***Official*** Australia in England (The Ashes)

[Swervy]

Kaneria has called Dravid, Ponting and Martyn master players of leg spin. “Without any doubt they are the best batsmen I ever bowled to. All of them are master players of leg-spin.” Link

He edged Kaneria, between keeper and slip, but from memory neither got a hand to it.

What does Kaneria know..he only plays against them!!!!

Richard actually watches highlight footage and reads match reports, he is bound to know more

 

[tooextracool]

I've never, ever been convinced of Vaughan as a Test-class opener and I'm still not, I still maintain he's better at four..

you can maintain whatever you want, you of course know that i made the exact same suggestion. either way hes been short of runs in both positions, and you have no explanation as to why hes magically become a proven test class player, when hes only gotten worse since you made that comment.

Nonetheless, he's proven as a far, far better player of spin than Langer, Ponting and Gilchrist.

and all 3 of them are far far better players of pace than he is. overall all 3 are proven good quality players at the test match level. vaughan is not. hence theres no reason for you to claim that he deserves to be ahead of them in any ranking system.

 

[tooextracool]

I wonder... who'd you prefer to see lining-up this summer against us? Clarke or Stephen Waugh? Because I'd prefer Clarke every time..

i couldnt tell you for sure at all, because i would consider both of them to be weak links of a very strong batting lineup. what i can tell you for sure is that i'd prefer either of those 2 any day of my life, ahead of katich.

While he wasn't anywhere near as good as 1991-2001 in 2001\02-2003\04, as I've said several times, and while the pressure was justifiable to some extent, and while there is absolutely no question Katich deserved a place in the side ahead of pretty much anyone, it was still possible to fit both of them into the side. It would, of course, have meant dropping Martyn, which at the time was not unthinkable, and later it would have meant dropping Lehmann, which has happened anyway.

so you'd drop martyn over that period for averaging 40 and having a brighter future, for steve waugh for averaging 37? i dont think averaging 37 merits a place in a batting lineup as strong as australias anymore.

 

[tooextracool]

I watched it, the ball didn't turn much at all. It played very inconsistently by the last day but other than that, it was a great batting deck. I've got Steve Waugh on video saying as much and considering he batted on it...............

that is absolutely 100% incorrect. there were open cracks on the wicket on the last 2 days, so it definetly turned, if only significantly during the last 2 days, its just that the bowlers just didnt bowl well enough to exploit it. the ball that got martyn out in the 2nd inning for example turned significantly, which is really the only way someone like dawson will ever take a wicket anyways.

 

[Swervy]

that is absolutely 100% incorrect. there were open cracks on the wicket on the last 2 days, so it definetly turned, if only significantly during the last 2 days, its just that the bowlers just didnt bowl well enough to exploit it. the ball that got martyn out in the 2nd inning for example turned significantly, which is really the only way someone like dawson will ever take a wicket anyways.

TEC mate..cracks dont mean a pitch will take spin...it means pacers will get some sideways movement and up and down bounce...and spinners will tend to just get funny bounce...if the pitch was dusty etc, then you have yourself a nasty little turner

 

[tooextracool]

TEC mate..cracks dont mean a pitch will take spin...it means pacers will get some sideways movement and up and down bounce...and spinners will tend to just get funny bounce...if the pitch was dusty etc, then you have yourself a nasty little turner

not really, cracks almost always result in sharp turn- which is a combination of turn and bounce,not to mention of course that uneven bounce is a key asset to a spin bowler anyways.

 

[Swervy]

not really, cracks almost always result in sharp turn- which is a combination of turn and bounce,not to mention of course that uneven bounce is a key asset to a spin bowler anyways.

cracks MAY indicate there COULD be turn...in that a cracked pitch may well be quite dry and so become quite dusty...but the cracks themselves wont produce the turn (will it might just produce a tiny amount, but nothing special)...its the grip the ball gets from the mucky dust that does the turn

So yes, cracks may indicate sharp turn is possible, but cracks tend not cause the sharp turn.

Anyway..sorry for being a tad picky there...

 

[tooextracool]

cracks MAY indicate there COULD be turn...in that a cracked pitch may well be quite dry and so become quite dusty...but the cracks themselves wont produce the turn (will it might just produce a tiny amount, but nothing special)...its the grip the ball gets from the mucky dust that does the turn

So yes, cracks may indicate sharp turn is possible, but cracks tend not cause the sharp turn.

Anyway..sorry for being a tad picky there...

ok then cracks dont cause turn on their own, but the fact is that cracks assist any spinner who is capable of turning it, even if the pitch isnt turning significantly on its own. sydney though did turn and with the uneven bounce it was certainly very helpful for spinners.

 

[social]

So conditions in Sri Lanka are extraordinarily different to India, are they?

No two countries are exactly the same.

 

[social]

Cannot believe that we have umpteen pages of crap where people are trying to prove that pitch A didnt spin or pitch B did spin all to back up a theory that so-and-so cant play spin.

The bottom line is that if a batsman averages over 50 in a career spanning more than, say, 50 tests, he is an exceptional player of ALL types of bowling.

