*Official* Zimbabwe in Australia Thread

[gibbsnsmith]

Youre too harsh on lee.. i dont see you going out there giving your all bowling at that pace at that accuracy.

 

[luckyeddie]

Agreed that Gilchrist gets dropped more often than most - similar situation to Zulu a few years ago. He hits the ball so darned hard and is prepared to chance his arm.

 

[Richard]

Youre too harsh on lee.. i dont see you going out there giving your all bowling at that pace at that accuracy.

Believe me, if I was considered good enough to be picked for a Test-match, I would give it my all.
As for Lee's accuracy, it's presumably better than mine or else I'd be better than I am, but by international standards Lee's accuracy is nought but a joke.
If he really can bowl as accurately as several people have claimed he can, why doesn't John Buchanan or someone just have a quiet word with him and tell him "why not try doing this?"
The reality is, Lee almost always bowls so waywardly that he presents no great threat, and usually goes for a few. I can't wait to see what SRT and co. do to him. Even Zimbabwe and Bangladesh haven't had any undue concerns, have they?
Yes, he's quick, yes, he swings the ball more than he did two years ago, but there has to be a reason for his continued taking of wickets at an unexceptional average. And I don't really think it's realistic to suggest this reason is simply that he doesn't know how he should be bowling.

 

[Richard]

Agreed that Gilchrist gets dropped more often than most - similar situation to Zulu a few years ago. He hits the ball so darned hard and is prepared to chance his arm.

Yes, very similar to Klusener. Although his ODI average isn't quite as inflated as Gilchrist's Test one. Klusener's had more than his share of luck, but not as much as Gilchrist has had in Tests.

 

[Anil]

I would say he does fine against spin once he gets well enough set.

...it's not whether you say it or not....has he actually done that against a good spin attack in spin-friendly conditions....(other than that Mumbai century)?

As for the innings in mumbi well he was only droped twice one when he was on 46 a very tough chance and the other one was about 4 runs before he got out.

Ok, maybe it is two, I am talking from memory and it could be wrong. I remember reading reports about the fact that Hayden's was a chanceless innings while Gilchrist's although really belligerent was a very chancy one(somehow it stuck in my mind that he was dropped five times during that innings....)

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

NB- This comment has no bearing on the quality of batsman that I consider Gilchrist to be.
----
I remember when Gilchrist was dropped 5 times in a session by England during the Ashes. I was staunchly supporting England at the time, but I couldn't help but be amused. On a couple of the occasions, he was dropped of orthodox edges - simple chances and I remember him turning to walk back to the pavilion on each occasion, then seeing the fielder drop the ball, smiling at his luck and resuming his innings. It was funny because it almost seemed as though he was trying to get himself out, but England just wouldn't let him. He went on to score a century and the last time he was dropped was on 90odd (93 I think).

 

[Chubb]

QUOTE]Lee bowled his usual pies and got one excuse-for-a-test-player-who-only-keeps-getting-picked-through-outside-interference and one clueless tailender[/QUOTE]

I don't like Lee either, but then I'm English. But, Dion Ebrahim is a talented batsman- he got consecutive fifties against England- and he has either 8 or 10 test half-centuries to his name, so his selection is justified, but he is no opener. he should be batting at 5 or 6. Gavin Ewing is far from a "Clueless tailender"- the man averages 48 in first class cricket with two double hundreds. He has the potential to average at least 24 in test cricket (That is good for Zimbabwe at the moment) and possibly more.

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

Ebrahim has 7 fifties in 17 Tests. IMO he's a useful batsman, but in the context of Zimbabwean cricket, he's a good bat.

Re: Gavin Ewing. Clueless tailender?? It is beyond me why they are putting the young man below Taibu and Streak because in my estimation he's a batsman who bowls, not a bowler who bats. He averages 53.27 in FC cricket with 3 hundreds and 8 fifties. His top score is 212. 1000+ FC runs in 13 games.

If he's a clueless tailender, what is Rikki Clarke?

 

[gibbsnsmith]

a world class batsman of course or the 12th man

 

[marc71178]

If he's a clueless tailender, what is Rikki Clarke?

Note, if anyone can satisfactorily answer what is Rikki Clarke, I'll be impressed!

 

[luckyeddie]

Note, if anyone can satisfactorily answer what is Rikki Clarke, I'll be impressed!

I quote the duck's 'disclaimer' from this week's (month's? year's?) diary...

Disclaimer...

All characters, circumstances and Inzy portrayed within these columns are entirely fictitious. Any similarity to any cricketers, Rikki Clarke or moaning Victorian coaches portrayed herein is entirely coincidental. Furthermore, any similarity between said Rikki Clarke and an actual cricketer, past or present, is in itself also coincidental. If we have given any other impression, we should like to apologise. We are so fuc very sorry and promise never to do anything naughty again (crosses fingers).


So you see it's even stumped DD.

(The 'fuc' bit should have a 'strikethrough' in HTML)

 

[gibbsnsmith]

a world class batsman of course or the 12th man

not a satisfactory answer?

 

[Eclipse]

I have never said "he ONLY, EVER" makes runs through fluke - I said not long ago that I reckon he'd average about 40 if he didn't get dropped so many times as he has been.
I don't need to watch a match to work-out that Gilchrist has been dropped. I honestly can't remember the first 9 Tests of Gilchrist's career, but having read reports on all his not-insignificant scoring in that period I have not yet found one that mentions a let-off.
However, in the oft-praised innings at The Wankhede Stadium, Mumbai, he was dropped twice in 2 balls, by Badani running back and by Dravid at slip. Neither were exactly sitters but both should have been taken. They were on 44 and 46, incidentally.
In The Ashes 2001 (not 2000) he made a four-chance 154 (15, 69 and 102 and 154) and a five-chance 90 (13, 30-odd, 48, 56 and 90). He scored a crucial half-century at Trent Bridge, but nothing else.
He then scored a century against New Zealand and a 78* in which he was missed lbw at least once. Then a 200* in which he was dropped on 12 and 110-odd. He then made 138* where he should have been stumped in the 30s.
He scored a century against us at The SCG, chanceless, and that 113* against the hapless and hopeless Zimbabweans.
Still not a record to be sniffed at - I really must make an exact calculation - but not one as good as the scorebook average.

