***Official*** Super Series

[sqwerty]

i do not enjoy these comparisons between watson and flintoff. flintoff was rubbish when he started off yes, but that does not mean that every jack and jill who cant bowl to save his life will be a flintoff simply because he too is rubbish at the same age.



he looks good? his action maybe better than flintoffs was back in 2001, but his accuracy is worse, and he cant seem to do anything with the ball other than move it off the seam.



because hes proven himself so much in either form of the game that we can make this conclusion? he finally plays one good innings with the bat and now hes capable of being as good a batsman as freddie.




please point out to me where i said that his bowling 'cant develop'?
my point is that his bowling is non existent right now, not that it will continue to remain like that.

Look....I can't be bothered breaking down all your points and responding but all I'm saying is Watson has the bones of becoming something........whether or not he does is yet to be seen.....the same could have been said of Flintoff 4 years ago.

Sure you can bring up comparisons with other socalled allrounders like Ronnie Irani and the other crap ones and say what's the difference but with Watson he is at least bowling at a 140-145 kmh.........ie - he's got the genetic makeup and he's got something to work on.

You say you have never said he can't develop........though most of what you say about him more or less confines him to the scrap heap

 

[tooextracool]

Look....I can't be bothered breaking down all your points and responding but all I'm saying is Watson has the bones of becoming something........whether or not he does is yet to be seen.....the same could have been said of Flintoff 4 years ago.

watson has the potential of becoming something with the bat, with the ball his performances to date do not show anything about him being capable of bowling.

Sure you can bring up comparisons with other socalled allrounders like Ronnie Irani and the other crap ones and say what's the difference but with Watson he is at least bowling at a 140-145 kmh.........ie - he's got the genetic makeup and he's got something to work on.

umm have you seen ronnie irani bowl? bowling is not all about pace, and ronnie irani was far more accurate and could even swing the ball occasionally, something that watson is as yet incapable off. ronnie irani may have been a crap bowler, but then again so is watson.

You say you have never said he can't develop........though most of what you say about him more or less confines him to the scrap heap

he might develop, but were he playing as a bowler or bowling all rounder he would struggle to play domestic cricket let alone international cricket until he shows improvements.

 

[Stuart]

Learning to swing the ball, bowl cutters, move the ball of the seam can all be learned, accuracy can be learned. Bolwing at 145 km/hr cant be, its a fairly rare thing and is reliant on a number of factors that cant be hugely improved with coaching. I think the point that sqwerty is trying to get across is that he has the raw potential to be a very handy bowler, we havent seen it yet but the raw materials are there.

 

[tooextracool]

and learning to swing the ball conventionally doesnt just come like that, it takes plenty of time and depends on whether your action is conducive enough to support it. otherwise almost every bowler who had a long test match career would have been able to swing the ball.

 

[Stuart]

Yes but it is something that can be worked on more so than say steping up from a top speed of 130 to a top speed of 145 k/hr.

Good pace bowling relies on a combination of factors, accuracy, speed, movement (of which swing is just one type), trajectory etc Watson has speed, he has begun to move the ball off the seam more than he used to, if he works hard on this and other aspects of his bowling whats to say he cant become a very good bowler.

I think this is what the Australian selectors are trying to make him do by selecting him as a bowling all rounder. By making his primary role in the ODI side bowling it will make him work on the finer points of pace bowling and hopefully speed up his development, something that from his performance in the super series to date appears to be having results.

 

[tooextracool]

watson hasnt bowled any better in the super series than he did this summer in england. unfortunately his figures in the super series flattered him, largely because of some very poor strokes played by certain batsmen.
i dont take pace as the only thing for 'talent', natural or otherwise. point is that watson isnt very good at everything else. ive seen many bowlers with just pace come and go without doing anything, and thats because they had no variety and no accuracy.