BTW, Richard's theory that Ponting has been successful against Murali because the latter is not a conventional finger spinner (rather than simply admitting the former may not be quite as bad a player of spin as he would have us believe), ranks up there with his theories on McGrath, Flintoff, and first chances.

 

[superkingdave]

I just wish they'd keep the petty arguments out of the official thread

 

[badgerhair]

The bottom line is that if a batsman averages over 50 in a career spanning more than, say, 50 tests, he is an exceptional player of ALL types of bowling.

Not that I've got any examples in mind, but I'd have thought it possible that an opening batsman could be weakish against spin, or, like Alec Stewart, unable to play it coherently until he's been in for a couple of hours and got 50 on the board.

BTW, Richard's theory that Ponting has been successful against Murali because the latter is not a conventional finger spinner (rather than simply admitting the former may not be quite as bad a player of spin as he would have us believe), ranks up there with his theories on McGrath, Flintoff, and first chances.

But you have to admire the ingenuity of it all, surely? You need a very fertile imagination to be able to find ever more extraordinary ways of showing that black is in fact charcoal grey and that the difference is *significant*.

Cheers,

Mike

 

[age_master]

I just wish they'd keep the petty arguments out of the official thread

agreed

 

[social]

Not that I've got any examples in mind, but I'd have thought it possible that an opening batsman could be weakish against spin, or, like Alec Stewart, unable to play it coherently until he's been in for a couple of hours and got 50 on the board.



But you have to admire the ingenuity of it all, surely? You need a very fertile imagination to be able to find ever more extraordinary ways of showing that black is in fact charcoal grey and that the difference is *significant*.

Cheers,

Mike

It is true that even the best players can be "relatively" weak against one type of bowling, e.g. Ponting is merely very good against spin whilst being about the best against pace, but anyone that is "poor" will be found out and eventually improve or dropped for good.

BTW, I actually enjoy Richard's contributions as they promote discussion. However, some of his assertions are so nonsensical as to defy belief.

 

[archie mac]

Cannot believe that we have umpteen pages of crap where people are trying to prove that pitch A didnt spin or pitch B did spin all to back up a theory that so-and-so cant play spin.

The bottom line is that if a batsman averages over 50 in a career spanning more than, say, 50 tests, he is an exceptional player of ALL types of bowling..

100% agree, even when you think you have won the argument certain posters, just go back and start their argument again.
India hardly lose a wicket, Aust. save the match with ease, and we are still told there was turn. Slow, quick, finger, wrist, orthodox, unorthodox, left, right, subcontinent, english, and any conbination of those above, maybe we could debate a different topic in relation to the Ashes?

Imagine; 15 mins. before the start of the First Test an alien space ship lands in the middle of the pitch, and out walks 11 men from Mars.
They tell the World that Cricket is their game, they have decided to destroy Earth. Unless we can beat them in a Test Match. We have no time and must combine the best from both sides. Which English players come into the Aust. side and why?

The pitch is expected to be fast for the first day, but will almost certainly take turn from day 3.

 

[chaminda_00]

I just wish they'd keep the petty arguments out of the official thread

Yep can't wait for the cricket to start and this crap to stop

 

[Scaly piscine]

BTW, I actually enjoy Richard's contributions as they promote discussion. However, some of his assertions are so nonsensical as to defy belief.

There's promoting discussion through reasoned debate and then there's Motson rambling on like a loon for page after page taking over an important thread. Sadly some people keep replying to him to make the situation worse.

 

[tooextracool]

The bottom line is that if a batsman averages over 50 in a career spanning more than, say, 50 tests, he is an exceptional player of ALL types of bowling..

i think this post right here signifies how reliant people are on averages. it might take you a very long time, and after watching a hell of a lot more cricket for you to realise that the average is just a number, to be totally dependent on something like that is absolutely foolish. if you ever did manage to use even the average correctly, youd see that gilchrist;s average falls down to the low 30s when he plays quality spin bowling, or more significantly hes had about 3-4 successes and half a dozen miserable failures on turners.

 

[tooextracool]

Ponting is merely very good against spin whilst being about the best against pace, but anyone that is "poor" will be found out and eventually improve or dropped for good.

you really are a joker arent you?
i ask you, how many times has ponting faced a quality spin bowler on a turner?
hes been fortunate enough to do so very rarely, and when he has, hes failed miserably on more than half of those occasions. to claim that this player, who was made out to be a complete novice against harbhajan and kumble is 'very good', is hilarious, but dont stop yourself, despite my avatar, i enjoy the odd joke once in a while.

 

[tooextracool]

100% agree, even when you think you have won the argument certain posters, just go back and start their argument again.
India hardly lose a wicket, Aust. save the match with ease, and we are still told there was turn. .

oh yes of course, i can see it now. australia lose 16 wickets, had a fresh batsman at the crease, and if it werent for katich would quite conceivably have lost the game with more than half a day to spare, and you say that they saved the match with ease. brilliant that.
and of course its impossible for a wicket to turn and still be a draw isnt it? i mean if a dead flat wicket takes turn on the last couple of days and ends up a draw, we must assume it didnt turn, because the result says so.