Steve Harmison pulls out of Zimbabwe tour

[tooextracool]

He's not the quickest - he's not the slowest, either, I might add - but that does not make his fielding sufficiently poor for it to count against him.

yes it does, as ive said time and time again if you are mono skilled then you have to at least be a good fielder....gough is not.and with his bowling being ordinary, hes really not contributing much at all to the side.

That funny little thing called potential again - the selectors believe he can do better with the ball than he's recently demonstrated.

err no, its a funny little thing called 'reputation' and personally i would quit before it gets completely ruined.

And he can bat better than some, let me assure you - and field as well as some, too.

better than some yes, but considering that his bowling isnt brilliant anymore he should be better than at least half the other players in the world in either 1 of those skills.
and personally the only 'some' that gough can bat better than are some of the most disgraceful batters in the game today.....all of whom could probably bowl a lot better than gough ATM.

And I'd say you're being very, very harsh on the good performances!

no im not, i used your theories, so really you are being too harsh on him and every other player that you assess.

As I say, I don't really see that the West Indies series counts for too much

why not?because failure on flat wickets can be condoned?

- this summer it's been 4 good, 3 OK, 3 poor and one which started very good and ended very poor (unneccesarily - 6-11-1 turning into 10-48-1).

then im afraid you cant count - 0/58,3/48,4/50,1/48 and 0/30 are all poor performances, so stop editing facts to suit yourself. 5 failures, 1 good performance and 4 OK performances. something completely different to what you posted initially....2 bad games out of a 11,where did you even come up with such a figure?

 

[tooextracool]

IMO you've shown a poor interpretation of his figures' meaning.

no i have not, i havent modified the figures at all, ive shown them to you exactly the way they are. and even you know that they have been extremely dissapointing.

If everyone is poor then it's not really fair to blame someone overtly for being so.
If one is OK and one or two others are pretty good, it's not fair to heap apathy on the OK one.

much the same way when mcgrath got 1/26 and you called it a failure because lee and warne did better you mean?
and believe me 1/40 is poor on a seamer friendly wicket no matter what anyone else does.