 

[jlo33692]

watson hasnt bowled any better in the super series than he did this summer in england. unfortunately his figures in the super series flattered him, largely because of some very poor strokes played by certain batsmen.
i dont take pace as the only thing for 'talent', natural or otherwise. point is that watson isnt very good at everything else. ive seen many bowlers with just pace come and go without doing anything, and thats because they had no variety and no accuracy.

TEC what is it you are actually trying to say.?
Is it that they should give up on Watson as he is a hopeless bowler who got 12 lucky wickets in the ODI against the Worlds best team?
Should they not play him or should they play him,i doint know if its just the way im reading your comments but it seems you are not a Watson fan. I dont think the other guys were comparing Watson to Flintoff they are just trying to get accross that Freddie was also pretty shabby in his early days and LEARNT how to reverse swing,cut and move the ball etc,etc, Now i doubt that watson will ever be a Freddie ,oh god i hope i am way wrong on that, But what im saying is he has not done anything wrong by getting 12 wickets and batting at a decent clip the other day,Lucky?maybe but good bowlers tend to make there own luck,maybe he forced the batsman into a poor shot or 2 as surley he didnt get 12 lucky wickets? The aussie selectors have not got much wrong in the selection stakes in the last 10 years so i think they deserve the chance to play the guys they know a lot more than you or i will ever know of these guys.Look at A Symonds in the world cup he was on the verge of no return,1 good innings turned his whole carrer around,and sometimes that is all it takes. The reason the others are saying look at flintoff in his early years is not to compare the two ,it is to state that he had his problems early doors as well but faith in him payed off. Noone is claiming Watson to be a freddie clone,but he is an allrounder wheather you like it or not,he is in the team for his bowling and his batting but i would sugest he is more for his bowling as the batting is pretty strong ,as the others have stated ,it aint every day you find a bowler woth the potential to bowl consistant 140/145 and above who can also bat and field...

 

[sqwerty]

watson has the potential of becoming something with the bat, with the ball his performances to date do not show anything about him being capable of bowling.



umm have you seen ronnie irani bowl? bowling is not all about pace, and ronnie irani was far more accurate and could even swing the ball occasionally, something that watson is as yet incapable off. ronnie irani may have been a crap bowler, but then again so is watson.



he might develop, but were he playing as a bowler or bowling all rounder he would struggle to play domestic cricket let alone international cricket until he shows improvements.

i repeat....JUST LIKE FLINTOFF 4 YEARS AGO

 

[sqwerty]

watson hasnt bowled any better in the super series than he did this summer in england. unfortunately his figures in the super series flattered him, largely because of some very poor strokes played by certain batsmen.
i dont take pace as the only thing for 'talent', natural or otherwise. point is that watson isnt very good at everything else. ive seen many bowlers with just pace come and go without doing anything, and thats because they had no variety and no accuracy.

I agree his figures flattered him a bit (it was already game over in game 2 when he came on - I probably would have given McGrath man of the match before him) and in game 3 Lee did all the damage before he came on......but he didn't bowl too badly in general

 

[honestbharani]

BTW, does anyone have the stats of teams chasing at the Telstra Dome? For some reason, I am still inclined to think that batting first is a HUGE advantage there. It would be interesting to see if the stats confirm that.

 

[sqwerty]

BTW, does anyone have the stats of teams chasing at the Telstra Dome? For some reason, I am still inclined to think that batting first is a HUGE advantage there. It would be interesting to see if the stats confirm that.

hard to see why........couldn't think of anywhere where the conditions are more equal for both teams

 

[honestbharani]

It is hard to see why, but I think the teams that have batted first have won most of the matches held there. I am only saying this from memory, that is why I said it will be interesting if the stats confirm it. Seems to be some kind of X factor or something. Another reason Pollock shoudl not be captain. He loses too many tosses. . He even lost some important ones at the WC.

 

[jlo33692]

It is hard to see why, but I think the teams that have batted first have won most of the matches held there. I am only saying this from memory, that is why I said it will be interesting if the stats confirm it. Seems to be some kind of X factor or something. Another reason Pollock shoudl not be captain. He loses too many tosses. . He even lost some important ones at the WC.

