nz man4man better than australia

[Richard]

I am struggling to understand how Cairns can be called bad as a bowler though

Because his ODI record wasn't very good, even allowing for the fact that he bowled 3 or sometimes even 4 overs at the death more often than not.

 

[Richard]

3 early wickets have a huge effect regardless of final figures.

No, not neccesarily.
If no more wickets fall in the first 20 overs or so, and if the bowling's wayward, the batting side's in a good position.

 

[Richard]

no its not, 4.5 is just about as good as 4.2-4.3 was in the 90s, especially if you bowl at the death.

Hmm, I'll give you 4.3 maybe, but 4.2?
Not so sure.

 

[Richard]

OK, shutup all of you. Give Matthew Hayden to us, and we would kindly accept him.

I can't believe you guys are arguing about the selection of Hayden in the team, when Waugh once labelled him the BEST batsman in....

Find where anyone's said Hayden shouldn't be being picked for Australia? He's exceedingly good at his job, he's just also exceptionally lucky that he's played in an era where all you really need to do to get a high average is what he's good at (ie batting popgun bowling on non-seaming pitches).
But to call him the best batsman of the current generation is ludicrous, to call him an all-time great... beyond belief.

 

[Richard]

Well i don't think he should be dropped, just that he has a weakness like most batsmen.

Having a weakness against the simple inducker isn't something most batsmen have.

 

[Richard]

A player doesn't average 55+ for almost 50 Tests and then sudden drop to below 30 because of a change in conditions.

Really?
Unless I'm very much mistaken Ponting's does exactly that, when you take non-turning pitches and turning ones.
And it shows quite clearly that he's a relatively hopeless player of spin, and had HE played in the pre-1970 era when turning pitches were much more common I don't like HIS chances of success either.
And had Hayden played in an era where seamers were more common (ie just about all the time except the 1930s and 2000s) I'd say exactly the same.

 

[marc71178]

Already done, pal.

So how come you're denying basic knowledge of such a subject?

 

[Top_Cat]

Unless I'm very much mistaken Ponting's does exactly that, when you take non-turning pitches and turning ones.

Very mistaken. Ponting averages 50 in Sri Lanka (on genuinely raging turners in almost all of the Tests he played there) and has only played one Test away against Pakistan in Pakistan where he scored a ton so it's not fair to bring in that one. This percepton of Ponting as a rubbish player of spin is just wrong.

The problem is India and the pitches in India haven't been raging turners for ages. They've generally been slow and low with huge scores when Ponting has played on them (other than the last Test of the last series). So it's actually India and one or two of their bowlers (Harbi and Kumble) which Ponting has struggled with, not the turning conditions because there really hasn't been any.

Check 'em out; big scores abound:

http://statserver.cricket.org/guru?...edhigh=;csearch=;submit=1;.cgifields=viewtype

As for Hayden, well in the same way you can't prove that he would have done worse in more seaming conditiosn in the 80's, I can't prove the opposite. If he has a big one in England, will you guys back off? I doubt it.

 

[Ming]

No, not neccesarily.
If no more wickets fall in the first 20 overs or so, and if the bowling's wayward, the batting side's in a good position.

So say 3/80 after 20 overs is a good position for the batting team? Not really, it only an OK position. The bowling wouldn't be that wayward anyway, since you always say that ODI bowling these days are "exceptional", and that a good bowling RPO should be below 4.2,

I guess NZ don't have any good ODI bowlers at the moment inc Oram, Styris, Bond and Vettori.

 

[Richard]

So how come you're denying basic knowledge of such a subject?

Err - I'm doing that where, exactly?

 

[Richard]

Very mistaken. Ponting averages 50 in Sri Lanka (on genuinely raging turners in almost all of the Tests he played there) and has only played one Test away against Pakistan in Pakistan where he scored a ton so it's not fair to bring in that one. This percepton of Ponting as a rubbish player of spin is just wrong.

The problem is India and the pitches in India haven't been raging turners for ages. They've generally been slow and low with huge scores when Ponting has played on them (other than the last Test of the last series). So it's actually India and one or two of their bowlers (Harbi and Kumble) which Ponting has struggled with, not the turning conditions because there really hasn't been any.

Check 'em out; big scores abound:

http://statserver.cricket.org/guru?...edhigh=;csearch=;submit=1;.cgifields=viewtype

As for Hayden, well in the same way you can't prove that he would have done worse in more seaming conditiosn in the 80's, I can't prove the opposite. If he has a big one in England, will you guys back off? I doubt it.

Certainly not if it's on a typical English track of the 2002-onwards era - ie nothing for seam or spin.
Yes, fair enough about Ponting in Sri Lanka, I didn't see that series in which he averaged 84 or whatever it was, and during my time of watching I've only ever seen him look absolutely woeful against spin.
So that's where that slightly misplaced assumption comes from.
But you can't deny that when he looks bad he looks truly woeful.
Nor can you say he didn't deal with Kumble and Harbhajan with utter ease in Australia last winter.

