Decentric
|
|
Group: Awaiting Activation
Posts: 22K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+xWe will need Marsh as fourth pacer as this track looks slow and low. Wanre was just saying it is a mistake having Siddle and Marsh in the same team, as they are similar. He advocates Patto or Starc instead of Siddle. He also actually advocated Patto over Marsh, which is stupid. His actual complaint is two medium pacers, which has merit - his real point being, if you play a trundler like Siddle, you shouldn't need a 5th bowler like Marsh when you have a donkey work seamer like Sidder to go with a spinner in Lyon. He didn't say that exactly, but that is his real and extrapolated meaning. I would have played Patto over Siddle. Not that I really care for Warne's opinion on anything other than spin bowling outside of India tbh. :P Boycott doesn't know much either does he Paddles?
|
|
|
|
Paddles
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 1.5K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+xWe will need Marsh as fourth pacer as this track looks slow and low. Wanre was just saying it is a mistake having Siddle and Marsh in the same team, as they are similar. He advocates Patto or Starc instead of Siddle. He also actually advocated Patto over Marsh, which is stupid. His actual complaint is two medium pacers, which has merit - his real point being, if you play a trundler like Siddle, you shouldn't need a 5th bowler like Marsh when you have a donkey work seamer like Sidder to go with a spinner in Lyon. He didn't say that exactly, but that is his real and extrapolated meaning. I would have played Patto over Siddle. Not that I really care for Warne's opinion on anything other than spin bowling outside of India tbh. :P Boycott doesn't know much either does he Paddles? He knows he isn't knighted, and he knows he has a domestic assault conviction? Sorry - I'm not on forums to read what the paid populist commentators say, I can listen to them directly :P If Hazelwood is so good, ask Boycs to explain why he is ranked 54th on averages in the last 2 years? Cos to me, that's pretty average. Mediocre. Nearly below the global average. That is including Bangladesh...I don't really care for the mainstream populist soundbite commentator opinions... My main exceptions are Bishop and Ponting tbh. I think the rest are very very ordinary. Bishop and Ponting talk about plans with foresight. Not results in history that we can all see. But I look forward to Shane complaining about Steve Waugh at some point this test match.... Kerry Packer set the Job description 40 years ago, talk at a level that non cricket people understand... so they keep watching.
|
|
|
Keyboard Warrior
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 885,
Visits: 0
|
Root dropped by Paine.
What a shocker, it was a straightforward catch to first slip.
|
|
|
Keyboard Warrior
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 885,
Visits: 0
|
Poms 1-84.
Burns now 42.
|
|
|
Keyboard Warrior
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 885,
Visits: 0
|
Another fumble from Paine off Lyon.
Butterfingers!
|
|
|
BaggyGreens
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 4.1K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+xYou guys can keep telling Mike - he is mad. And I don't have a position on this. Which makes me a sit-on-fence weakling as some might say. But in Mikes defence - i want to point out this fact. http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/stats/index.html?class=1;orderby=bowling_average;spanmin1=01+sep+2017;spanval1=span;template=results;type=bowlingHazelwood is 54'th on averages in the last 2 years. 54th.... Yeah, better than Broad, Starc, and Stokes. But is 54th good? Cos I don't rate Broad and Stokes as bowlers. Do you? Because I don't. I don't even really rate Starc in tests neither to be clear (I rate his yorkers in pyajama cricket death bowling very very highly). He is higher than Mark Wood, but lets be honest, he was utter rubbish his entire career bar his recent Windies tour... I am first to admit his form dropped over the past 12 or so months. Or his wicket taking did. Has struggled on these types of flat decks. Its difficult for me. I used to rate Haze. And he fell away massively after I had a conclusion. He has caught me out already once. I don't wanna take a strong point of view on him without being sure. I think a lot of Mike says has merit. But I also remember Haze and Patto hammering NZ here in 2016. And being a class above the rest of the world. I'm a lil bit split. But I am not impressed by Haze this tour, in Mike's defence. Unlike Mike, I'm not going to totally write Haze off neither. I'm on the fence right now. But Mike really really could be right. Really could be. Haze was better imo at the slower pace valuing accuracy. But he has always, ALWAYS been favouring that new ball. Always. Even when I rated him. And that's okay if done well. Philander is shit without a new ball or a Dukes. But a new new ball or a Dukes, Philander asks questions more than a jealous wife. Why are you not impressed by him this tour. He has done plenty to impress even the harshest judge imo.
