Spinners

[Neil Pickup]

Meh, time to agree to disagree. Not in an arguing mood

 

[Richard]

Which suggests his day is better than Lee, Pollock, McGrath, Gillespie, Harmison, Anderson, Ntini, Zaheer etc. You get the idea.

On an off day he's still better than Harmison, Anderson, Ntini, Zaheer Khan and Brett Lee.
On a good day he's better than Pollock, McGrath and Gillespie without a doubt in my mind. Every bit as accurate as them and has more tricks up his sleeve and uses them usually at just the right times.
I'd say Vaas' peak is highest of anyone in World cricket, and his peaks are more frequent than those of most seamers. However, he's possibly even worse than Langer in his troughs; goes from averaging 16 to averaging 100. Incredible. If his troughs were less low his overall average would be much better. Peaks and troughs generally occur with equal regularity.

 

[Tom Halsey]

I maintain that Franklyn Rose, on his day, was the best bowler in the world.

If you say that, you could call Michael Bevan brilliant. But he was crap....Points out that Michael Bevans only good bowling performance was against who?...I shall let you work it out with a hint...the initials of the country were W.I.

 

[marc71178]

On an off day he's still better than Harmison, Anderson, Ntini, Zaheer Khan and Brett Lee.

ROFLMAO

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

If his troughs were lower his overall average would be much better.

That makes no sense. However, if his troughs weren't as low...

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

If you say that, you could call Michael Bevan brilliant. But he was crap....Points out that Michael Bevans only good bowling performance was against who?...I shall let you work it out with a hint...the initials of the country were W.I.

This is a stupid comment with no relation to mine.

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

On a good day he's better than Pollock, McGrath and Gillespie without a doubt in my mind.

So you are off the firm belief that Vaas at his best is better than MacGrath, Gillespie and Pollock at their best?

 

[Rik]

So you are off the firm belief that Vaas at his best is better than MacGrath, Gillespie and Pollock at their best?

Statistically in ODI Cricket he is, since he is the only bowler to take 8 wickets in a ODI innings. McGrath has taken 7 and that was against Nambia who are more than a tad weaker than Zimbabwe.

 

[lord_of_darkness]

lol howd this go from a spinners thread to a fast bowlers thread..?

 

[Neil Pickup]

Statistically in ODI Cricket he is, since he is the only bowler to take 8 wickets in a ODI innings. McGrath has taken 7 and that was against Nambia who are more than a tad weaker than Zimbabwe.

Yes, but did he deserve those wickets?

 

[Richard]

So you are off the firm belief that Vaas at his best is better than MacGrath, Gillespie and Pollock at their best?

Yep, that's what I said. Gillespie, McGrath and Pollock are all mainly seam bowlers, Gillespie being more of a conventional swinger than McGrath and Pollock, but Vaas bowls just about everything - conventional swing, seam, cut, reverse-swing, and he's very good, at his best, at knowing when to bowl what. He's also very accurate and bowls a fullish length from a relatively short stature, making him more threatening and while he is as economical he is doing it with less MFE.

 

[Richard]

That makes no sense. However, if his troughs weren't as low...

You're quite right it doesn't. Now corrected.

 

[Eclipse]

Yep, that's what I said. Gillespie, McGrath and Pollock are all mainly seam bowlers, Gillespie being more of a conventional swinger than McGrath and Pollock, but Vaas bowls just about everything - conventional swing, seam, cut, reverse-swing, and he's very good, at his best, at knowing when to bowl what. He's also very accurate and bowls a fullish length from a relatively short stature, making him more threatening and while he is as economical he is doing it with less MFE.

Gillespie may have changed since you last saw him but he is not a genuine swing bowler he gets some swing with the new and old ball but he is much more a seam bowler.

He is however IMO the best fast bowler at extracting seam movment and bounce off the deadest tracks imaganable. If you had seen some of his spells against India in India back in 2001 and in the WI this year you would know what I am talking about.

He gets more seam movment than McGrath and bowls in the 140s as well as being quite accurate. In short you never feel comftable against him even on real flat tracks and his figures over the last 18 monthes have been as good as anyone's.

 

[Richard]

Gillespie may have changed since you last saw him but he is not a genuine swing bowler he gets some swing with the new and old ball but he is much more a seam bowler.

He is however IMO the best fast bowler at extracting seam movment and bounce off the deadest tracks imaganable. If you had seen some of his spells against India in India back in 2001 and in the WI this year you would know what I am talking about.

He gets more seam movment than McGrath and bowls in the 140s as well as being quite accurate. In short you never feel comftable against him even on real flat tracks and his figures over the last 18 monthes have been as good as anyone's.

So he can now extract seam off pitches of the like that no-one has ever been able to extract seam from?
He might have the best seam-position in The World but I'm afraid you make a wholly illogical ascertation there.
If it was possible to move the ball off the seam on any surface, no-one would need to do anything except keep the seam straight to be a big threat whenever they bowled. Anywhere.
I'm afraid you can't use your favourite "I've watched it so I know better" trick here, either.

 

[Eclipse]

So he can now extract seam off pitches of the like that no-one has ever been able to extract seam from?

were the hell did I say that?? what i said is that even on flat pitches he gets life out of them better than any bowler I have seen.

Somone has to do it the best and in my opinion that is gillespie.

You know **** all about Australian players man.

 

[Rik]

You know **** all about Australian players man.

Just as although you being Australian, it doesn't mean you know everything about them either.

 

[Eclipse]

Just as although you being Australian, it doesn't mean you know everything about them either.

I dont proclame to ether but It's quite clear I know less about English cricket than you do and Visa Versa.

With Richard he seem's to think he know's everything about everyone.

 

[luckyeddie]

You know **** all about Australian players man.

An argument which now precludes Eclipse from pontificating about

a) England
b) New Zealand
c) India
d) South Africa
e) Pakistan
f) Sri Lanka
g) Bangladesh
h) West Indies
i) Zimbabwe

by a similar logic, and one which disqualifies inter-national discussions.

 

[Eclipse]

An argument which now precludes Eclipse from pontificating about

a) England
b) New Zealand
c) India
d) South Africa
e) Pakistan
f) Sri Lanka
g) Bangladesh
h) West Indies
i) Zimbabwe

by a similar logic, and one which disqualifies inter-national discussions.

?? I dont try to have my say on everthing especialy those topic's I dont have a great deal of knowlage in. and the last thing I would do is try to is pass off my poorly informed opinion on those who know better like it's a fact.

 

[luckyeddie]

?? I dont try to have my say on everthing especialy those topic's I dont have a great deal of knowlage in thats what I was pointing out.

I'll give you that one, as you explained in a later posting, however, your assertation that Gillespie

is however IMO the best fast bowler at extracting seam movment and bounce off the deadest tracks imaganable

was, by your own admission, an OPINION which appeared to have no pre-set delimiters. Best you've seen? Best this week? Best ever?

As such, Richard 'assumed the extreme' (as he was entitled to do) and had a little dig (no surprise there).

Personally, I think that there is very little between Pollock, McGrath and Gillespie when all of them are bowling at their best with respect to extracting life from an otherwise unhelpful pitch, although as you correctly pointed out Gillespie does it a bit quicker (which, of course, he will cease to do in about 5 years as he slows down)