 

[Richard]

So say 3/80 after 20 overs is a good position for the batting team? Not really, it only an OK position. The bowling wouldn't be that wayward anyway, since you always say that ODI bowling these days are "exceptional", and that a good bowling RPO should be below 4.2,

Eh, where the hell do I say ODI bowling these days is exceptional? It's exceptionally poor, yes.
And no, 3\80 off 20 isn't a good position for batting side - but 3\120 off 20 is.

I guess NZ don't have any good ODI bowlers at the moment inc Oram, Styris, Bond and Vettori.

Bond is certainly a very good ODI bowler. Styris categorically is not. Oram's OK but no more, yet, than that (his record against the mighty American teams makes him look a bit better than he is).

 

[Top_Cat]

Yes, fair enough about Ponting in Sri Lanka, I didn't see that series in which he averaged 84 or whatever it was, and during my time of watching I've only ever seen him look absolutely woeful against spin.
So that's where that slightly misplaced assumption comes from.
But you can't deny that when he looks bad he looks truly woeful.
Nor can you say he didn't deal with Kumble and Harbhajan with utter ease in Australia last winter.

Surely that due to Aussie pitches being more true and the Indian pitches having only more spin but far less pace? Ricky Ponting has looked suspect against any bowling when the pitch is holding up as I think it's pretty clear he likes the ball coming on. And although you're right about him against Harbi in Aus (utter ease), against Kumble he was more 'treating him with respect' (he was bowling well) but for sure, he wasn't unduly troubled. But then, in that form (two double tons in a row), there's very few bowlers in the world who would have troubled him.

 

[marc71178]

Err - I'm doing that where, exactly?

Denying how 2 paces changes where the ball is when it reaches the batsman when it would be a yorker without the paces.

 

[Richard]

Surely that due to Aussie pitches being more true and the Indian pitches having only more spin but far less pace? Ricky Ponting has looked suspect against any bowling when the pitch is holding up as I think it's pretty clear he likes the ball coming on. And although you're right about him against Harbi in Aus (utter ease), against Kumble he was more 'treating him with respect' (he was bowling well) but for sure, he wasn't unduly troubled. But then, in that form (two double tons in a row), there's very few bowlers in the world who would have troubled him.

I seem to remember him and several others cracking Kumble around quite a bit.
Penetrative as he was in that series, Kumble is no longer as accurate as he used to be and not many of the Aussies treated him with much respect as to allow him to bowl economically.
I've never really seen Ponting on a slow (non-seaming) pitch against seamers, so I can't really comment.

 

[Richard]

Denying how 2 paces changes where the ball is when it reaches the batsman when it would be a yorker without the paces.

I'll say it again - try looking at some trajectories of deliveries, and measuring how much they change in 2 paces.

 

[Ming]

Eh, where the hell do I say ODI bowling these days is exceptional? It's exceptionally poor, yes.
And no, 3\80 off 20 isn't a good position for batting side - but 3\120 off 20 is.

Bond is certainly a very good ODI bowler. Styris categorically is not. Oram's OK but no more, yet, than that (his record against the mighty American teams makes him look a bit better than he is).

How can you rate Bond as a good ODI bowler, because according to you he can't swing it...

****, you are so smart Richard. Is going at 6 an over truely a good position for the batting side!

 

[Zinzan]

Certainly not if it's on a typical English track of the 2002-onwards era - ie nothing for seam or spin.
Yes, fair enough about Ponting in Sri Lanka, I didn't see that series in which he averaged 84 or whatever it was, and during my time of watching I've only ever seen him look absolutely woeful against spin.
So that's where that slightly misplaced assumption comes from.
But you can't deny that when he looks bad he looks truly woeful.
Nor can you say he didn't deal with Kumble and Harbhajan with utter ease in Australia last winter.

Amazing ...between you (richard) and TEC , you'd think Ponting and Hayden wouldn't even make it at club level.

Arguably Australia's 2 best test batsmen in arguably the greatest team in test history ....

C'mon fellas....they aren't too bad

 

[Ming]

It's funny how Richard says that you don't need to watch matches to judge a player, instead you can use statistics alone WHEN he is saying that Ponting looked woeful even though his statistics suggested otherwise.

 

[Zinzan]

which shows how much of lee you've actually watched pre 2004. vb series 2003, lee was bowling just as fast and just as accurately, and still got hammered in test matches at the time. this ' hes bowling faster than ever' is a ludicrous claim really.



except that both ponting and dravid have succeeded on seamer friendly wickets, hayden clearly hasnt. id expect dravid to still average over 50, ponting in the high 40s and hayden in high 20s were they play in the 80s.

Everyone is entilted to their own opinion, this is an open forum at the end of the day. The only problem with your opinion with regard Hayden is that your Totally on your own. No one else, cricket fans, players , selectors share this view.

Thus the problem with your creditability