*Official* NatWest Series: ENG v SA v ZIM

[Rik]

Why isolate 3 games, which don't show a great deal, when there's other recent games that he's bowled in and should surely come into consideration?

Because if a bowler can't keep it tight, or take wickets against Zimbabwe then who can they take them against? Never mind the fact that, excluding Vaughan, he has the worst econ of any spinner in this series, and one of the worst of any bowler. If our spinner can't even keep it tight then there's no point in playing him. I'm not isolating these 3 games either, he's been on the wane in ODIs for quite a while.

It's all well and good having variation in the attack, but what's the point in playing a spinner if he's just leaking easy runs and not causing any problems? I'd much rather have an all seam attack if it means we don't give easy runs away.

 

[Eclipse]

Because if a bowler can't keep it tight, or take wickets against Zimbabwe then who can they take them against? Never mind the fact that, excluding Vaughan, he has the worst econ of any spinner in this series, and one of the worst of any bowler. If our spinner can't even keep it tight then there's no point in playing him. I'm not isolating these 3 games either, he's been on the wane in ODIs for quite a while.

It's all well and good having variation in the attack, but what's the point in playing a spinner if he's just leaking easy runs and not causing any problems? I'd much rather have an all seam attack if it means we don't give easy runs away.

You might as well play another batsman IMO.

 

[Rik]

You might as well play another batsman IMO.

Well, instead, the plumped for *Cough*RUBBISH*Cough* Harmison

Who went for 18 off 3 overs (4 wides)

ODI average now up to 49, econ 5.96

 

[Eclipse]

Well, instead, the plumped for *Cough*RUBBISH*Cough* Harmison

Who went for 18 off 3 overs (4 wides)

ODI average now up to 49, econ 5.96

I dont know why England persist with him.

 

[luckyeddie]

I dont know why England persist with him.

Persist? It's his first ODI since Sri Lanka (Remember that he took 0-27 from 2 overs on that occasion. See? He's getting better)

Certainly, the famed Steve Wayward-Harmison (the duck's changed his name) radar wasn't working very well at all today, but regarding the wides, Harmison did not much worse than anyone else. Only Freddie was wideless, and Anderson managed 6 (3 in successive deliveries).

I like the idea of an all-pace attack, though. Face it, just because Giles is (arguably) the best slow bowler in the country is no reason to play him in an ODI because, best or not, he's still not very good.

 

[marc71178]

Well, instead, the plumped for *Cough*RUBBISH*Cough* Harmison

Who went for 18 off 3 overs (4 wides)

ODI average now up to 49, econ 5.96

I notice nobody has criticised Anderson for the number of wides he bowled today...

 

[marc71178]

Because if a bowler can't keep it tight, or take wickets against Zimbabwe then who can they take them against?

But he did bowl tightly against Pakistan earlier this summer, so by quotig stats from just 3 gaems you're being a little selective.

 

[Langeveldt]

I notice nobody has criticised Anderson for the number of wides he bowled today...

Anderson is an accurate bowler with a lovely pure action who swings the ball at pace, Harmison isnt...


Stewart Matsikenyeri and Andy Blignaut tucking into him after the appaling situation they were in only reinforces my dislike for his selection...

 

[Langeveldt]

Because if a bowler can't keep it tight, or take wickets against Zimbabwe then who can they take them against.

Theres always Bangladesh, Rik

 

[marc71178]

Anderson is an accurate bowler with a lovely pure action who swings the ball at pace,

If he's accurate, how come he bowled 3 wides in a row though?

Granted Harmison didn't pick up a wicket, but from the radio, I got the impression he didn't bowl badly.

 

[Rik]

I notice nobody has criticised Anderson for the number of wides he bowled today...

Anderson bowler 6 wides + 1 no ball but only 8 runs off the bat from 5 overs, Harmison bowled 4 + 14 runs off the bat off 3, which is a tad different.

 

[Rik]

But he did bowl tightly against Pakistan earlier this summer, so by quotig stats from just 3 gaems you're being a little selective.

He was economical in the Pakistan series (3.58 an over) but strike rate still 144.00

But as you have stated many times, it's better to use a rounded perspective of more than just 3 games, so look at all 6 games and the picture is nowhere near good enough to justify his place. He's the only spinner but if the only spinner's not good enough...

