Who has a better test bowling attack ?

[tooextracool]

Guess what these were, then? Yes, that's right - anomalies!
Most fingerspinners don't achieve this success on pitches that don't turn, and it would probably in Saqlain's case and certainly in Boje's given that I watched that 2000\01 series, have been down to poor batting....

yes and the SL players are terrible players of spin too....appalling players....

And we can tell that by the fact that he's been bowling in Test-cricket for all of the last 3 years...

oh this is typical of richard....to pass opinions about something that he has no clue about....klusener was injured in 98, so we saw a good 4 years of what he was at the intl level after that. the 8/64 against india in eden gardens was what he was capable of doing in his prime.

 

[biased indian]

Shoaib - better than anyone on either side at his best, but still not consistent..

dont think so, shoaib is only effective when he is in rhythm, and that only seems to happen once every series and against NZ. but yes when he is in rhythm he is lethal

u both seems to agree on it

 

[Richard]

yes and the SL players are terrible players of spin too....appalling players....

Maybe generalisation and stereotypes would have it that they can never play poorly against spin.
The reality of it is, they can, occasionally, and they did.

oh this is typical of richard....to pass opinions about something that he has no clue about....klusener was injured in 98, so we saw a good 4 years of what he was at the intl level after that. the 8/64 against india in eden gardens was what he was capable of doing in his prime.

I know Klusener was injured in 1998, I saw the injury happen.
We saw, in fact, just under 3 years of what he was capable of, given that he was dropped in mid-2001\02 and returned from the injury in mid-1998\99.
Of course he wasn't the same bowler for a long time, but someone who followed South African cricket in 2003\04 would realise that he did a hell of a lot of work and bowled really well. All right, he wasn't great in his Middlesex stint but that's, sadly, affected a lot of overseas players recently.

 

[Tom Halsey]

well it was the same opinion that was going around about harmison not so long ago.....

Harmison had obvious talent though - even though for a time he was very innacurate.

 

[Tom Halsey]

oh this is typical of richard....to pass opinions about something that he has no clue about....klusener was injured in 98, so we saw a good 4 years of what he was at the intl level after that. the 8/64 against india in eden gardens was what he was capable of doing in his prime.

No, it's typical you.

You said he's no good at Test level 'anymore'.

Now, Richard replied, perfectly validly, by saying that we don't know that, because we haven't seen him for 2 and a half years.

So we do know he was good at Test level for 4 years while he did play, but we don't know now, as he isn't playing.

 

[Tim]

NZ definately helps Shoaibs bowling average in tests.

I think at the end of the test series in January he had figures of 15/50 over the last year.

 

[marc71178]

Harmison had obvious talent though

So obvious that only a couple of us backed his selection when he was conceding lots of runs?!

Isn't hindsight a great thing?

 

[tooextracool]

Harmison had obvious talent though - even though for a time he was very innacurate.

yes so obvious that some people on here thought that he was rubbish and didnt deserve a place in the side.

 

[tooextracool]

No, it's typical you.

actually no, it seems that you have a knack of butting into arguments that you know nothing about....

You said he's no good at Test level 'anymore'.

Now, Richard replied, perfectly validly, by saying that we don't know that, because we haven't seen him for 2 and a half years.

So we do know he was good at Test level for 4 years while he did play, but we don't know now, as he isn't playing.

the injury pretty much meant that he lost most of his pace, and his bowling was finished as a result of that. i seriously doubt that he will ever be able to bowl the way he used to which is why i made that statement

 

[tooextracool]

Maybe generalisation and stereotypes would have it that they can never play poorly against spin.
The reality of it is, they can, occasionally, and they did.

no you cannot dismiss every series in which a finger spinner bowled well on wickets that didnt offer much for them due to poor batting. IMO the same case can be made for a wrist spinner who has taken wickets on wickets with no turn. lets see some examples of wrist spinners bowling well on wickets with no turn against good quality batting then?

I know Klusener was injured in 1998, I saw the injury happen.
We saw, in fact, just under 3 years of what he was capable of, given that he was dropped in mid-2001\02 and returned from the injury in mid-1998\99.
Of course he wasn't the same bowler for a long time, but someone who followed South African cricket in 2003\04 would realise that he did a hell of a lot of work and bowled really well. All right, he wasn't great in his Middlesex stint but that's, sadly, affected a lot of overseas players recently.

i personally doubt he will ever be able to retain what he could do at his best. whether hes bowled well in SA domestic cricket doesnt say much IMO and it certainly wasnt reflected in that ODI series in NZ.

 

[Andre]

as shown by his 5fer in brisbane....

Hobart, actually, which is a notoriously slow wicket. Warne's record at the ground is excellent. Saqlain, from memory, has never played a Test in Brisbane.

 

[tooextracool]

Hobart, actually, which is a notoriously slow wicket. Warne's record at the ground is excellent. Saqlain, from memory, has never played a Test in Brisbane.

you're right....it was mushtaq ahmed who played in the first test at brisbane and got hammered. saqlain was recalled for the 2nd one at hobart.

 

[Tom Halsey]

So obvious that only a couple of us backed his selection when he was conceding lots of runs?!

Isn't hindsight a great thing?

I admit that when I very first saw him, against India, I wondered why he had ever played FC cricket.

But he bowled a few decent spells in Australia (forgetting the one in which he bowled something like 13 wides in the over! ) and Dennis Lillee said publicly that he had a hell of a lot of talent. Thats eries, combined with Lillee's comments, told me he had talent - although he still wasn't bowling well like he was now at that point.

 

[marc71178]

So why didn't you say it on here?

 

[Richard]

the injury pretty much meant that he lost most of his pace, and his bowling was finished as a result of that. i seriously doubt that he will ever be able to bowl the way he used to which is why i made that statement

Klusener, like anyone, was never a good bowler purely because of his pace.

 

[Richard]

no you cannot dismiss every series in which a finger spinner bowled well on wickets that didnt offer much for them due to poor batting. IMO the same case can be made for a wrist spinner who has taken wickets on wickets with no turn. lets see some examples of wrist spinners bowling well on wickets with no turn against good quality batting then?

The whole point is there is no such thing as a wicket that doesn't turn for a wristspinner.
The beauty of wristspinners is they can turn it on anything and that is why exceptionally accurate wristspinners like Warne and Murali have been so phenominally successful just about everywhere they've played. Just about - not absolutely.
If you had watched that South Africa-Sri Lanka series of 2000\01 properly you would see that the Sri Lankan batsmen batted shockingly virtually throughout the series (with the exception of Sangakkara) against both fast-medium and slow.

i personally doubt he will ever be able to retain what he could do at his best. whether hes bowled well in SA domestic cricket doesnt say much IMO and it certainly wasnt reflected in that ODI series in NZ.

No, the whole attack bowled very poorly then - except Pollock.
Ntini, Nel and Kallis were all woefully sub-par, for no good reason.
So why should Klusener be singled-out?

 

[Richard]

I admit that when I very first saw him, against India, I wondered why he had ever played FC cricket.

But he bowled a few decent spells in Australia (forgetting the one in which he bowled something like 13 wides in the over! ) and Dennis Lillee said publicly that he had a hell of a lot of talent. Thats eries, combined with Lillee's comments, told me he had talent - although he still wasn't bowling well like he was now at that point.

Lillee reckons just about the same thing about Stephen Kirby, last I heard, too.
Harmison was averaging 100 in that series up to the second-innings at The MCG, after which he took 6 for 152. He certainly did not bowl well at all in Australia.
He then demolished Zimbabwe's excuse for a Test-batting-line-up and was hammered again in the first 2 South Africa Tests. He didn't bowl with any penetration in the next 3 innings despite bowling with far more accuracy than had previously been shown, and then a fluked leg-cutter and a bad decision in his favour in the second-innings at The Oval - plus a luckily timed injury that meant he missed the Sri Lanka series - set him off on the trail he followed in the first 3 Tests in West Indies and against New Zealand. The Bangladesh game, naturally, doesn't count for anything.

 

[marc71178]

Harmison was averaging 100 in that series up to the second-innings at The MCG, after which he took 6 for 152. He certainly did not bowl well at all in Australia.

Hmm, world class International Quick who has coached some of the recent top bowlers at his academy or English schoolboy?

Whose opinion is more valid I wonder?

 

[Muddaser]

no mention of umar gul, he did very well against india in the second test.

also mansoor amjad( under 19 leggie ) and mohammed irshad will come through sooner or later.

mohammed irshads runup is too long for anyones liking and hes all over the place from what i heard. very fast though, well over 90mph.

ali imran pasha is another who looks promising.

Umar Gul, Mohammed Sami, Shoaib Akhtar and Danish Kaneria is the most likely attack pakistan will go with in the near future.

mohammed irshad, mansoor amjad, shabbir ahmed and ali imran pasha as reserves for now.

 

[tooextracool]

Klusener, like anyone, was never a good bowler purely because of his pace.

no but pace made him a far more effective and penetrating bowler. just like it did to darren gough.