Which teams would be adversely effected by Cond/Pitches in SA ?

[devdas]

Comming back to the original topic, the pace-oriented conditions in South Africa could well mean that only one spin bowler could be fielded in the playing eleven, so i believe India would be really effected by the playing conditions in SA.They will have to go with either Harbharjan or Kumble but that means that they will have to play with 4 pacers!! At the moment only Zaheer Khan looks good, who the other three pacers will be ??? Certainly not ajit/Nehra and bangar, but then who??

 

[Neil Pickup]

Which is why India aren't going to win it...

Re: Waqar/Wasim v McGrath/Gillespie

I looked at it as "Who would you rather have in your team". Suggesting "talent" as a basis is flawed as Mark Ramprakash is probably one of the, if not the most talented players in England. However, for numerous other reasons, I'd rather see a long list of others play for us.

And to whoever interpreted my earlier post as suggesting Lee was better than Akhtar - read again, think, then reply.

 

[marc71178]

Thats convenient. A little elaboration perhaps ? How does Gillespie get the lead over Wasim for God's sake ?

Apart from the fact that Wasim is past it you mean? I cannot think that a single sane person would select him ahead of Gillespie.

He may have had talent in the past, but if you want to talk about the past then I suggest England have the best attack because we've got Botham, Laker, Trueman, Barnes etc.

 

[Anil]

Originally posted by Neil Pickup
McGrath v Waqar 1-0
Gillespie v Wasim 2-0
Lee v Shoaib 2-1
Bichel v Razzaq 3-1
Warne v Saqlain 4-1

That's how...

Not quite.

McGrath v Waqar 1-0
Gillespie v Wasim 1-1
Lee v Shoaib 0-2
Bichel v Razzaq 1-1
Warne v Saqlain 3-1

That's more like it.

 

[onemangang]

And to whoever interpreted my earlier post as suggesting Lee was better than Akhtar - read again, think, then reply.

Lee v Shoaib 2-1 Thats what you wrote, to me it sounds as if you were saying that lee is better!

Also since we are talking about onedayers, think twice before writing Akram off, he's still among the top onedayer bowlers!

 

[vandemataram]

Originally posted by marc71178

I'm surpised no one commented on it yet but since when is Agarkar a fast bowler???

Don't you have to be quick for that??

A genuine quick bowler is one who bowls b/w 145-150 KMH, Ajit fastest has been recorded at 147 in Aus and he used to bowl around 145 often!

Or a bowler?! [/quote]

In England, a bowler is said to be a player who bows out before the match has actually started(Gough/Flintoff/Jones etc) That defination certainly doesn't suit Ajit

 

[marc71178]

Originally posted by onemangang

And to whoever interpreted my earlier post as suggesting Lee was better than Akhtar - read again, think, then reply.

Lee v Shoaib 2-1 Thats what you wrote, to me it sounds as if you were saying that lee is better!

Also since we are talking about onedayers, think twice before writing Akram off, he's still among the top onedayer bowlers!

No, it's a running total - and he's actually saying Shoaib is better.

 

[marc71178]

Originally posted by vandemataram

Originally posted by marc71178

I'm surpised no one commented on it yet but since when is Agarkar a fast bowler???

Don't you have to be quick for that??

A genuine quick bowler is one who bowls b/w 145-150 KMH, Ajit fastest has been recorded at 147 in Aus and he used to bowl around 145 often!

Or a bowler?!

In England, a bowler is said to be a player who bows out before the match has actually started(Gough/Flintoff/Jones etc) That defination certainly doesn't suit Ajit [/quote]

6 - 0 - 60 - 0

 

[anzac]

I admire what the Aussie bowling attack does & has achieved, but I think a major part of their success is due to the totals amassed by their batsmen, allowing them to attack & the Captain to set aggressive fields....

McGrath is a taller version of Hadlee - maybe not as quick but gets more bounce...

Gillsepie looks 'evil' and reminds me of the WIndies attack of old, but he is prone to bowl stump to stump & drift towards middle where he can be picked off - he is no where near as effective bowling outside off as when he is bowling 'at the batsman'....

Lee is most effective when given the new ball and told to bowl at a good length but FAST - not short.....he took all his wickets in his early years by bowling a good line & length & fast - lately he seems to be trying to compete head to head with Dizzy by bowling the same type of deliveries - at his pace that can & is often very costly because he does not get the same bounce off the pitch....(I also thought Dizzy was a better bowler prior to the collision with Steve)......

Wasim has plenty of street smarts as a bowler provided he has his mind on the job.....he is the main reason I rate the Pakistan attack ahead of Australia & South Africa simply because he is a lefty - just the change of angle alone adds to the variety of attack, let laone the talent he has with it....in my time there has only been 1 better bowler of the yorker IMO and that is Waqar!!!!!

Waqar has also slowed from his tear away years but again has plenty of savvy....I think man for man the Pakistan seamers can do more with the ball than the Aussie attack, & those late in swinging yorkers are beautiful.....

The pair of them may not take as many wickets now as they used to but I suspect that they create plenty of wicket opportunities for the other bowlers.....

Pakistan also win the variety stakes IMO because of the likes of Razzaq & Mahmood who are both competent back up bowlers, not to mention their more than competent spinners - Australia only has their BIG 4 and that is their attack's achillies heel IMO .....

SA therefore rate a distant 3rd of these 3. India have the right variety but use too many ingredients to achieve this - NZ by recent selections are following this pattern as well.....

