by zito.. » Wed, 31 May 2000 04:00:00
http://www-uk.cricket.org/link_to_database/ARCHIVE/CRICKET_NEWS/2000/...
Cheers
Zito.
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
by Araw » Wed, 31 May 2000 04:00:00
Makes me wonder though, what we will do about the bowling on the Oz tour.
Maybe - just maybe - a spinner (Ramnarine!) will get consideration as a
bowler. King, Rose, Walsh, & Ramnarine could be a good combination.
I think Pakistan has the best overall attack in the world right now, with 2
of the best 10 fast bowlers and 2 of the 3 best spinners (opinion, obviously)
in the world. Add an allrounder like Razzaq (when he's fit) to the equation
and you have the best bowling side in the world.
The West Indies do not have the luxury of a world class spinner, let alone
two, but would do well to consider the balance of an Aussie or Pakistani
attack.
Arawak
------------------------------------------------------------------
Visit London Cricket Club's website at http://www.arawak.on.ca/lcc
by Kurt Toolsi » Wed, 31 May 2000 04:00:00
> I was hoping that Walsh would be the one to retire after England, and then
> Amby after Oz.
> Makes me wonder though, what we will do about the bowling on the Oz tour.
> Maybe - just maybe - a spinner (Ramnarine!) will get consideration as a
> bowler. King, Rose, Walsh, & Ramnarine could be a good combination.
Kurt
> I think Pakistan has the best overall attack in the world right now, with 2
> of the best 10 fast bowlers and 2 of the 3 best spinners (opinion, obviously)
> in the world. Add an allrounder like Razzaq (when he's fit) to the equation
> and you have the best bowling side in the world.
Kurt
> The West Indies do not have the luxury of a world class spinner, let alone
> two, but would do well to consider the balance of an Aussie or Pakistani
> attack.
> Arawak
> ------------------------------------------------------------------
> Visit London Cricket Club's website at http://www.arawak.on.ca/lcc
by Araw » Thu, 01 Jun 2000 04:00:00
I'd have to say that Campbell is the biggest target for a spinner looking for
a Windies wicket right now. Well, perhaps Grrr, but he's never batting by the
time the spinners come on.....
Arawak
------------------------------------------------------------------
Visit London Cricket Club's website at http://www.arawak.on.ca/lcc
by jalawye » Thu, 01 Jun 2000 04:00:00
* Sent from RemarQ http://www.remarq.com The Internet's Discussion Network *
The fastest and easiest way to search and participate in Usenet - Free!
by Mike Holman » Thu, 01 Jun 2000 04:00:00
>> >Can we finally debunk the theory that the Windies are vulnerable to spin?
>> Dear Glub, no. We want that myth firmly in place when we get to England, and
>> then Oz afterwards. Hinds showed that the best defence to spinners is to club
>> them out of the park and send them simpering back home to momma. Sarwan
>> clearly knows how to deal with it, and Lara (if he's in the mood) isn't weak
>> against anything but himself.
>Ah, yes! Dear old Tuffers. Looking forward to renewing that
>friendship.
We're waiting with bated breath to see what Schofield's actually like;
he's had less than 20 f-c matches, so it's not like many people know,
but he is the basket in which England have placed their spin eggs for
the summer. If we have a dry summer and the wickets turn dusty, I guess
they might wheel Tuffers out for The Oval (6-29, anyone?) if it does
look like a two-spinner track, but otherwise I think The Cat's going to
be smoking in a different dressing-room to the England team this summer.
Cheers,
Mike
--
"Cricketers are apt to claim, with not too conspicuous modesty, that specially
noble virtues are inherent in and derivable from cricket" - EW Swanton, 1947
by GBaje » Fri, 02 Jun 2000 04:00:00
>> Makes me wonder though, what we will do about the bowling on the Oz tour.
>> Maybe - just maybe - a spinner (Ramnarine!) will get consideration as a
>> bowler. King, Rose, Walsh, & Ramnarine could be a good combination.
I watched Rose in 2 one days facing a bowler who was delivering some good
accurate fast yorkers towards the end of the innings. Rose dug out a couple
and then on both occasions retreated a yard outside the legstump and waved at
another yorker which hit all of his stumps.
I watched a few spells in New Zealand where he seemed to put every ball on the
same spot and the batsman padded out to everyone. No one Rose says they need to
replace Marshall as soon as possible. He needs someone to walk him out before
the game and show him what length, line and direction to bowl when he is in
unfamiliar surroundings, especially when the wicket is not hard.