|
|
|
BaggyGreens
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 4.1K,
Visits: 0
|
Poor Cummo two catches spilt off his bowling. Siddle with a dolly.
|
|
|
BaggyGreens
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 4.1K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+xYou guys can keep telling Mike - he is mad. And I don't have a position on this. Which makes me a sit-on-fence weakling as some might say. But in Mikes defence - i want to point out this fact. http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/stats/index.html?class=1;orderby=bowling_average;spanmin1=01+sep+2017;spanval1=span;template=results;type=bowlingHazelwood is 54'th on averages in the last 2 years. 54th.... Yeah, better than Broad, Starc, and Stokes. But is 54th good? Cos I don't rate Broad and Stokes as bowlers. Do you? Because I don't. I don't even really rate Starc in tests neither to be clear (I rate his yorkers in pyajama cricket death bowling very very highly). He is higher than Mark Wood, but lets be honest, he was utter rubbish his entire career bar his recent Windies tour... I am first to admit his form dropped over the past 12 or so months. Or his wicket taking did. Has struggled on these types of flat decks. Its difficult for me. I used to rate Haze. And he fell away massively after I had a conclusion. He has caught me out already once. I don't wanna take a strong point of view on him without being sure. I think a lot of Mike says has merit. But I also remember Haze and Patto hammering NZ here in 2016. And being a class above the rest of the world. I'm a lil bit split. But I am not impressed by Haze this tour, in Mike's defence. Unlike Mike, I'm not going to totally write Haze off neither. I'm on the fence right now. But Mike really really could be right. Really could be. Haze was better imo at the slower pace valuing accuracy. But he has always, ALWAYS been favouring that new ball. Always. Even when I rated him. And that's okay if done well. Philander is shit without a new ball or a Dukes. But a new new ball or a Dukes, Philander asks questions more than a jealous wife. Why are you not impressed by him this tour. He has done plenty to impress even the harshest judge imo. Haze was better imo at the slower pace valuing accuracy.
Yes he was. Then along came that drongo Lehmann with his pace policy. Everyone must bowl minimum 140ks. Reckon that was when Josh' career went a touch pear-shaped.
|
|
|
Brew
|
|
Group: Banned Members
Posts: 271,
Visits: 0
|
+xPoor Cummo two catches spilt off his bowling. Siddle with a dolly. Not good for Australia either.
|
|
|
Decentric
|
|
Group: Awaiting Activation
Posts: 22K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+xYou guys can keep telling Mike - he is mad. And I don't have a position on this. Which makes me a sit-on-fence weakling as some might say. But in Mikes defence - i want to point out this fact. http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/stats/index.html?class=1;orderby=bowling_average;spanmin1=01+sep+2017;spanval1=span;template=results;type=bowlingHazelwood is 54'th on averages in the last 2 years. 54th.... Yeah, better than Broad, Starc, and Stokes. But is 54th good? Cos I don't rate Broad and Stokes as bowlers. Do you? Because I don't. I don't even really rate Starc in tests neither to be clear (I rate his yorkers in pyajama cricket death bowling very very highly). He is higher than Mark Wood, but lets be honest, he was utter rubbish his entire career bar his recent Windies tour... I am first to admit his form dropped over the past 12 or so months. Or his wicket taking did. Has struggled on these types of flat decks. Its difficult for me. I used to rate Haze. And he fell away massively after I had a conclusion. He has caught me out already once. I don't wanna take a strong point of view on him without being sure. I think a lot of Mike says has merit. But I also remember Haze and Patto hammering NZ here in 2016. And being a class above the rest of the world. I'm a lil bit split. But I am not impressed by Haze this tour, in Mike's defence. Unlike Mike, I'm not going to totally write Haze off neither. I'm on the fence right now. But Mike really really could be right. Really could be. Haze was better imo at the slower pace valuing accuracy. But he has always, ALWAYS been favouring that new ball. Always. Even when I rated him. And that's okay if done well. Philander is shit without a new ball or a Dukes. But a new new ball or a Dukes, Philander asks questions more than a jealous wife. Why are you not impressed by him this tour. He has done plenty to impress even the harshest judge imo. Haze was better imo at the slower pace valuing accuracy.
Yes he was. Then along came that drongo Lehmann with his pace policy. Everyone must bowl minimum 140ks. Reckon that was when Josh' career went a touch pear-shaped. Lehmann's 140 kph pace policy was bizarre.
|
|
|
Paddles
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 1.5K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+xYou guys can keep telling Mike - he is mad. And I don't have a position on this. Which makes me a sit-on-fence weakling as some might say. But in Mikes defence - i want to point out this fact. http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/stats/index.html?class=1;orderby=bowling_average;spanmin1=01+sep+2017;spanval1=span;template=results;type=bowlingHazelwood is 54'th on averages in the last 2 years. 54th.... Yeah, better than Broad, Starc, and Stokes. But is 54th good? Cos I don't rate Broad and Stokes as bowlers. Do you? Because I don't. I don't even really rate Starc in tests neither to be clear (I rate his yorkers in pyajama cricket death bowling very very highly). He is higher than Mark Wood, but lets be honest, he was utter rubbish his entire career bar his recent Windies tour... I am first to admit his form dropped over the past 12 or so months. Or his wicket taking did. Has struggled on these types of flat decks. Its difficult for me. I used to rate Haze. And he fell away massively after I had a conclusion. He has caught me out already once. I don't wanna take a strong point of view on him without being sure. I think a lot of Mike says has merit. But I also remember Haze and Patto hammering NZ here in 2016. And being a class above the rest of the world. I'm a lil bit split. But I am not impressed by Haze this tour, in Mike's defence. Unlike Mike, I'm not going to totally write Haze off neither. I'm on the fence right now. But Mike really really could be right. Really could be. Haze was better imo at the slower pace valuing accuracy. But he has always, ALWAYS been favouring that new ball. Always. Even when I rated him. And that's okay if done well. Philander is shit without a new ball or a Dukes. But a new new ball or a Dukes, Philander asks questions more than a jealous wife. Why are you not impressed by him this tour. He has done plenty to impress even the harshest judge imo. You really want the reasons? I'll list them. 1 This England team's batting is rubbish. Absolute rubbish. Noone in this team has averaged over 40 in the past 2 years. In the past 3 years, only Root has hit 40 as an average. 2 It's England. I expect low scores. I have watched every series here from 2015 on. NZ, SA, Ind, Ire and Pak produced many shoot outs. The WI even won a test here. 3 That over vs Stokes at Leeds. Its etched in my brain. He went short and was driven. Good shot. Fair enough. He followed it up with a full toss for 6. Then lost his line and was hook/pulled for 6. He lost the plot under pressure. Okay - real pressure situation, but the best of the best don't collapse like that. Why I am impressed, he can deliver a great seam presentation and bowl long spells as I have watched him do in Aus and NZ over after over. Where I think he went wrong? When he upped his pace to lose the new ball specialist tag like Philander has. Will Haze go up or down from here? I don't know. I think Archer will be a superstar. Hazelwood, he could be a superstar, or retired from test cricket this time next year forever. I don't have a position. I think he needs to slow down with the new ball and use the seam and his accuracy, and increase pace with the old ball and use his height and pace. Right now, I think he is muddling the two. But I never played test cricket, so what do I know?
