Steve Harmison pulls out of Zimbabwe tour

[tooextracool]

I personally don't really worry about, if I feel like following it, I will, if not I won't open up the threads. Simple.

if more people were like you of course the forum would simply be a lot better too IMO......of course there are just too many people who open up the thread, not having anything to contribute to it, refuse to scroll up and not want other people posting continuosly in it.

 

[marc71178]

See, this is the mad thing - you have now automatically been proven correct, on the evidence of 7 months of Test-cricket.
And the way you put it, regardless of what happens in the next 18, you'll still have been proven correct.

Ah, the old broken record strikes - the fact is he is ranked number 1 in the World, there must be a reason for that.

As it stands, there is nothing to suggest he won't continue in this vein of form. Heck, he's even getting wickets in ODI's as well, but then again they're all trrelevant as it's only runs that count in that form.

 

[marc71178]

Hmm, I'd like to think so but we've seen similar, far more prominent and poignant (A Flower and Olonga) gestures - that was 18 months ago now, sadly it still doesn't seem to have changed much.

So how come those aren't also pointless gestures then?

 

[marc71178]

I wait to see how he'll fare against (hopefully) better batting in South Africa on (hopefully) better pitches.

Because that West Indian batting line-up is just so useless isn't it

 

[Richard]

So how come those aren't also pointless gestures then?

Because they were made by Zimbabweans, in a very shrewd, very public, way. I believed they'd make a difference at the time.
They do, however, seem to have made little or no difference 18 months down the line, though, I'll say that.

 

[Richard]

Because that West Indian batting line-up is just so useless isn't it

It wasn't great, no.
There were players who had their moments (Lara, Sarwan, Hinds, Devon Smith) and there were players who were better second-time-round (Gayle, Chanderpaul).
But for both series, the batting was singularly poor most of the time.
Even though only in the Fourth Tests were the pitches especially good, very few of the wickets were actually due to the uneven bounce, but due to poor strokes.

 

[Richard]

Ah, the old broken record strikes - the fact is he is ranked number 1 in the World, there must be a reason for that.

Yes, the rankings are faulty and based on form.

As it stands, there is nothing to suggest he won't continue in this vein of form. Heck, he's even getting wickets in ODI's as well, but then again they're all trrelevant as it's only runs that count in that form.

I never said that. It's you that said all that counts in ODIs is batting.
And if he doesn't continue in this vein? Would you have predicted Vaughan-the-opener's demise after 2002?
Will this 7 months still be the be-all-and-end-all?

 

[Richard]

interesting those stats, the 3.00 came against zimbabwe and unless you want to start a whole new argument about how zimbabwe still deserve test and ODI status i fail to see how that counts,the 4.1 came on a wicket where india only got 204 while england failed to chase that score,the 4.14 came when india got 170,and the 2.82 came on a wicket on which WI scored 159 and where he only took 1 wicket, that off ravi rampaul.

All of them might need to be taken in context (the "they only got so-and-so" could actually be because of Gough's figures, not the other way around, you know) but they all prove he is rather more capable than le seemed to be suggesting.

this from someone whos only contribution is coming from the ball and has no real future in the english side isnt something to be proud about......

No, but it does prove he can hit a barn-door.

 

[luckyeddie]

All of them might need to be taken in context (the "they only got so-and-so" could actually be because of Gough's figures, not the other way around, you know) but they all prove he is rather more capable than le seemed to be suggesting.

No, but it does prove he can hit a barn-door.

Are you really allowed to play the 'context' card? I don't think so.

I feel that you're probably arguing here just for the sake of it, but never mind.
The fact of the matter is, sides now are selected with a long distance aim in mind - and when it comes to WC2007, Goughie is going to be 37 - I seriously doubt that he will be selected, so get someone else in (not Wharf).

On reflection, the 'barn door' comparison was out of order - yesterday's quite appalling first over is still fresh in the mind, but surely you of all people realise that people make idiotic judgments based upon a single over containing 7 wides?

 

[Richard]

Yes, I've done it many a time (eg Harmison in his 3rd, 4th and 5th VB Series games 2 winters ago).
If I truly believed Gough wouldn't be around in 2007 I'd be the first to say "there's no point picking him in the side". I credited Caddick, Knight, Stewart and Hussain for retiring when they did - so many people acted surprised, not realising that the next World Cup is all that matters in ODIs.
But Gough has publicly stated his aim is to be around for that World Cup - presumably principally based on his disappointment at missing the last.
37 isn't that old any more (well, it never really has been), even for a bowler (well, a good one anyway). Personally, I'm all for giving him the chance.
Of course, like anyone else, if his performances really do drop he should be left-out.
But as it is, a "drop in performance" from Harmison right now would probably be being smashed for 10 or 11 games. For Goughie we've heard cries already, from countless quarters, for his axing, due to 2 bad games.
2 bad games! Just TWO. That, to me, is very harsh, and purely because of the perennial, never-stopping generalisation in sport about older players.

 

[Richard]

Are you really allowed to play the 'context' card? I don't think so.

I wasn't - tooextracool was.
His figures are worse when you put them in context.
They're better when you don't bear in mind that one of them was against a side that don't deserve the tag "ODI side".

 

[marc71178]

It wasn't great, no.
There were players who had their moments (Lara, Sarwan, Hinds, Devon Smith) and there were players who were better second-time-round (Gayle, Chanderpaul).

So Lara is now a player who "has his moments"...

 

[marc71178]

I never said that. It's you that said all that counts in ODIs is batting.

Erm, I don't think I have, seeing as I often talk on here about the importance of taking wickets in ODIs, I very much doubt I'd suddenly change my views.

 

[marc71178]

All of them might need to be taken in context (the "they only got so-and-so" could actually be because of Gough's figures, not the other way around, you know)

Please explain to me how an economy rate greater than the team overall rate causes the final score ot be so low.

 

[Richard]

So Lara is now a player who "has his moments"...

Well... albeit one of them was a mere 400*, but nonetheless I don't think anyone would say Lara was consistent in these 8 Test-matches.

 

[Richard]

Erm, I don't think I have, seeing as I often talk on here about the importance of taking wickets in ODIs, I very much doubt I'd suddenly change my views.

You've told me time and again that all the rules in ODIs today are geared towards causing as many runs as possible.

 

[Richard]

Please explain to me how an economy rate greater than the team overall rate causes the final score ot be so low.

Err... going at 4.346932858329-an-over causes the score to be lower than had you gone at 4.52536456590-an-over.

 

[marc71178]

For Goughie we've heard cries already, from countless quarters, for his axing, due to 2 bad games.

This year:

17 games, 18 wickets @ 35.50 and eco. 4.61

Did I hear you say 2?

Bear in mind that at the same time one S Harmison has 26 wickets @ 25.57 and eco. 4.37, a figure you earlier today put down to friendly pitches...

You can't have it both ways.

 

[marc71178]

You've told me time and again that all the rules in ODIs today are geared towards causing as many runs as possible.

And you reckon you don't twist whay people say.

 

[Richard]

This year:

17 games, 18 wickets @ 35.50 and eco. 4.61

Did I hear you say 2?

Bear in mind that at the same time one S Harmison has 26 wickets @ 25.57 and eco. 4.37, a figure you earlier today put down to friendly pitches...

You can't have it both ways.

Exclude the figures in West Indies and you'll get the picture.