As far as our bowling is concerned, I would like to see 2 fast bowlers in the
side. I mean Marshall, Holding, Roberts type speed and Croft's willingness to
keep charging in.
Jonathan
>and the next set of replacements are McLean, Dillon and maybe if
>his back holds out Colleymore. Ram is more of a threat than McLean
>(O.K. Lord Tesco is more of a threat than McLean)
Jonathan
by Kurt » Fri, 02 Jun 2000 04:00:00
> >> I was hoping that Walsh would be the one to retire after England, and then
> >> Amby after Oz.
> I was hoping they said goodbye after they exacted revenge against South Africa
> >> Makes me wonder though, what we will do about the bowling on the Oz tour.
> >> Maybe - just maybe - a spinner (Ramnarine!) will get consideration as a
> >> bowler. King, Rose, Walsh, & Ramnarine could be a good combination.
> Rose, that brainless rebellious cricketer will not last too long. I think this
> current management will not be all that tolerable of some of his shenanigans
> and I suspect that they will have some harsh words about his approach to game.
> I watched a few spells in New Zealand where he seemed to put every ball on the
> same spot and the batsman padded out to everyone. No one Rose says they need to
> replace Marshall as soon as possible. He needs someone to walk him out before
> the game and show him what length, line and direction to bowl when he is in
> unfamiliar surroundings, especially when the wicket is not hard.
Kurt
> >and the next set of replacements are McLean, Dillon and maybe if
> >his back holds out Colleymore. Ram is more of a threat than McLean
> >(O.K. Lord Tesco is more of a threat than McLean)
> Every bowler has some kind of stock ball that takes wickets. I keep watching
> McClean but I cant really figure out exactly what he is doing. I suggest that
> he just runs in and let it fly and hope for the best.
> Jonathan
by Mad Hami » Sat, 03 Jun 2000 04:00:00
>>So is Walsh going to follow suit? I do recall Walsh saying that he
>>doesn't want both of them (Ambrose & Walsh) to retire at the same time.
>>So is Walsh planning on a final Test series in Australia? He definitely
>>didn't rule himself out for the Aus series thou' he only made
>>commitment for the Eng tour.
>I was hoping that Walsh would be the one to retire after England, and then
>Amby after Oz.
>Makes me wonder though, what we will do about the bowling on the Oz tour.
>Maybe - just maybe - a spinner (Ramnarine!) will get consideration as a
>bowler. King, Rose, Walsh, & Ramnarine could be a good combination.
>I think Pakistan has the best overall attack in the world right now, with 2
>of the best 10 fast bowlers
Waqar Younis since Jan 1 1997
20 3444 111 1842 70 26.31 2 6-78 3.21
Shoaib Akhtar
15 2836 72 1618 45 35.96 2 - 5-43 63.02 3.42
I'd guess that Pollock, McGrath, Donald, Fleming, Lee, Gillespie,
Ambrose, Walsh, Streak have better records in that time than either
Waqar or Akhtar.
>The West Indies do not have the luxury of a world class spinner, let alone
>two, but would do well to consider the balance of an Aussie or Pakistani
>attack.
by Vernon Gonsalve » Sat, 03 Jun 2000 04:00:00
> >So is Walsh going to follow suit? I do recall Walsh saying that he
> >doesn't want both of them (Ambrose & Walsh) to retire at the same time.
> >So is Walsh planning on a final Test series in Australia? He definitely
> >didn't rule himself out for the Aus series thou' he only made
> >commitment for the Eng tour.
V.
by Mad Hami » Sun, 04 Jun 2000 04:00:00
>>> I was hoping that Walsh would be the one to retire after England, and then
>>> Amby after Oz.
>I was hoping they said goodbye after they exacted revenge against South Africa
>>> Makes me wonder though, what we will do about the bowling on the Oz tour.
>>> Maybe - just maybe - a spinner (Ramnarine!) will get consideration as a
>>> bowler. King, Rose, Walsh, & Ramnarine could be a good combination.
>Rose, that brainless rebellious cricketer will not last too long. I think this
>current management will not be all that tolerable of some of his shenanigans
>and I suspect that they will have some harsh words about his approach to game.