|
|
|
Decentric
|
|
Group: Awaiting Activation
Posts: 22K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+xYou guys can keep telling Mike - he is mad. And I don't have a position on this. Which makes me a sit-on-fence weakling as some might say. But in Mikes defence - i want to point out this fact. http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/stats/index.html?class=1;orderby=bowling_average;spanmin1=01+sep+2017;spanval1=span;template=results;type=bowlingHazelwood is 54'th on averages in the last 2 years. 54th.... Yeah, better than Broad, Starc, and Stokes. But is 54th good? Cos I don't rate Broad and Stokes as bowlers. Do you? Because I don't. I don't even really rate Starc in tests neither to be clear (I rate his yorkers in pyajama cricket death bowling very very highly). He is higher than Mark Wood, but lets be honest, he was utter rubbish his entire career bar his recent Windies tour... I am first to admit his form dropped over the past 12 or so months. Or his wicket taking did. Has struggled on these types of flat decks. Its difficult for me. I used to rate Haze. And he fell away massively after I had a conclusion. He has caught me out already once. I don't wanna take a strong point of view on him without being sure. I think a lot of Mike says has merit. But I also remember Haze and Patto hammering NZ here in 2016. And being a class above the rest of the world. I'm a lil bit split. But I am not impressed by Haze this tour, in Mike's defence. Unlike Mike, I'm not going to totally write Haze off neither. I'm on the fence right now. But Mike really really could be right. Really could be. Haze was better imo at the slower pace valuing accuracy. But he has always, ALWAYS been favouring that new ball. Always. Even when I rated him. And that's okay if done well. Philander is shit without a new ball or a Dukes. But a new new ball or a Dukes, Philander asks questions more than a jealous wife. Why are you not impressed by him this tour. He has done plenty to impress even the harshest judge imo. Haze was better imo at the slower pace valuing accuracy.
Yes he was. Then along came that drongo Lehmann with his pace policy. Everyone must bowl minimum 140ks. Reckon that was when Josh' career went a touch pear-shaped. I'm not sure? H is bowling well now. He hasn't taken a wicket this morning, but he was given one LBW overruled by DRS.
|
|
|
Paddles
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 1.5K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+xYou guys can keep telling Mike - he is mad. And I don't have a position on this. Which makes me a sit-on-fence weakling as some might say. But in Mikes defence - i want to point out this fact. http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/stats/index.html?class=1;orderby=bowling_average;spanmin1=01+sep+2017;spanval1=span;template=results;type=bowlingHazelwood is 54'th on averages in the last 2 years. 54th.... Yeah, better than Broad, Starc, and Stokes. But is 54th good? Cos I don't rate Broad and Stokes as bowlers. Do you? Because I don't. I don't even really rate Starc in tests neither to be clear (I rate his yorkers in pyajama cricket death bowling very very highly). He is higher than Mark Wood, but lets be honest, he was utter rubbish his entire career bar his recent Windies tour... I am first to admit his form dropped over the past 12 or so months. Or his wicket taking did. Has struggled on these types of flat decks. Its difficult for me. I used to rate Haze. And he fell away massively after I had a conclusion. He has caught me out already once. I don't wanna take a strong point of view on him without being sure. I think a lot of Mike says has merit. But I also remember Haze and Patto hammering NZ here in 2016. And being a class above the rest of the world. I'm a lil bit split. But I am not impressed by Haze this tour, in Mike's defence. Unlike Mike, I'm not going to totally write Haze off neither. I'm on the fence right now. But Mike really really could be right. Really could be. Haze was better imo at the slower pace valuing accuracy. But he has always, ALWAYS been favouring that new ball. Always. Even when I rated him. And that's okay if done well. Philander is shit without a new ball or a Dukes. But a new new ball or a Dukes, Philander asks questions more than a jealous wife. Why are you not impressed by him this tour. He has done plenty to impress even the harshest judge imo. Haze was better imo at the slower pace valuing accuracy.
Yes he was. Then along came that drongo Lehmann with his pace policy. Everyone must bowl minimum 140ks. Reckon that was when Josh' career went a touch pear-shaped. The Aus pace policy predates that. Look at why Bollinger was dropped in either 2009 or 2010. one of the two. Im too lazy to confirm the precise year :P Wasn't Lehmann either - he wasn't a selector. Langer is your first selector coach in a long time... :P Lehamann was only coach and had no say over selection. On tour you used to have a on tour selector. And at home the full set up :P
|
|
|
Decentric
|
|
Group: Awaiting Activation
Posts: 22K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+xYou guys can keep telling Mike - he is mad. And I don't have a position on this. Which makes me a sit-on-fence weakling as some might say. But in Mikes defence - i want to point out this fact. http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/stats/index.html?class=1;orderby=bowling_average;spanmin1=01+sep+2017;spanval1=span;template=results;type=bowlingHazelwood is 54'th on averages in the last 2 years. 54th.... Yeah, better than Broad, Starc, and Stokes. But is 54th good? Cos I don't rate Broad and Stokes as bowlers. Do you? Because I don't. I don't even really rate Starc in tests neither to be clear (I rate his yorkers in pyajama cricket death bowling very very highly). He is higher than Mark Wood, but lets be honest, he was utter rubbish his entire career bar his recent Windies tour... I am first to admit his form dropped over the past 12 or so months. Or his wicket taking did. Has struggled on these types of flat decks. Its difficult for me. I used to rate Haze. And he fell away massively after I had a conclusion. He has caught me out already once. I don't wanna take a strong point of view on him without being sure. I think a lot of Mike says has merit. But I also remember Haze and Patto hammering NZ here in 2016. And being a class above the rest of the world. I'm a lil bit split. But I am not impressed by Haze this tour, in Mike's defence. Unlike Mike, I'm not going to totally write Haze off neither. I'm on the fence right now. But Mike really really could be right. Really could be. Haze was better imo at the slower pace valuing accuracy. But he has always, ALWAYS been favouring that new ball. Always. Even when I rated him. And that's okay if done well. Philander is shit without a new ball or a Dukes. But a new new ball or a Dukes, Philander asks questions more than a jealous wife. Why are you not impressed by him this tour. He has done plenty to impress even the harshest judge imo. Will Haze go up or down from here? I don't know. I think Archer will be a superstar. Hazelwood, he could be a superstar, or retired from test cricket this time next year forever. I don't have a position. I think he needs to slow down with the new ball and use the seam and his accuracy, and increase pace with the old ball and use his height and pace. Right now, I think he is muddling the two. But I never played test cricket, so what do I know? Interesting summation of H. That is, reducing his pace with the new ball, but increasing it with the older ball. I'm surprised you think Archer will be a superstar, when he has only just played a few Tests?
|
|
|
Brew
|
|
Group: Banned Members
Posts: 271,
Visits: 0
|
I’m giving that session to the Poms.
|
|
|
BaggyGreens
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 4.1K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+xYou guys can keep telling Mike - he is mad. And I don't have a position on this. Which makes me a sit-on-fence weakling as some might say. But in Mikes defence - i want to point out this fact. http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/stats/index.html?class=1;orderby=bowling_average;spanmin1=01+sep+2017;spanval1=span;template=results;type=bowlingHazelwood is 54'th on averages in the last 2 years. 54th.... Yeah, better than Broad, Starc, and Stokes. But is 54th good? Cos I don't rate Broad and Stokes as bowlers. Do you? Because I don't. I don't even really rate Starc in tests neither to be clear (I rate his yorkers in pyajama cricket death bowling very very highly). He is higher than Mark Wood, but lets be honest, he was utter rubbish his entire career bar his recent Windies tour... I am first to admit his form dropped over the past 12 or so months. Or his wicket taking did. Has struggled on these types of flat decks. Its difficult for me. I used to rate Haze. And he fell away massively after I had a conclusion. He has caught me out already once. I don't wanna take a strong point of view on him without being sure. I think a lot of Mike says has merit. But I also remember Haze and Patto hammering NZ here in 2016. And being a class above the rest of the world. I'm a lil bit split. But I am not impressed by Haze this tour, in Mike's defence. Unlike Mike, I'm not going to totally write Haze off neither. I'm on the fence right now. But Mike really really could be right. Really could be. Haze was better imo at the slower pace valuing accuracy. But he has always, ALWAYS been favouring that new ball. Always. Even when I rated him. And that's okay if done well. Philander is shit without a new ball or a Dukes. But a new new ball or a Dukes, Philander asks questions more than a jealous wife. Why are you not impressed by him this tour. He has done plenty to impress even the harshest judge imo. Haze was better imo at the slower pace valuing accuracy.
Yes he was. Then along came that drongo Lehmann with his pace policy. Everyone must bowl minimum 140ks. That was when Josh' career went a touch pear-shaped.
|
|
|
Paddles
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 1.5K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+xYou guys can keep telling Mike - he is mad. And I don't have a position on this. Which makes me a sit-on-fence weakling as some might say. But in Mikes defence - i want to point out this fact. http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/stats/index.html?class=1;orderby=bowling_average;spanmin1=01+sep+2017;spanval1=span;template=results;type=bowlingHazelwood is 54'th on averages in the last 2 years. 54th.... Yeah, better than Broad, Starc, and Stokes. But is 54th good? Cos I don't rate Broad and Stokes as bowlers. Do you? Because I don't. I don't even really rate Starc in tests neither to be clear (I rate his yorkers in pyajama cricket death bowling very very highly). He is higher than Mark Wood, but lets be honest, he was utter rubbish his entire career bar his recent Windies tour... I am first to admit his form dropped over the past 12 or so months. Or his wicket taking did. Has struggled on these types of flat decks. Its difficult for me. I used to rate Haze. And he fell away massively after I had a conclusion. He has caught me out already once. I don't wanna take a strong point of view on him without being sure. I think a lot of Mike says has merit. But I also remember Haze and Patto hammering NZ here in 2016. And being a class above the rest of the world. I'm a lil bit split. But I am not impressed by Haze this tour, in Mike's defence. Unlike Mike, I'm not going to totally write Haze off neither. I'm on the fence right now. But Mike really really could be right. Really could be. Haze was better imo at the slower pace valuing accuracy. But he has always, ALWAYS been favouring that new ball. Always. Even when I rated him. And that's okay if done well. Philander is shit without a new ball or a Dukes. But a new new ball or a Dukes, Philander asks questions more than a jealous wife. Why are you not impressed by him this tour. He has done plenty to impress even the harshest judge imo. Will Haze go up or down from here? I don't know. I think Archer will be a superstar. Hazelwood, he could be a superstar, or retired from test cricket this time next year forever. I don't have a position. I think he needs to slow down with the new ball and use the seam and his accuracy, and increase pace with the old ball and use his height and pace. Right now, I think he is muddling the two. But I never played test cricket, so what do I know? Interesting summation of H. That is, reducing his pace with the new ball, but increasing it with the older ball. I'm surprised you think Archer will be a superstar, when he has only just played a few tests? I backed Archer before a single test or odi. He's so fast, but varies it and so straight and had every delivery bar an inswinger - which 1 he doesn't need and 2 he will probably learn since he plays in England. Its like Bumrah, this time last year he had no outswinger, which is more important, but if he can learn the yorker and all those slower balls too like he did, its no surprise right now his outswingers in the WI are all over twitter. He has literally learnt that in the past year. But he nails it. But who is surprised? Not many. He already had learned to master so many variations, it was only a matter of tuition and practice before he did. And now he has. I don't wanna get into a fight cos I rate Cummins a lot, I think he is excellent, and I like watching him, but I think he has less variations that Bumrah, Rabada and Archer. That said, its doesn't matter. Cos Asif, McGrath, S Clarke, Abbas and Philander didn't have variations, they had control. And Cummins has control at more pace than them - hence why he has been so good so far. I presonally believe a fully fit and firing Pattinson has the highest potential of all Aus bowlers, but he lacks stamina and discipline. Cummins has stamina and discipline, and accordinly right now is your best. All Haze needs to remember, a channel bowler will always have a low bowling average. Hadlee and Asif, you don't need variations. Just keep it on the top of off and look for natural variation, the jafa as Hadlee called it.
|
|
|
BaggyGreens
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 4.1K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+xYou guys can keep telling Mike - he is mad. And I don't have a position on this. Which makes me a sit-on-fence weakling as some might say. But in Mikes defence - i want to point out this fact. http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/stats/index.html?class=1;orderby=bowling_average;spanmin1=01+sep+2017;spanval1=span;template=results;type=bowlingHazelwood is 54'th on averages in the last 2 years. 