8D

 

[Gotchya]

Talent?

Not a hope there.

This is what I responded to anyway, its talent what we are talking about and not who is the valuable player at the moment. Thats why i included that bit about past performances not taken into consideration.

Re: Waqar/Wasim v McGrath/Gillespie

I looked at it as "Who would you rather have in your team". Suggesting "talent" as a basis is flawed as Mark Ramprakash is probably one of the, if not the most talented players in England. However, for numerous other reasons, I'd rather see a long list of others play for us.

I find your example flawed, we're not talking abt some under achievers but class acts that have had wonderful careers. Talent wise how they can be inferior to the Australian duo, i dont get that at all.

Apart from the fact that Wasim is past it you mean? I cannot think that a single sane person would select him ahead of Gillespie.

He may have had talent in the past, but if you want to talk about the past then I suggest England have the best attack because we've got Botham, Laker, Trueman, Barnes etc.

What really do you mean by : "may have had talent" ?? Is talent that volatile ? Talent dosen't go away like that, you have it one night and the next morning you wake up and pffft its gone. It stays with you for life....give waqar and wasim a new body and I bet they'd be ripping apart lineups from scratch.

Moreover, I dont see too much insanity in picking Wasim in a test side over Gillespie because :

Pace was never his asset, pace is the only thing that a bowler loses with age.

Wasim still (if you happen to watch the most recent he played) has unequalled control over swing. He has been producing wicket taking balls and is still one of the most economical bowlers in ODI's as well as tests.


If all this is because dizzy and glenn keep drubbing your boys, and you have to rub it in, we can stop it right here

 

[Gotchya]

On South African tracks I would rate the bowling attacks as follows :

Pakistan
Australia
South Africa
New Zealand
India (with Zaheer)
England (without Gough)
West Indies
............

 

[Anil]

Originally posted by Gotchya
On South African tracks I would rate the bowling attacks as follows :

Pakistan
Australia
South Africa
New Zealand
India (with Zaheer)
England (without Gough)
West Indies
............

I would actually rate the Indians below England and the West Indies as far as pace attacks are concerned. Zaheer and to a certain extent Srinath are the only pacers that can be relied on for some consistency and these two really can't blast sides out. Nehra has been in a really crappy zone for quite some time now and Agarkar just can't be relied on.

England, if they have a fully fit Caddick, Tudor, Jones, Flintoff attack(Gough would be a great bonus), looks good in SA conditions. So do the West Indians with Dillon, Cuffy, Collins, Vasbrakes, Colleymore....

 

[Gotchya]

Perhaps, but to be honest none of the three England,India or West Indies can blast sides out as of now. Its anyone's call as far as these three are concerned. Good beafy batting lineups, but nothing to write home about when it comes to the bowling attacks.

 

[wasims_fan]

Originally posted by marc71178

Thats convenient. A little elaboration perhaps ? How does Gillespie get the lead over Wasim for God's sake ?

Apart from the fact that Wasim is past it you mean? I cannot think that a single sane person would select him ahead of Gillespie.

He may have had talent in the past, but if you want to talk about the past then I suggest England have the best attack because we've got Botham, Laker, Trueman, Barnes etc.

how can you compare gillespie with wasim.gillespie doesn't even have any experience yet he has only played 44 ODIS.first of all he should be taught how to bowl in the final overs then you should think of comparing him with wasim.

 

[aussie_beater]

Originally posted by anilramavarma

England, if they have a fully fit Caddick, Tudor, Jones, Flintoff attack(Gough would be a great bonus), looks good in SA conditions.

Gough has been ruled out from the world cup too....so he isn't going to be there.

 

[Anil]

Originally posted by aussie_beater

Originally posted by anilramavarma

England, if they have a fully fit Caddick, Tudor, Jones, Flintoff attack(Gough would be a great bonus), looks good in SA conditions.

Gough has been ruled out from the world cup too....so he isn't going to be there.

Still, I would suggest that in SA conditions, their pace attack is better than India's.

 

[aussie_beater]

Originally posted by anilramavarma

Originally posted by aussie_beater

Originally posted by anilramavarma

England, if they have a fully fit Caddick, Tudor, Jones, Flintoff attack(Gough would be a great bonus), looks good in SA conditions.

Gough has been ruled out from the world cup too....so he isn't going to be there.

Still, I would suggest that in SA conditions, their pace attack is better than India's.

Yes you could say that as Agarkar and Nehra aren't any good as of now, and its only up to Zaheer and Srinath for that matter.

 

[marc71178]

I dont see too much insanity in picking Wasim in a test side over Gillespie

Wasim is past it now, and to suggest you'd select him (7 Test wickets in 7 matches since July 2000) over Gillespie is ludicrous!

 

[marc71178]

how can you compare gillespie with wasim.gillespie doesn't even have any experience yet he has only played 44 ODIS.first of all he should be taught how to bowl in the final overs then you should think of comparing him with wasim.

ODI's aren't proper Cricket, how many times do I have to say that? But incidentally Gillespie slips in at number 4 in the current rankings.

He is also a key member of the best bowling attack in the world, bar none - Wasim isn't even an automatic pick now.

 

[aussie_beater]

Originally posted by marc71178

ODI's aren't proper Cricket, how many times do I have to say that?

Oh, they are proper alright.....

they are just different, but to say that they are not proper cricket, is plain ridiculous.