to hitting the seam etc then it has also been pitched short enough for the batsman to have decided he was going to play a cross-bat shot or have to fend it away from his body. If the ball is pitched on a good length, the batsman won't be playing anything even faintly resembling a cross-bat shot. For argument's sake lets say McGrath pitches one in his usual area just outside off, the batsman goes forward, the ball bounces a little more and all of a sudden he's out of position for the shot he was attempting to play - THAT'S where extra bounce comes into it, not when playing a ball that is already short to start off with.

So how does him being a little bit out of position mean he's likely to get out?
All it means is it'll hit the splice instead of the middle.
Which is completely harmless.

 

[Son Of Coco]

So how does him being a little bit out of position mean he's likely to get out?
All it means is it'll hit the splice instead of the middle.
Which is completely harmless.

And it'll hit the splice everytime will it? Ok, let's say it bounces steep enough to hit the edge and fly to slip - what happens then?

 

[Richard]

Cutters are seam!

Oh, and McGrath constantly beats the outside edge, but I have seen him cut a batsman in half (not literally of course) with one that jags back too. You don't have to mix it up that much with balls seaming in and out all over the place to be effective.

I'm glad you mentioned looking at things a little more closely Richard rather than assuming - advice you possibly should take on board yourself.

Cutters are seam????? WHAT????
They're totally different, and they're what set the good apart from the great - seam is simply landing the ball on the seam and letting it grip on the pitch, and move sideways. Cutters are running the fingers down the side of the ball (not dissimilar to the "break" action applied by sidespinners) and "dragging" it sideways.
I know McGrath sometimes passes the edge - but mostly (on non-seaming wickets) it's because the batsman has tried to play inside the line.
If you just move the ball a little sometimes and not at all others, you won't cause many problems - you have to vary the amount it moves to be dangerous. Otherwise it becomes easy.

 

[Swervy]

So how does him being a little bit out of position mean he's likely to get out?
All it means is it'll hit the splice instead of the middle.
Which is completely harmless.

..or a glove..

it also means the batsman doesn t have full control of what he is doing,which isnt completely harmless

 

[Son Of Coco]

Because yes - sometimes batsmen play the wrong line, play with an open face, etc.
Which simply means that for different instances, there are different needs of movement - but often half a bat isn't enough.
Playing, meanwhile, is about the worst place to judge it from - you can't make accurate measurements when playing, you've got to keep your eye on the game.

Well, if I'm bowling the ball I'm keeping my eye on where that ball is going aren't I? Seeing as though that's the part of the game I'm involved in.....so I'd presume I see how much it's moving etc.

 

[Richard]

And it'll hit the splice everytime will it? Ok, let's say it bounces steep enough to hit the edge and fly to slip - what happens then?

If it's going to fly to slip it's got to do more than bounce extra - it's got to move sideways.
Which, funnily enough, is what I've always said constitutes good bowling.

 

[Richard]

..or a glove..

it also means the batsman doesn t have full control of what he is doing,which isnt completely harmless

You've got to be almost totally out of control - as long as the batsman's still got some control he can usually avert dismissal.
Even most gloves usually go straight down - and how often do you see a ball bouncing "extra" enough to hit the glove? If it does, the pitch is badly uneven.

 

[Richard]

Well, if I'm bowling the ball I'm keeping my eye on where that ball is going aren't I? Seeing as though that's the part of the game I'm involved in.....so I'd presume I see how much it's moving etc.

But you can't make a measurement of how far it's moved.
The only way you can do that is with a flight-path-tracker (HawkEyes and all that)

 

[Son Of Coco]

Cutters are seam????? WHAT????
They're totally different, and they're what set the good apart from the great - seam is simply landing the ball on the seam and letting it grip on the pitch, and move sideways. Cutters are running the fingers down the side of the ball (not dissimilar to the "break" action applied by sidespinners) and "dragging" it sideways.
I know McGrath sometimes passes the edge - but mostly (on non-seaming wickets) it's because the batsman has tried to play inside the line.
If you just move the ball a little sometimes and not at all others, you won't cause many problems - you have to vary the amount it moves to be dangerous. Otherwise it becomes easy.