54th.... Yeah, better than Broad, Starc, and Stokes. But is 54th good? Cos I don't rate Broad and Stokes as bowlers. Do you? Because I don't. I don't even really rate Starc in tests neither to be clear (I rate his yorkers in pyajama cricket death bowling very very highly). He is higher than Mark Wood, but lets be honest, he was utter rubbish his entire career bar his recent Windies tour... I am first to admit his form dropped over the past 12 or so months. Or his wicket taking did. Has struggled on these types of flat decks. Its difficult for me. I used to rate Haze. And he fell away massively after I had a conclusion. He has caught me out already once. I don't wanna take a strong point of view on him without being sure. I think a lot of Mike says has merit. But I also remember Haze and Patto hammering NZ here in 2016. And being a class above the rest of the world. I'm a lil bit split. But I am not impressed by Haze this tour, in Mike's defence. Unlike Mike, I'm not going to totally write Haze off neither. I'm on the fence right now. But Mike really really could be right. Really could be. Haze was better imo at the slower pace valuing accuracy. But he has always, ALWAYS been favouring that new ball. Always. Even when I rated him. And that's okay if done well. Philander is shit without a new ball or a Dukes. But a new new ball or a Dukes, Philander asks questions more than a jealous wife. Why are you not impressed by him this tour. He has done plenty to impress even the harshest judge imo. You really want the reasons? I'll list them. 1 This England team's batting is rubbish. Absolute rubbish. Noone in this team has averaged over 40 in the past 2 years. In the past 3 years, only Root has hit 40 as an average. 2 It's England. I expect low scores. I have watched every series here from 2015 on. NZ, SA, Ind, Ire and Pak produced many shoot outs. The WI even won a test here. 3 That over vs Stokes at Leeds. Its etched in my brain. He went short and was driven. Good shot. Fair enough. He followed it up with a full toss for 6. Then lost his line and was hook/pulled for 6. He lost the plot under pressure. Okay - real pressure situation, but the best of the best don't collapse like that. Why I am impressed, he can deliver a great seam presentation and bowl long spells as I have watched him do in Aus and NZ over after over. Where I think he went wrong? When he upped his pace to lose the new ball specialist tag like Philander has. Will Haze go up or down from here? I don't know. I think Archer will be a superstar. Hazelwood, he could be a superstar, or retired from test cricket this time next year forever. I don't have a position. I think he needs to slow down with the new ball and use the seam and his accuracy, and increase pace with the old ball and use his height and pace. Right now, I think he is muddling the two. But I never played test cricket, so what do I know? You can only play the opposition put up to you. I reckon his pace has been on parity with the decks here. They were dry and relatively bouncy with seaming conditions and Haze has utilised them expertly as Cummins has done. This looks like the only deck for the batsmen in the series. Again you dredge up that Stokes tonking session. I already explained that.
|
|
|
Paddles
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 1.5K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+xYou guys can keep telling Mike - he is mad. And I don't have a position on this. Which makes me a sit-on-fence weakling as some might say. But in Mikes defence - i want to point out this fact. http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/stats/index.html?class=1;orderby=bowling_average;spanmin1=01+sep+2017;spanval1=span;template=results;type=bowlingHazelwood is 54'th on averages in the last 2 years. 54th.... Yeah, better than Broad, Starc, and Stokes. But is 54th good? Cos I don't rate Broad and Stokes as bowlers. Do you? Because I don't. I don't even really rate Starc in tests neither to be clear (I rate his yorkers in pyajama cricket death bowling very very highly). He is higher than Mark Wood, but lets be honest, he was utter rubbish his entire career bar his recent Windies tour... I am first to admit his form dropped over the past 12 or so months. Or his wicket taking did. Has struggled on these types of flat decks. Its difficult for me. I used to rate Haze. And he fell away massively after I had a conclusion. He has caught me out already once. I don't wanna take a strong point of view on him without being sure. I think a lot of Mike says has merit. But I also remember Haze and Patto hammering NZ here in 2016. And being a class above the rest of the world. I'm a lil bit split. But I am not impressed by Haze this tour, in Mike's defence. Unlike Mike, I'm not going to totally write Haze off neither. I'm on the fence right now. But Mike really really could be right. Really could be. Haze was better imo at the slower pace valuing accuracy. But he has always, ALWAYS been favouring that new ball. Always. Even when I rated him. And that's okay if done well. Philander is shit without a new ball or a Dukes. But a new new ball or a Dukes, Philander asks questions more than a jealous wife. Why are you not impressed by him this tour. He has done plenty to impress even the harshest judge imo. You really want the reasons? I'll list them. 1 This England team's batting is rubbish. Absolute rubbish. Noone in this team has averaged over 40 in the past 2 years. In the past 3 years, only Root has hit 40 as an average. 