Ohh so now we are taking LBW decisions and missed stumpings into account are we??
Look how about you just accept I know more about Gilly than you do. You may have "read the reports" but that simpily does not make up for actualy watching the games.

Beleve me Gilchrist's avrage is only signifigantly inflated by one thing the fact he has a great supporting list of batsman making run's before him.

It just does not seem possible to have 3053 runs at 61.06 and have that avrage inflated by 20 runs because of droped catches.

By your logic Gilchrist has well over 1000 runs more than he should had catches been held now thats just crazy.

Also I dont care what you say if the feilders cant catch him because he hit's the ball so hard then that's a skill Gilchrist has somthing that wont change so you really cant say he is lucky.

 

[Eclipse]

Australia 2/96

Hayden out for 20 Ponting 59 off 55 with 11x4 playing some stunning shots as usual.

 

[age_master]

I remember when Gilchrist was dropped 5 times in a session by England during the Ashes. I was staunchly supporting England at the time, but I couldn't help but be amused. On a couple of the occasions, he was dropped of orthodox edges - simple chances and I remember him turning to walk back to the pavilion on each occasion, then seeing the fielder drop the ball, smiling at his luck and resuming his innings. It was funny because it almost seemed as though he was trying to get himself out, but England just wouldn't let him. He went on to score a century and the last time he was dropped was on 90odd (93 I think).

and.... what do you expect, its england everyone gets dropped by england

 

[PY]

and.... what do you expect, its england everyone gets dropped by england

Yeah Ramps and Hick must have been dropped at least 20 times between them :P

 

[Craig]

Welcome back Mr Luckyeddie!

Now I saw that pitch one day 1, and correct me if I am wrong, did it have any grass on it and it looked like a damp wicket, not like the flat wicket i have seen. But then again, I didnt see the pitch report.

Bichel's ball to Carlise was a good one and IMO Carlise had to play at it.

 

[Richard]

QUOTE]Lee bowled his usual pies and got one excuse-for-a-test-player-who-only-keeps-getting-picked-through-outside-interference and one clueless tailender

I don't like Lee either, but then I'm English. But, Dion Ebrahim is a talented batsman- he got consecutive fifties against England- and he has either 8 or 10 test half-centuries to his name, so his selection is justified, but he is no opener. he should be batting at 5 or 6. Gavin Ewing is far from a "Clueless tailender"- the man averages 48 in first class cricket with two double hundreds. He has the potential to average at least 24 in test cricket (That is good for Zimbabwe at the moment) and possibly more. [/QUOTE]
Crikey - maybe I should have taken a look at Ewing's record before judging on one over against the new-ball in murky conditions...
Ebrahim, however, has been tried down the order, especially in ODIs, and it hasn't worked. The way David Houghton told it on some commentary I heard last year, Ebrahim's been an opener all his life. He might have a few half-centuries, but any batsman will get half-centuries if you pick him enough times. His average is very poor. I'd much prefer see Grant Flower and Gripper opening, or maybe Gavin Rennie if he's still playing. Ebrahim's First-Class record is poor, too, and I really don't see him being a success in Test-cricket.

 

[Richard]

Ebrahim has 7 fifties in 17 Tests. IMO he's a useful batsman, but in the context of Zimbabwean cricket, he's a good bat.

Re: Gavin Ewing. Clueless tailender?? It is beyond me why they are putting the young man below Taibu and Streak because in my estimation he's a batsman who bowls, not a bowler who bats. He averages 53.27 in FC cricket with 3 hundreds and 8 fifties. His top score is 212. 1000+ FC runs in 13 games.

If he's a clueless tailender, what is Rikki Clarke?

They once picked Stuart Matsikenyeri at eleven in an ODI, as a wristspinner.
If they can make a logic-baffling decision with one young batsman-who-bowls-a-little-bit, why can't they do it with another?

 

[Richard]

Ohh so now we are taking LBW decisions and missed stumpings into account are we??
Look how about you just accept I know more about Gilly than you do. You may have "read the reports" but that simpily does not make up for actualy watching the games.

Beleve me Gilchrist's avrage is only signifigantly inflated by one thing the fact he has a great supporting list of batsman making run's before him.

It just does not seem possible to have 3053 runs at 61.06 and have that avrage inflated by 20 runs because of droped catches.

By your logic Gilchrist has well over 1000 runs more than he should had catches been held now thats just crazy.

Also I dont care what you say if the feilders cant catch him because he hit's the ball so hard then that's a skill Gilchrist has somthing that wont change so you really cant say he is lucky.

What is the difference between missed lbws, missed stumpings and dropped catches? They are all instances of dismissal being got away with. "Let-off" is a better term.
If you want to deny to yourself that Gilchrist is more lucky than most by holding-out that let-offs aren't luck, fine by me. Fortunately, most people who have so far commented seem to disagree.
As for trying that one about watching games enabling better analysis of whether runs were earnt or not, that's complete tripe. You don't have to watch someone to know whether they're good or not. If someone scores runs at a level of the game, it's pretty obvious that they're good at that level. And by "scores runs" I mean earnt them, not been gifted them by incompetant fielding-sides and Umpires.