LOL

Did anyone read the following ...just goes to show sometimes huh??

The ongoing Super Series gives us an opportunity to look back at the memorable clash between Australia and the Rest of the World in 1971-72. Here, we pick out five offbeat incidents from that series, which featured a galaxy of superstars, some exceptional individual displays and team-mates coping with news from the battlefields of home.
The mother of all slips
In a list containing the biggest faux pas in cricketing history, Tony Greig and Hylton Ackermann would probably feature right on top. Both landed at Adelaide airport and were greeted by a small man wearing a button-up brown cardigan who introduced himself in non-specific terms. Both Greig and Ackermann handed him whatever they were holding, visited the washrooms and then joined the man in the coffee shop. A lively cricket conversation followed and Greig nonchalantly turned to the host and asked: "Do you actually have anything to do with cricket around here?", to which the man replied, "Well we sort of run the local scene."

Right then, Garry Sobers walked in, looked past both Greig and Ackermann and greeted their host: "Sir Donald, good morning."

Greig, who was speechless at that point, recalled the incident in Mike Coward's book The Chappell years: Cricket in the `70s: " ... we certainly didn't know our history. And of course, in South Africa we didn't have television, and pictures of Bradman weren't something we were too au fait with. Bradman never let me forget that ... It gave me a special little relationship with the great man, which was fun."

for the rest og the article http://content-aus.cricinfo.com/ci/content/story/221546.html

 

[jlo33692]

Honestbrahani
M8 i dont think they have played to many games at the dome,I may be wrong but i think about 5 ODI is about all before this series.Im still looking ,trying to find them though!!!

 

[Ikki]

Freddie was a very good player before the Ashes but after it I think more people tend to overexaggerate when comparing him to other players. Freddie is good, but to say Watson can't and won't be better than him is just as they say "player hating". Watson has it all and in my own opinion will be a better player. TEC obviously has some sort of envy towards him, but eh...

 

[SJS]

BTW, does anyone have the stats of teams chasing at the Telstra Dome? For some reason, I am still inclined to think that batting first is a HUGE advantage there. It would be interesting to see if the stats confirm that.

Before this so called Super series which Australia won basically because they were the better side (as a team), there have been six one day games played at the Telstra Dome.

One of them between SAF and Australia was tied.

Of the other five three were won by the team chasing
- Australia (vs Pakistan) in June 2002
- Pakistan in (vs Australia) June 2002
- Newzealand (vs Australia) in Dec 2004

and two have been won by the team batting first.
- Australia (vs SAF) in August 2000
- SAF (vs Australia) in August 2000

So it does not look like the team batting first has any significant advantage here.

 

[JASON]

I was amused to hear that John Wright has criticised his ROW Team after the Super ODI series !!

I wonder what contribution he has made to this ROW performance apart from Posing with Ponting for the cameras before the series, turning up to press conferences and talk about Chappell in India and collecting the Cheque (for A$100,000 ) .

 

[Zinzan]

Who will be the 2nd world XI spinner selected for sydney??

Vettori or Kumble

I'm hoping they go on form with the former

 

[Dasa]

Who will be the 2nd world XI spinner selected for sydney??

Vettori or Kumble

I'm hoping they go on form with the former

It'll be Vettori because Kumble isn't in the squad, but it should be Kumble...he has a record superior to Vettori against Australia in recent times, did very well against Aus last time he played against them both home and away and took 12 wickets in his last Test at Sydney.

 

[social]

I was amused to hear that John Wright has criticised his ROW Team after the Super ODI series !!

I wonder what contribution he has made to this ROW performance apart from Posing with Ponting for the cameras before the series, turning up to press conferences and talk about Chappell in India and collecting the Cheque (for A$100,000 ) .

Coaches are the most overrated contributors to a team's success.

To quote an Aussie rugby league coach, "you cant have a decent stud without first having decent cattle."