i dont understand this who is a worse test spinner than giles in test cricket nonsense. its obvious that giles is borderline good enough to play for the test side, therefore its even more obvious that there arent going to be too many worse spinners than him, because a worse spinner would generally not be good enough to play for the test side consistently.FaaipDeOiad said:
no, he'll be ineffective if he bowls with his typical inaccuracy, which has happened extremely often in both test and ODI cricket. he has potential, but until he sorts out his accuracy at his pace hes not going to take too many wickets.greg said:
except for the fact that shoaib akhtars record doesnt get better when he plays outside of pakistan/subcontinentC_C said:
Well exactly. I was querying the comment that "giles is far from the worst regular test spinner in the world"... when in fact I can't really think of a regular test spinner who is worse than Giles at all, aside from minnow nations. As you say, anyone worse than Giles wouldn't be a regular member of a test side.tooextracool said:
so the fact that mushtaq ahmad averages over 50 in every year from and including 99 doesnt prove anything?aussie said:1. Wait so Shoaib, Saqlain & Mushtaq in 99 were nothing please
as much as i respect donald that is an absolute joke. donald was operating in that series at nearly medium pace, and it was particularly sad for me to see a once great fast bowler get taken apart by the likes of brett lee and yet not have the firepower to respond to it.FaaipDeOiad said:
the one from 01/02?Pratyush said:
donald-past itFaaipDeOiad said:
donald - same as aboveFaaipDeOiad said:
FaaipDeOiad said:
the only 2 i can think of at the moment are rangana herath and nico boje.FaaipDeOiad said:
What's your point? I was responding to S_P saying that Donald, Pollock, Kallis and Kluesener had never played together against Australia, when in fact they have most of the time. Every time South Africa have played Australia in the last decade, Donald and Pollock have been fit and playing together in most of the matches, except in the very last series in South Africa when Pollock was missing.tooextracool said:
Boje I'd agree with, but he's not really picked all that regularly these days. I haven't really seen Herath play outside of Sri Lanka, but he's was alright there when I've seen him, but only on very spin-friendly tracks.tooextracool said:
I meant while the bowlers were in their better days, Donald was past it in the first 3 and Kallis wasn't much of a bowler in the last 4 (albeit he wasn't good for a long period of time anyway). Klusener has forever been crap with the ball.FaaipDeOiad said:
im assuming that the argument is that most of the current aussie batsman havent played a quality pace attack in their careers, otherwise the argument doesnt really make sense, because australia faced plenty of quality bowlers(including SA) in the 90s.FaaipDeOiad said:
Yeah, I understand that, I was just responding to the point about Donald.tooextracool said:
the england side most certainly didnt encounter a quality pace attack after the first test at lords. lee,tait,gillespie and kaspa in the series didnt qualify as a quality pace attack and i suspect that had australia put out a quality pace attack in this series, they would have exposed the shortcomings of some of the english batsmen in the side.FaaipDeOiad said:
there arent that many to be honest, and there certainly arent many quality swing bowlers around the world. india and SL largely have pace attacks to forget about. NZ rely exclusively on bond. pakistan have akhtar and possibly shabbir who might develop into something.im optimistic about the SA and WI attacks which both have a fair bit of potential- an attack of lawson,powell,collins, bravo and collymore/best might not look very good on paper, but ive liked the look of almost all of them. for SA nel obviously has a hell of a lot of potential, if ntini can bowl like how he did in the WI recently he might accomplish something, and pollock will always be a fine bowler when the ball swings.FaaipDeOiad said:
So, England have never faced a good pace attack either then?greg said:
