Who is the greatest Englishman never to win the Ashes?

[Richard]

Either Bangladesh are a Test-standard nation, or you rate West Indies' bowling attack beyond all reasonable levels.

Well it certainly ain't the former.
No, I don't think Harmison's presence in front of Edwards or Lawson or someone of that ilk would make the attack any better or worse.
Certainly you'd have to be crazy to think him better than Bravo, Collins or Collymore.

 

[luckyeddie]

Well it certainly ain't the former.
No, I don't think Harmison's presence in front of Edwards or Lawson or someone of that ilk would make the attack any better or worse.
Certainly you'd have to be crazy to think him better than Bravo, Collins or Collymore.

You rate Bravo, Collins AND Collymore as better than Harmison?

Clearly I am crazy. Ignore list for you - I've just had enough of your insane ramblings, you fool.

 

[Swervy]

You rate Bravo, Collins AND Collymore as better than Harmison?

Clearly I am crazy. Ignore list for you - I've just had enough of your insane ramblings, you fool.

I would do the same..but then I would miss out on gems like the air at sea level in South Africa is thinner than anywhere else..its great entertainment

 

[steds]

Either Bangladesh are a Test-standard nation, or you rate West Indies' bowling attack beyond all reasonable levels.

Don't get Sri Lanka's pace attack and New Zealand's support for Bond.







...Oh, and if Mick Lewis can get an ODI or two...

 

[pskov]

Your delusion on the Harmison matter reaches crazy levels.
I will not stop going-on, very profusely, about the fact that Harmison is quite obscenely overrated in this country. There is no way on Earth that Harmison would make any of the 8 Test-standard nations a better side. No way on this planet. England are a poorer side for his presence, and the sooner everyone realises that the better the chances of us actually getting to the top of the tree.
There is absolutely nothing in Harmison's Test performances to justify labelling him close to Hoggard, Jones and Flintoff. Quite how long it will take some thick skulls to absorb this piece of information is not something I have the slightest clue of.

I am not as high on Harmison as some others clearly are, mainly because I feel he is too inconsistent. When he is on form he is the best of the bowlers that England have and possibly the best pace bowler in the world, but it seems he has rarely hit such form for a whole match let alone series in the last year or so. Currently, I rank him as the worst of Engalnd's pace quartet and if I were Duncan Fletcher would be telling him he has the first two tests against Sri Lanka to get back somewhere near his best or he will lose his place to Anderson. However, to say that he couldn't get in any test side in the world is so ludicrous I'm not sure it merits response.

West Indies - Better than any bowler they have

New Zealand - Only Bond is better, although if we justify Bond as one of the world's best by how he has performed against West Indies in this series....

South Africa - Ntini is similary quick and inconsistent, but Harmison posses better height and bounce so is a better bowler IMHO. Pollock is far from what he used to be. Nel, who I rate highly, is perhaps the only bowler who can compare with Harmison, but still not as good.

Australia - Obviously he is not as good as McGrath, but he is certainly better than Lee.

Sri Lanka - I would say Vaas is better, but Harmy would clearly be the no. 2 pacer on this team.

India - Better than any pace bowler they have played in years. Munaf and Sreesanth it is too early too tell much with, but Harmison would displace one of them at present. More realistically they would play all three.

Pakistan - Harmison and Shoaib are similar in that when on form they are devastating, but rarely have been of late. I would say they are equal. Harmy is better than anything else they have.

Really?
I'd wager quite a bit that both Tremlett and Plunkett come to nothing at international level - and quite possibly Mahmood too.
It takes an idiot, quite frankly, to say "he's 21, he WILL improve with experience". Most players don't. Plunkett and Tremlett are clearly very, very poor and are, in my estimation, unlikely to get much better.

Leaving aside whether you think Plunket and Tremlett are any good or not, this is just absurd. Players do improve with experience, it is blatant fact. That's why the concepts of blooding players and forming a consistent pattern of selection are adhered to in all sports, nay all jobs around the world.

 

[Jono]

Richard clearly has lost his mind, and is going far far overboard, however he does have a point.

Harmison bowling stats since the beginning of the South Africa tour not including games against Bangladesh:

                     Mat  Runs  HS   BatAv 100  50   W    BB  BowlAv 5w  Ct St

unfiltered            41   429  42   10.72   0   0 159  7/12   29.02  6   5  0
filtered              16   238  42   13.22   0   0  47  5/43   40.23  1   1  0

He's clearly the 'weakest link' of the England pace bowling attack. Still a decent bowler, but not great.

 

[luckyeddie]

Richard clearly has lost his mind, and is going far far overboard, however he does have a point.

<snip>

He's clearly the 'weakest link' of the England pace bowling attack. Still a decent bowler, but not great.

Doesn't matter how you phrase it - weakest, fourth-best, worst. If there's someone who can do Harmison's job better, then you can gerrim in t'side straight away - and I'll mourn Steve W-H's departure in exactly the same way as I've mourned those of Butcher and Thorpe - with that famous Norwegian saying, "So long, and thanks for all the fish".

Ask Justin Langer who he would rather face with the new ball - Harmison or Dwayne Bravo.

 

[Tom Halsey]

Richard, while going slightly OTT with saying that he wouldn't improve any of the other Test-standard nations (he would improve a few), does have a point.

Harmison, barring the odd sporadic Test, hasn't performed against a Test-standard country since the end of our series against the West Indies in 2004. That's 1 and a half years of rubbish.

Clearly, if he can come back from this, great, but I see nothing to suggest he will.

 

[luckyeddie]

Richard, while going slightly OTT with saying that he wouldn't improve any of the other Test-standard nations (he would improve a few), does have a point.

Harmison, barring the odd sporadic Test, hasn't performed against a Test-standard country since the end of our series against the West Indies in 2004. That's 1 and a half years of rubbish.

Clearly, if he can come back from this, great, but I see nothing to suggest he will.

Richard doesn't have a point, because that's not the point that he was addressing. He was just carrying out his own, unimaginative personal vendetta like he always does. He brought the subject of Harmison up like he always does, because he has a bee in his bonnet about just about anything and everything. He is yet to offer one alternative (no, Cork doesn't count), and without an alternative, he is just peeing into the wind and hoping his shoes remain dry.

It's not about 'coming back from this' either - it's about finding someone who can do the same job better than Harmison does at the moment - you know, having a balanced bowling attack. Perhaps there's someone lurking in Essex seconds at the moment who can force batsmen on to the back foot and take them out of their comfort zone - in which case, they might force their way into the first team and from there into the England setup.

Great, if that's the case. If not, who would you play instead of Harmison at the moment? If you've got a name, good - let's hear it, but just saying 'he is rubbish' is a waste of time. This is where many people fall down (and is the bee in my own personal bonnet) - some are always ready to knock people but haven't got any sort of positive contribution to make on the subject.

Richard would presumably like someone like Bravo to be drafted in to the side - no wonder he regrets the premature discarding of the likes of Cork and White, DeFreitas and Caddick. Perhaps one of those would do? How about Ealham or Irani? Lewis? Chapple? If he came up with a single name, then there could be grounds for debate - but it's like me bemoaning the level my football team has sunk to. no point in hoping that they suddenly find a Thierry Herny or a Wayne Rooney - you make do with what you have got.

Richard would have more credibility if he, just once in his life, said something constructive - don't you make the same mistake that windbag does.

I presume from what you were saying that you would kick Harmison out - might I be so bold as to suggest that your ideal England attack might be Hoggard, Anderson, Flintoff, Jones? That's not bad when things are going well and all are fit - it'd certainly give Australia a few problems given their issues with the swinging ball.

 

[Scaly piscine]

Richard clearly has lost his mind, and is going far far overboard, however he does have a point.

Harmison bowling stats since the beginning of the South Africa tour not including games against Bangladesh:

                     Mat  Runs  HS   BatAv 100  50   W    BB  BowlAv 5w  Ct St

unfiltered            41   429  42   10.72   0   0 159  7/12   29.02  6   5  0
filtered              16   238  42   13.22   0   0  47  5/43   40.23  1   1  0

He's clearly the 'weakest link' of the England pace bowling attack. Still a decent bowler, but not great.

If you conveniently go back just far enough to include his one awful series he's bound to have a high average.

These are his figures since the SA series:

                     Mat  Runs  HS   BatAv 100  50   W    BB  BowlAv 5w  Ct St

unfiltered            41   429  42   10.72   0   0 159  7/12   29.02  6   5  0
filtered              11   142  39   10.14   0   0  38  5/43   32.42  1   1  0

Not great, but he's basically only played on one wicket that suited him, he's also played on several extremely batsman friendly wickets in that time. If he'd have not gotten injured and missed the last Test on a more bowler friendly wicket his filtered average might well have been sub 30, or if he'd gotten the ball for a prolonged spell during that damp, gloomy spell in the 5th Test again he might have been sub 30. Hoggard gets his own personally preferred conditions to bowl in and otherwise hardly bowls, give the same to Harmison and he'd get some nice averages. Hoggard used to be a workhorse bowler - now it's Harmison. In another 12 months when the conditions are different it could be the other way round.

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

I agree that Harmison is overrated, but he's certainly good enough to make most test sides.

I wouldn't pick him for Australia right now, and I think he might struggle to break into South Africa ahead of Pollock, Ntini and Nel also. He's certainly good enough for the other sides though.

 

[BoyBrumby]

I agree that Harmison is overrated, but he's certainly good enough to make most test sides.

I wouldn't pick him for Australia right now, and I think he might struggle to break into South Africa ahead of Pollock, Ntini and Nel also. He's certainly good enough for the other sides though.

You'd have Kaspa & Clark ahead of him? Serious question.

 

[luckyeddie]

I agree that Harmison is overrated, but he's certainly good enough to make most test sides.

I wouldn't pick him for Australia right now, and I think he might struggle to break into South Africa ahead of Pollock, Ntini and Nel also. He's certainly good enough for the other sides though.

So do I, but the only way he wouldn't make the Australian side is if you decided to play just two seamers, or you felt that having Lee and Harmison in the same line-up might be a bit of a liability if both bowl at their wayward worst and you run out of helmets for fine leg and the umpires. The likes of Kasprowicz, Tait and Clark don't exactly stir the loins at present. Of course, they are likely to turn into world-beaters in a few months.

 

[Tom Halsey]

Not great, but he's basically only played on one wicket that suited him, he's also played on several extremely batsman friendly wickets in that time. If he'd have not gotten injured and missed the last Test on a more bowler friendly wicket his filtered average might well have been sub 30, or if he'd gotten the ball for a prolonged spell during that damp, gloomy spell in the 5th Test again he might have been sub 30. Hoggard gets his own personally preferred conditions to bowl in and otherwise hardly bowls, give the same to Harmison and he'd get some nice averages. Hoggard used to be a workhorse bowler - now it's Harmison. In another 12 months when the conditions are different it could be the other way round.

And what do those figures you quoted become once the Bangladesh freebies are taken out?

 

[Tom Halsey]

Richard doesn't have a point, because that's not the point that he was addressing. He was just carrying out his own, unimaginative personal vendetta like he always does. He brought the subject of Harmison up like he always does, because he has a bee in his bonnet about just about anything and everything. He is yet to offer one alternative (no, Cork doesn't count), and without an alternative, he is just peeing into the wind and hoping his shoes remain dry.

It's not about 'coming back from this' either - it's about finding someone who can do the same job better than Harmison does at the moment - you know, having a balanced bowling attack. Perhaps there's someone lurking in Essex seconds at the moment who can force batsmen on to the back foot and take them out of their comfort zone - in which case, they might force their way into the first team and from there into the England setup.

Great, if that's the case. If not, who would you play instead of Harmison at the moment? If you've got a name, good - let's hear it, but just saying 'he is rubbish' is a waste of time. This is where many people fall down (and is the bee in my own personal bonnet) - some are always ready to knock people but haven't got any sort of positive contribution to make on the subject.

Richard would presumably like someone like Bravo to be drafted in to the side - no wonder he regrets the premature discarding of the likes of Cork and White, DeFreitas and Caddick. Perhaps one of those would do? How about Ealham or Irani? Lewis? Chapple? If he came up with a single name, then there could be grounds for debate - but it's like me bemoaning the level my football team has sunk to. no point in hoping that they suddenly find a Thierry Herny or a Wayne Rooney - you make do with what you have got.

Richard would have more credibility if he, just once in his life, said something constructive - don't you make the same mistake that windbag does.

I presume from what you were saying that you would kick Harmison out - might I be so bold as to suggest that your ideal England attack might be Hoggard, Anderson, Flintoff, Jones? That's not bad when things are going well and all are fit - it'd certainly give Australia a few problems given their issues with the swinging ball.

I don't think there is a better option at the moment (at what Harmison does - in swinging conditions I'd be tempted to play Anderson).

But that doesn't alter the fact that Harmison, barring sporadic, isolated Tests, hasn't performed since October 2004.

 

[Kweek]

Who is the greatest Englishman never to win the Ashes?

Rob Key.

dont you mean biggest ?

 

[Scaly piscine]

And what do those figures you quoted become once the Bangladesh freebies are taken out?

They were already taken out.

NB in my earlier bit the '5th Test' refers to Ashes one, just in case there's any confusion.

 

[Top_Cat]

I think Steve Harmison is just going through a bad trot at the minute. He may need to be rested from the pressure of the Test side for a little while to get out of it but I think he has the pontential to be a great for England because he's unique; he's the only bowler worldwide who bowls that 'hip-to-heart' length. One place he falls down has always been when he tries to bowl short too often. As I've said for ages, he should keep the ball up and use the bouncer as a shock-ball a bit more. If he modelled himself on Curtly Ambrose a little more, I think he'll be devastating. What got to people about Curtly wasn't just his speed or aggression but his immaculate length. People were constantly shocked by the bounce he got from a length and Harmi should have a look at that I reckon.

 

[wpdavid]

Wasn't Deadly still in the side then too? Second best fellow to have come out of Bromley (after Bowie).

Yup. That's why I rate the 1977 attack as the best I've seen.

 

[wpdavid]

Was there ever a period where Willis, Old, Lever, Hendrick and Botham were around together?
Or was Underwood's presence still obstructing that?
Snow-Brown-Jones-Arnold-Underwood-Illingworth couldn't have been too bad, either.

In 1977, we tended to have 3 from Willis, Hendrick, Old, Lever & Botham (who first appeared in the 4th test) plus Underwood, Greig and, sometimes, Miller. The quicks were all around until 1981/2, after which Old, Lever & Hendrick went to SA and that was pretty much that for them. Underwood was absent for a while after 1977 due to WSC, which is why I see that particular summer as the best I've seen. Plus Old & Hendrick began to be less effective thereafter, IIRC.

As for Snow, Brown, Jones, Arnold, Underwood & Illingworth - you won't see that particular combination very often, if at all. Arnold came after Brown & Jones, and Jones only played a handful of game anyway. Illingworth probably didn't play many with Brown & Jones, as I think he was brought back to captain the side in the late 60's. Beyond theat, Underwood wasn't always a regular under Illingworth - he tended to be called up when conditions suited.

FWIW Probably the best lineup during my lifetime, although I wasd too young to appreciate it, was the side that toured WI in the late 60's. It certainly had by far the best batting line up in Boycott, Edrich, Barrington, Cowdrey, Graveney & D'oliveira. Knott was world class and Snow, Brown & Jones was a more than decent pace attack.