>I watched Rose in 2 one days facing a bowler who was delivering some good
>accurate fast yorkers towards the end of the innings. Rose dug out a couple
>and then on both occasions retreated a yard outside the legstump and waved at
>another yorker which hit all of his stumps.
>I watched a few spells in New Zealand where he seemed to put every ball on the
>same spot and the batsman padded out to everyone.
>As far as our bowling is concerned, I would like to see 2 fast bowlers in the
>side. I mean Marshall, Holding, Roberts type speed and Croft's willingness to
>keep charging in.
In terms of the Australian team I'd like to see players like
Morris
Barnes
Bradman
Harvey
McCabe
Miller
Lindwall
Davidson
Tallon
O'Reilly
Grimmett
I blame the selectors that we don't have them available.
by Araw » Tue, 06 Jun 2000 04:00:00
>I'd go for 3, plus a decent spinner. Holding doesn't think there's
>a decent spinner in the WI. But then again he doesn't think there's
>a decent spinner in the world.
Arawak
------------------------------------------------------------------
Visit London Cricket Club's website at http://www.arawak.on.ca/lcc
by Araw » Tue, 06 Jun 2000 04:00:00
>dunno, Akram must have been bowling better in the Windies than here
>but out here he could only manage about 2 overs with any threat in
>them.
[stats deleted]
More to the point, stats don't say much for a 6 month snapshot. I'm saying
that that right now, the bowling attack that Pakistan has is only rivalled by
Australia, and that Pakistan has the edge.
>I'd say that Muralidharan is ahead of Mushtaq\
>46 11481 378 5502 180 30.57 10 3 7-56 63.78 2.88
>dunno that gets him in the top 3 spinners in the world.
>In terms of quick bowlers McGrath, Fleming, Lee, Gillespie
>for spinners Warne & McGill.
Out of courtesy, I put Warne ahead of Mushie and Saqqy, but at the moment, I
don't believe he is close to the threat he was a few years ago. Incidentally,
Warne & McGill were soundly thumped by the West Indies last time around.
Arawak
------------------------------------------------------------------
Visit London Cricket Club's website at http://www.arawak.on.ca/lcc
by Kenny Gree » Tue, 06 Jun 2000 04:00:00
> Lies, damned lies, and statistics. That Streak's statistics put him in the
> company of the rest of the list shows how misleading stats are.
Bowling 1103.2 285 2881 126 22.86 6-87 6 - 52.5 2.61
Those stats dont lie. Streak is better than any English pace bowler, any
Indian pace bowler and watching him bowl confirms this. And the fact that he
gets a fair portion on dead wickets in Zim is even more impressive. If he
had been fit at Sabina...who knows.
Wasim Akram 3 116.2 35 264 15 17.60 6-61 2 1 46.5
2.26
Abdur Razzaq 3 49 9 121 3 40.33 1-13 - - 98.0
2.46
Waqar Younis 3 68 13 212 5 42.40 2-72 - - 81.6
3.11
Saqlain Mushtaq 3 127 34 259 6 43.16 5-121 1 - 127.0
2.03
Mushtaq Ahmed 3 115 18 349 8 43.62 3-91 - - 86.2
3.03
Thats the picture against
CEL Ambrose 3 118.3 42 219 11 19.90 4-43 - - 64.6
1.84
CA Walsh 3 123 26 292 14 20.85 5-22 2 - 52.7
2.37
RD King 3 111 26 291 12 24.25 4-48 - - 55.5
2.62
FA Rose 1 39 6 117 3 39.00 2-48 - - 78.0
3.00
NAM McLean 2 65.4 12 268 5 53.60 2-93 - - 78.8
4.08
Now thats me being a stat rat, but except for Guyana, Mushtaq didnt bowl
that well, and neither did Saqulain, and those pitches were in pakistans
favour, playing mostly slowish and taking spin.
Pakistans bowling in tests is varied, but there is plenty of reason to think
that it is overrated.
> >I'd say that Muralidharan is ahead of Mushtaq\
> >46 11481 378 5502 180 30.57 10 3 7-56 63.78 2.88
> >dunno that gets him in the top 3 spinners in the world.
> Hamish, you must be Mad!
Put it this way, would a top spinner be shielded away from Walsh and Ambrose
in Antigua on a wearing pitch with a couple wickets to win a series ? even
his colleagues knew.
> All world class bowlers, but none (IMO) as good as Wasim, and none *that*
> much better than Waqar.
Kenny