***Official*** West Indies in Australia

[tooextracool]

I fail to see how bowling batsman and getting them out LBW is poor bowling.

because they were just straight balls that were played all around. and the other wickets were generally due to slogs and poor shots.

 

[Mister Wright]

because they were just straight balls that were played all around. and the other wickets were generally due to slogs and poor shots.

I still fail to see how it can be poor bowling when balls are aimed at the stumps whether they be played around or not. Your just clutching at straws here and trying to make Watson's performances out to be worse than they are. You've obviously forgotten about the calibre of batsman that he was bowling to.

 

[tooextracool]

I still fail to see how it can be poor bowling when balls are aimed at the stumps whether they be played around or not. Your just clutching at straws here and trying to make Watson's performances out to be worse than they are. You've obviously forgotten about the calibre of batsman that he was bowling to.

oh give him a medal, for bowling 2 straight balls on the stumps. almost all his other wickets were long hops wide of off stump. you seem to be forgetting that every batsmen plays his share of poor strokes, and the likelyhood of that increases when they play ODIs. in the test match watson had absolutely 0 chance of taking a wicket, and it was glaringly obvious that he wasnt good enough. i'd think that if he were good enough to get quality batsmen out with good bowling in ODIs, he'd also be good enough to do it in test matches.

 

[aussie]

oh give him a medal, for bowling 2 straight balls on the stumps. almost all his other wickets were long hops wide of off stump. you seem to be forgetting that every batsmen plays his share of poor strokes, and the likelyhood of that increases when they play ODIs. in the test match watson had absolutely 0 chance of taking a wicket, and it was glaringly obvious that he wasnt good enough. i'd think that if he were good enough to get quality batsmen out with good bowling in ODIs, he'd also be good enough to do it in test matches.

have you seen much of Watson bowling in ODI's TEC, becuase i have seen him get batsmen out with good deliveries.

 

[tooextracool]

have you seen much of Watson bowling in ODI's TEC, becuase i have seen him get batsmen out with good deliveries.

i have, and ive never ever seen him get a batsman out with a ball that was anywhere near unplayable. a straight ball that the batsmen plays all around doesnt count as a good ball.

 

[Mister Wright]

oh give him a medal, for bowling 2 straight balls on the stumps. almost all his other wickets were long hops wide of off stump. you seem to be forgetting that every batsmen plays his share of poor strokes, and the likelyhood of that increases when they play ODIs. in the test match watson had absolutely 0 chance of taking a wicket, and it was glaringly obvious that he wasnt good enough. i'd think that if he were good enough to get quality batsmen out with good bowling in ODIs, he'd also be good enough to do it in test matches.

i have, and ive never ever seen him get a batsman out with a ball that was anywhere near unplayable. a straight ball that the batsmen plays all around doesnt count as a good ball.

You're missing the point here. Watson bowled well for a bowler in ODIs. I wasn't referring to the test match just the ODIs. Are you trying to tell me most bowlers in ODIs bowl unplayable deleveries? Most bowlers get wickets in ODIs from putting the ball in the right place. The fact that he kept bowling the ball on the stumps and the batsmen missed it has to say something about how good he is at bowling in ODIs.

 

[tooextracool]

You're missing the point here. Watson bowled well for a bowler in ODIs. I wasn't referring to the test match just the ODIs. Are you trying to tell me most bowlers in ODIs bowl unplayable deleveries? Most bowlers get wickets in ODIs from putting the ball in the right place. The fact that he kept bowling the ball on the stumps and the batsmen missed it has to say something about how good he is at bowling in ODIs.

the problem is that if he were putting the ball in the right places, hed have a better ER than the one he had for the series. and batsmen dont miss straight balls on the stumps unless they are seriously out of form, or play poor strokes, and im certain it was a combination of both in the ODIs.

 

[Natman20]

I see an Australian whitewash looming. Its about time the West Indies had some players with the talent of their older heroes.

 

[Mister Wright]

the problem is that if he were putting the ball in the right places, hed have a better ER than the one he had for the series. and batsmen dont miss straight balls on the stumps unless they are seriously out of form, or play poor strokes, and im certain it was a combination of both in the ODIs.

You are one harsh judge. Watson bowled well, and you seem to be the only one who doesn't think so. He did bowl without a lot of luck, but he kept trying and was putting the ball in the right places to get wickets. Unlike certain other bowlers when things don't go their way they tend to bowl short and try to bounce players out, Watson was good enough to keep attacking the stumps. All credit to him.

 

[roseboy64]

I see an Australian whitewash looming. Its about time the West Indies had some players with the talent of their older heroes.

They do have talent. Just no ability to use it wisely.

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

i have, and ive never ever seen him get a batsman out with a ball that was anywhere near unplayable. a straight ball that the batsmen plays all around doesnt count as a good ball.

Watson's a bit of a green top bully with the ball, but he can certainly bowl unplayable deliveries on helpful wickets. The last time he played on a pitch which was helping the seamers was against Bangladesh in the NWS where he took three, and at least two of them were genuinely good deliveries which most batsmen would have been troubled by.

I don't think he's as useless as you make out with the ball, as he has good pace and is reasonably accurate, which means that if he improves a bit he certainly has the potential to be handy. Right now he's not much good of course, but as just about everybody who knows Watson's game will tell you, he is a batsman who bowls, not the other way around.

 

[jlo33692]

Funny that - that would be kind of proving my point then, wouldn't it...

no your point was that he never played against other australians ,dont you remember that?I said again that he does but not much and you ask to show you ,which i did,now what?you are saying they dont count cause they were a year ago hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaa

ohh my my i get a laugh at some of the twist and turns in some peoples posts hahahahahahahaha

arty:

 

[roseboy64]

I think you're the one not getting it.

 

[jlo33692]

Watson's a bit of a green top bully with the ball, but he can certainly bowl unplayable deliveries on helpful wickets. The last time he played on a pitch which was helping the seamers was against Bangladesh in the NWS where he took three, and at least two of them were genuinely good deliveries which most batsmen would have been troubled by.

I don't think he's as useless as you make out with the ball, as he has good pace and is reasonably accurate, which means that if he improves a bit he certainly has the potential to be handy. Right now he's not much good of course, but as just about everybody who knows Watson's game will tell you, he is a batsman who bowls, not the other way around.

Good point Sean,he just needs some time and faith ,which i think they will give him,not everybody will be a world beater straight up will they?
The potential is there,he has the ability and with some luck regarding injuries he could be the all rounder we are looking to cap of the team in the next 10 years,I think he is only 23 or 24 isnt he? If so he has 10 years to make his mark besides he is our best bet just now by a mile.

 

[tooextracool]

You are one harsh judge. Watson bowled well, and you seem to be the only one who doesn't think so. He did bowl without a lot of luck, but he kept trying and was putting the ball in the right places to get wickets. Unlike certain other bowlers when things don't go their way they tend to bowl short and try to bounce players out, Watson was good enough to keep attacking the stumps. All credit to him.

i maybe a harsh judge but im extremely fair. watson for me bowled plenty of poor deliveries and mixed them up with some that were on target. he was however fortunate enough to get more wickets off both the poor and the on target deliveries than the rest of the bowlers.

 

[tooextracool]

Watson's a bit of a green top bully with the ball, but he can certainly bowl unplayable deliveries on helpful wickets. The last time he played on a pitch which was helping the seamers was against Bangladesh in the NWS where he took three, and at least two of them were genuinely good deliveries which most batsmen would have been troubled by.

i honestly cant see how any pace bowler wouldnt bowl unplayable deliveries on green top wickets. for watson to be a 'green top bully' i would think he'd have to actually be very very impressive on such wickets, and i hardly think he is comparable to what pollock or even caddick could achieve on a green top. yes he did bowl an unplayable ball for one of his wickets against bangladesh which he got to bounce awkwardly off a length, but on the whole id think batting sides around the world would relish the prospect of him coming on in any conditions.