 

[luckyeddie]

He was economical in the Pakistan series (3.58 an over) but strike rate still 144.00

But as you have stated many times, it's better to use a rounded perspective of more than just 3 games, so look at all 6 games and the picture is nowhere near good enough to justify his place. He's the only spinner but if the only spinner's not good enough...

As you so rightly intimate - don't play one.

Given the choice between Harmison and Giles, I know which one I would take (well, actually I'd add a couple of others into the equation before either were considered at the present, but you know what I mean) - and that would be Harmison.

I like strike bowlers. Someone once asked me (on here) why I used to like Devon Malcolm. Same reason as I tolerate Steve Harmison - occasionally, he'll win you a game. We haven't got an English (or Welsh) spinner who could do that on a helpful track at present.

 

[Rik]

As you so rightly intimate - don't play one.

Given the choice between Harmison and Giles, I know which one I would take (well, actually I'd add a couple of others into the equation before either were considered at the present, but you know what I mean) - and that would be Harmison.

I like strike bowlers. Someone once asked me (on here) why I used to like Devon Malcolm. Same reason as I tolerate Steve Harmison - occasionally, he'll win you a game. We haven't got an English (or Welsh) spinner who could do that on a helpful track at present.

Although I wouldn't take either because at the moment neither can take wickets or keep it tight but I see your point and I would probably take Harmison over Giles after his performance in this series. Harmison is hardly a strike bowler, though, if you want a strike bowler you look for Gough or Anderson. For Harmison read fast but just as wayward, more likely to let the pressure off. The failure of their only passable spinner and also Harmison's continuing lack of penetration make it interisting to see who will play in the final. It's also interisting to see who will survive from this squad, it looks like Key's already been given the boot. There have been some very mediocre performances from new players this summer, Solanki still only averaged 25 this summer despite that 106, McGrath averages 19 with the bat (at a very slow strike rate) and 111 with the ball, Clarke has 3 wickets at 37 and averages 9 with the bat but hasn't bowled in the last few matches, Key has 11 runs at 5.5, Troughton averages less than 10 runs an innings...then add Giles loosing it, Vaughan low on runs...it's not looking rosey.

To say I'm worried about the selector's judgement of a player would be an understatement on the returns this summer.

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

ok, But Giles should still attack with Gough and Anderson, And since when did West Indians know anything about spin

That is such an ignorant and stupid comment! I take it personally because I don't know how else to take it. I've never seen snow, but does that mean that I don't know anything about it? I'm not stupid! I'll have you know that WI have had 3 of the best spinners of all time- Ramadhin, Valentine and Gibbs. Also, England would love to have Ramnarine. You must have been joking, because I can't believe you said that seriously.

 

[Eclipse]

Harmison is not a strike bowler. Just because he can bowl over 140kph does not make him a strike bowler.

I Think England should stick with there kids for at least another 10 games give them a genuine chance.

 

[marc71178]

He was economical in the Pakistan series (3.58 an over) but strike rate still 144.00

But that goes back to the fact he was bowling to orders.

 

[marc71178]

To say I'm worried about the selector's judgement of a player would be an understatement on the returns this summer.

The squad needs to be given time to gel. Yes, they've not been outstanding yet, but remember how many of these guys are trying to find their feet at the same time. I think the squad desparately misses Collingwood, and his return will make a huge difference.

 

[chris.hinton]

That is such an ignorant and stupid comment! I take it personally because I don't know how else to take it. I've never seen snow, but does that mean that I don't know anything about it? I'm not stupid! I'll have you know that WI have had 3 of the best spinners of all time- Ramadhin, Valentine and Gibbs. Also, England would love to have Ramnarine. You must have been joking, because I can't believe you said that seriously.

it was meant for a joke because you produce excllent Fast bowlers the west indies did not know about spin, then i thought about the 2 in the 1950s

Sorry

 

[chris.hinton]

But that goes back to the fact he was bowling to orders.

Bowling to orders! they fact is a Wicket a Wicket and he did not take any... FOR the last time SPINNERS whether off/leg should be ATTACKING bowlers

Marc did you read that jenner interview with channel 4 the link i posted then you will find out
Marc maybe you will understand that English Coaches have GOT it wrong on spin, Jenners has it right and they and You need to listen to him.