Sorry Richard, but you're wrong. They're two terms applied to the same thing. You can bowl an off-cutter by turning the seam in a bit and then landing it on it or you can run your fingers down the ball - the difference being the latter is much easier to pick but more likely to do exactly what you intend. The same goes for a ball moving away from the right hander. A ball that hits the wicket and moves in to the batsman is called an 'off-cutter' and is referred to as this whether you've run your fingers down the seam or simply landed the ball on it. McGrath bowls a lot of off-cutters, yet I think you'll find that he rarely drags his fingers down one side of the ball. It has to do with seam position and angle.

Why would the batsman be attempting to play inside the line and how does this have nothing to do with McGrath?

 

[Son Of Coco]

If it's going to fly to slip it's got to do more than bounce extra - it's got to move sideways.
Which, funnily enough, is what I've always said constitutes good bowling.

Ahha, so McGrath with his extra bounce combined with the movement he gets is good then?

 

[Son Of Coco]

If it's going to fly to slip it's got to do more than bounce extra - it's got to move sideways.
Which, funnily enough, is what I've always said constitutes good bowling.

That also depends on where the ball is pitched to start with, again angle of bat etc.

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

Yep, I saw that one too and I've never seen him do what he did there.
I've seen most of them, too (and I make no apologies for saying the Bangladesh games don't matter in the slightest) and he's never moved the ball off the seam to take a wicket except where everyone can move it off the seam.

What does Bangladesh have to do with it? He has 5 wickets @ 24 in his entire career against Bangladesh - that's worse than his career record. In fact one of the remarkable things about McGrath is that he generally performs best in the toughest conditions against the best opposition. Look at the last two tours of India, where he played on decks with absolutely nothing in them for seamers against the likes of Tendulkar, Dravid and Laxman and was absolutely dominant.

Anyway, far from being isolated, the Adelaide test was practically a McGrath trademark. On a pitch where every other bowler looked a mile from getting a wicket and where even the most mediocre batsman looked settled and confident, he somehow extracted movement and picked up vital wickets with subtle variation. This is what he does better than any other bowler in the world today, and quite possibly better than any other bowler EVER. This is why it so absolutely mind-boggling that you would choose him of all people to accuse of being incapable on non-seaming wickets.

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

No, there are quite a few Test-matches where he's been handled very well.

Yes, but there are no batsmen who have handled him well as a general trend since 2001... see the difference? Tendulkar, Dravid, Lara, you name it, he's had the better part of the battles with all of them at some point or another on a non-seamer. Therefore by your standard they are all poor batsmen who can't handle a useless bowler who can't move it on a flat deck.

No, there are loads of bowlers who can't bowl well on flat wickets.

Okay, let me try a different track... name one seamer who performs better on a flat track than McGrath.

 

[social]

Someone buy Richard a ticket to a game.

 

[Dizzy #4]

Gillespie=Big time underrated


Let's be honest, People even cliam that McGrath is the better batsman of the 2!, Gillespie is a all round bowler, meaning that no matter the oppendent, he'll do good againest them, some bowlers have bogey line ups, An all rounded effort for nothing.


Marshell=The understudy of NZ

Can put in a lot, but lose it to bigger names that do as well

Vettori=Left out wonder

Can do a lot of things with bat or bowl, don't know why he gets left out

 

[marc71178]

No, it doesn't - because I've stated quite clearly that good figures don't neccesarily mean bowling well.

You've also stated that it's impossible to get good figures when bowling badly.

 

[marc71178]

Yes, because I know how easily time distorts things.

So you're saying you know more than the players who've actually faced the bowling.

How on Earth do you know more then?

 

[marc71178]

I've heard virtually every commentator here in Oz mention pressure being built at some stage, and given that they've all played cricket before I presume that they know what was going on and are speaking from personal experience in a similar situation.

Sorry SOC but Richard clearly knows more about what they've experienced than they do.

I think you should apologise to him for daring to suggest otherwise!