I don't think he's as useless as you make out with the ball, as he has good pace and is reasonably accurate, which means that if he improves a bit he certainly has the potential to be handy. Right now he's not much good of course, but as just about everybody who knows Watson's game will tell you, he is a batsman who bowls, not the other way around.

is he really reasonably accurate or is he made out to be so? his ERs in all forms of the game are very very poor(5.08 in list A is just pathetic), and other than bowling a few spells in the super series that were relatively accurate(compared to his usual self) he was by and large utter garbage, so much so in the test match that you felt sorry to even watch him bowl. i cant see how his bowling can possibly be of any use at the moment and fail to see how hes more than a part time bowler.

 

[tooextracool]

Good point Sean,he just needs some time and faith ,which i think they will give him,not everybody will be a world beater straight up will they?
The potential is there,he has the ability and with some luck regarding injuries he could be the all rounder we are looking to cap of the team in the next 10 years,I think he is only 23 or 24 isnt he? If so he has 10 years to make his mark besides he is our best bet just now by a mile.

if age is the only factor when it comes to development of a bowler, then you very well argue that michael clarke has the potential to become the next bishen singh bedi with the ball because he has more than enough time to do so.

 

[Eclipse]

is he really reasonably accurate or is he made out to be so? his ERs in all forms of the game are very very poor(5.08 in list A is just pathetic), and other than bowling a few spells in the super series that were relatively accurate(compared to his usual self) he was by and large utter garbage, so much so in the test match that you felt sorry to even watch him bowl. i cant see how his bowling can possibly be of any use at the moment and fail to see how hes more than a part time bowler.

accuracy is not the only thing that equates to economy rate..

Harmo is as waywards as anyone often but with his bounce and trajectory those wayward balls while harmless to the batsman so far as takeing a wicket can at times be very hard to score off..

Watson on the other hand low trajectory skidding action that will come onto the bat easy means batsman quite fancy slogging him even if his balls are of quite good length.

He is by no means an accurate bowlers yet but it's not a major weekness either..

 

[Top_Cat]

is he really reasonably accurate or is he made out to be so? his ERs in all forms of the game are very very poor(5.08 in list A is just pathetic), and other than bowling a few spells in the super series that were relatively accurate(compared to his usual self) he was by and large utter garbage, so much so in the test match that you felt sorry to even watch him bowl. i cant see how his bowling can possibly be of any use at the moment and fail to see how hes more than a part time bowler.

Agree with the sentiment and I think this is why; Watson doesn't move the ball sideways or up-and-down very much. In fact, he seems to move the ball less than any Test bowler I've ever seen. Decent bowlers never just have speed; they usually have swing/cut or hit the seam or both. Watson seems to have neither and just sort-of skids onto the bat at low trajectory. He actually hits the right spot relatively often but it really doesn't seem to matter. I never thought I'd see a bowler who was capable of bowling 140km/h+ look so unthreatening like Watson did in the Tests.

That said, Freddie was in a similar boat early-on; was quick enough but didn't really do enough with the ball so looked a bit unthreatening in the early matches I saw him bowl. Now that he swings the ball and hits the seam, he's bowling as well as anyone in the world.

I think Watson's problem is similar to Caddick's in the early part of his career; too quick to get excessive movement and not quick enough to be a an out-and-out speed merchant. Need to make a decision; slow down and develop the movement in his bowling or work on increasing his speed and hitting the seam.

 

[age_master]

I never thought I'd see a bowler who was capable of bowling 140km/h+ look so unthreatening like Watson did in the Tests.

yeah i must say im not a big fan of his bowling - than again in tests, if the selectors play 2 spinners while he is playing, he wont have that many overs to bowl - so his role will be more to keep it tight and take the odd wicket AND score heavily with the bat