Saker rates attack as good as great Australians

[Ruckus]

e: @ ruckus
a bit different but it's also possible, with a pronounced seam especially, to land the ball on one side of the seam with a tilted wrist and have it deviate. I find a much slower release speed is beneficial for that kind of movement.

sorry don't really understand what you mean by landing it on one side of the seam?

 

[marc71178]

Batting wise:

Broad>McGrath
Bresnan>Lee
Anderson<Gillespie
Swann=Warne

Why are you setting them against one another like that though? Ranking best to worst (and in the order they'd actually go in and bat) you get:

Bresnan > Warne
Broad > Gillespie
Swann > Lee
Anderson > McGrath

 

[benchmark00]

Why are you setting them against one another like that though? Ranking best to worst (and in the order they'd actually go in and bat) you get:

Bresnan > Warne
Broad > Gillespie
Swann > Lee
Anderson > McGrath

Ummmm because he's comparing like-for-like cricketers... Bresnan and Lee are not spin bowlers. fmd.

 

[Valer]

Imagine the ball hitting the seam but on an angle such that it almost hits one side of the ball as well. Eg looking from the bowlers perspective the seam is on a (minor) angle vs vertical.

 

[marc71178]

Ummmm because he's comparing like-for-like cricketers.

Yes, the batting. So compare 8 with 8, 9 with 9 etc.

 

[benchmark00]

Yes, the batting. So compare 8 with 8, 9 with 9 etc.

I hope to god you're being deliberately obtuse, though from history I doubt it very very much.

I will break it down just for you:

Why the **** would you compare the overall package of Graeme Swann, who is a spin bowler, to Brett Lee who is a fast bowler.

It's the infantile argument you get from people trying to compare Murali with Marshall as bowlers. Mind blowing.

 

[Spark]

He isn't comparing them as overall packages.

ftr when batting orders come into play individual comparisons of tails are meaningless. i'd back the english tail to score more runs than that tail, though it's close-ish

 

[Agent Nationaux]

Wow, didn't mean to start some argument. I just compared like for like bowlers. Broad is a bit like McGrath, people are comparing Anderson to Gillespie and that just leaves Lee and Bresnan. But you can compare them in any way really. Spark has the better idea, that they will score more runs.

 

[benchmark00]

He isn't comparing them as overall packages.

ftr when batting orders come into play individual comparisons of tails are meaningless. i'd back the english tail to score more runs than that tail, though it's close-ish

Ofcourse he is, can't see how someone can't see that. Broad and McGrath both bring similar things to the table, so it's only fair to compare them with one another. Swann and Warne, shock horror, both bowl spin, so it's only reasonable to compare those two.

 

[Spark]

That makes absolutely no sense. If we're comparing the batting abilities of the tail as-is, why bother with who bowls what? It's not as if we're selecting a team based on batting ability. We're given names, we compare their batting. That's it.

 

[benchmark00]

That makes absolutely no sense. If we're comparing the batting abilities of the tail as-is, why bother with who bowls what? It's not as if we're selecting a team based on batting ability. We're given names, we compare their batting. That's it.

ffs, the whole point of AN's exercise was not to compare team vs team.

He was comparing player vs player.

 

[zaremba]

That makes absolutely no sense. If we're comparing the batting abilities of the tail as-is, why bother with who bowls what? It's not as if we're selecting a team based on batting ability. We're given names, we compare their batting. That's it.

Exactly. Not sure quite why Marc has had his head bitten off quite like this; seems to me the point he and Spark makes is a legitimate one.

Anyhow the Aussie bowling attack is clearly ahead, while the English tail's batting maybe has the edge. As an overall package I'd take the Aussies obviously, although the tail end runs produced by England has been an important part of the team's success in recent years.

 

[Jacknife]

Exactly. Not sure quite why Marc has had his head bitten off quite like this; seems to me the point he and Spark makes is a legitimate one.

Anyhow the Aussie bowling attack is clearly ahead, while the English tail's batting maybe has the edge. As an overall package I'd take the Aussies obviously, although the tail end runs produced by England has been an important part of the team's success in recent years.

Just about to post the same, seems sensible to compare batting position rather than what someone bowls.

 

[Valer]

Batting records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPN Cricinfo

Batting records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPN Cricinfo

Not that I think this means much... The same period actually gives england a much better bowling attack by results (27.1ish vs 25.4 ish)... Also note a start of 05 cutoff has the same figure.

 

[Spark]

ffs, the whole point of AN's exercise was not to compare team vs team.

He was comparing player vs player.

And as I said, and as AN agrees, that's not the best way to assess the batting abilities of the tail.

 

[Ruckus]

Australia news: Waqar interviewed to replace McDermott | Cricket News | Australia | ESPN Cricinfo

Intriguing.


It is also intriguing why I posted that here.

 

[Agent Nationaux]

Waqar did help Pakistan become a better side with Misbah. Maybe he could do something for Australia. Only concern during Waqar's tenure was that Gul became worse.

 

[benchmark00]

And as I said, and as AN agrees, that's not the best way to assess the batting abilities of the tail.

That's not the point though! It's akin to comparing Matthew Hayden with Sehwag and then someone jumping in and saying "Oh hold on hold on, this isn't the best way to judge a teams batting strength!"

 

[Cricketismylife]

Lol English tail clearly miles better than that Australian one.

Bresnan and Broad are all rounders. Swann is pretty much an allrounder, his batting has been less effective due to the fact he bats at 10; he still averages more than some wicket keepers. Anderson is a genuine tail ender but a good number 11.

Lee is the best of the Aussie tail end bats, and he's slightly worse than Swann, and much worse than Broad and Bresnan. Gillespie and Warne are similar standard bats with Warne slightly better; Warne is far more talented but much looser, Gillespie doesnt have any talent but knows his limitations.

Mcgrath is a rabbit and worse than Anderson. So in order it's

1) Bresnan
gap
2) Broad
gap
3) Swann
4) Lee
gap
5) Warne
6) Gillespie
gap
7) Anderson
8) Mcgrath

I feel like Warne underachieved with the bat. He could have done a lot better because he was quite a clean striker of the ball, but he just didnt have any discipline even by lower order standards.

 

[zaremba]

Warne played some great knocks for Oz. At Sydney '06/07 (his last Test innings) he really did for England and did a lot to win that Test. Likewise at OT in '05 where his batting was important in saving that Test for the Crims.

Swann I feel has really under-achieved. A genuine talent, and a better bat than Broad, but has never really shown it for England for whom he's smacked the odd fun 20 or 30, but never hit the 80s or hundreds of which he's capable.