2 It's England. I expect low scores. I have watched every series here from 2015 on. NZ, SA, Ind, Ire and Pak produced many shoot outs. The WI even won a test here. 3 That over vs Stokes at Leeds. Its etched in my brain. He went short and was driven. Good shot. Fair enough. He followed it up with a full toss for 6. Then lost his line and was hook/pulled for 6. He lost the plot under pressure. Okay - real pressure situation, but the best of the best don't collapse like that. Why I am impressed, he can deliver a great seam presentation and bowl long spells as I have watched him do in Aus and NZ over after over. Where I think he went wrong? When he upped his pace to lose the new ball specialist tag like Philander has. Will Haze go up or down from here? I don't know. I think Archer will be a superstar. Hazelwood, he could be a superstar, or retired from test cricket this time next year forever. I don't have a position. I think he needs to slow down with the new ball and use the seam and his accuracy, and increase pace with the old ball and use his height and pace. Right now, I think he is muddling the two. But I never played test cricket, so what do I know? You can only play the opposition put up to you. I reckon his pace has been on parity with the decks here. They were dry and relatively bouncy with seaming conditions and Haze has utilised them expertly as Cummins has done. This looks like the only deck for the batsmen in the series. Again you dredge up that Stokes tonking session. I already explained that. I do - cos it was bad bowling. That full toss was horrid and inexplicable in the match situation. Yes we all have bad days. I get that. I cannot accept right now on recent form that Haze is world class. I just won't. I have seen much better from Abbas, Murtagh, amd a ton of Safrican and Indian bowlers in England recently. Unlike Mike, I won't write Haze off either. Because in 2016, I thought he was the bee's knees. He just hammered away at line and length in the channel like a champion. But since he increased his pace, I see too many bad balls. You may prefer more pace, typically in Australia, but its the extent of the trade off.Cos the famous channel bowlers still do well in Aus if they are really disciplined like McGrath and Hadlee. Has Haze got the mix (if that was desired) right now - if we accept he was off before this series vs India at home? I really don't know where Haze is at. Mike says he is crap. Other's say he is world class. I do not know where Hazelwood is at, at all. But I can tell you today - he is too short.Again. But his pace is more than sufficient. I wanna see how Abbas goes in Aus vs every batsman bar Smith, then incl Smith. Abbas is about as disciplined as they come when in form. This summer with NZ hosting India, NZ in Australia, Pak in Australia and Eng in NZ, we are all going to learn so much about the current crop around. So so much. Far more than any other season I can think of! (total side note why this summer is so exciting to me -fwiw - we expect to beat England again. Winning in Aus makes NZ world class. First time since the 1980's to win there. If we then beat India - NZ will finally be undisputed #1 for the first time ever in cricket history. And we beat India last time they were here...)
|
|
|
Decentric
|
|
Group: Awaiting Activation
Posts: 22K,
Visits: 0
|
Root dropped again - this time by Smith after diving at slip and getting both hands to the ball off Siddle.
1-89.
|
|
|
Keyboard Warrior
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 885,
Visits: 0
|
Dreadful catching from us!
Three catches dropped this morning.
|
|
|
Keyboard Warrior
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 885,
Visits: 0
|
Root has been dropped three times.
|
|
|
Keyboard Warrior
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 885,
Visits: 0
|
Well done Hazlewood!
Burns gone.
Poms 2-103.
|
|
|
Keyboard Warrior
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 885,
Visits: 0
|
For an Aussie nothing beats watching Poms walking back to the pavilion in quick succession!
|
|
|
Decentric
|
|
Group: Awaiting Activation
Posts: 22K,
Visits: 0
|
One has to take one's hat off to England this series for their fighting spirit.
They just won't give up!
|
|
|
Decentric
|
|
Group: Awaiting Activation
Posts: 22K,
Visits: 0
|
+xFor an Aussie nothing beats watching Poms walking back to the pavilion in quick succession! It hasn't happened much in this innings.
|
|
|
Paddles
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 1.5K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+xFor an Aussie nothing beats watching Poms walking back to the pavilion in quick succession! It hasn't happened much in this innings. England's 2 wickets down, you're into the allrounders and tail now... :P
|
|
|
grazorblade
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 19K,
Visits: 0
|
hmmm we take our catches and we are in a real dominant position here
spewing
some loose stuff from most of our bowlers from what I've seen. Must be tired
|
|
|
grazorblade
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 19K,
Visits: 0
|
marsh getting predigious movement
even his half volleys look dangerous
|
|
|
dead|ine
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 8,
Visits: 0
|
marsh is def ballin
|
|
|