**.....UNOFFICIAL.....** ASHES 2007 thread

[Richard]

it was really just a straight ball angled into chanderpaul, looked a lot more effective because he'd been swinging every other ball away from the left hander. cant imagine a bowler not being able to bowl a straight ball, and really that ball would have been completely ineffective if bracken hadnt been getting the swing he was getting during the game. a bowler who swings the ball both ways though is far more effective than one who just slips in the odd straight ball in there.

That was the point Sean was making.
Really, straight balls are perfectly effective if they're an exception to a load of away-swingers.

 

[aussie]

As has been said - "the entire summer" is really rather a misnomer because while there are some similarities between the WI and SA series, the fact is by-and-large SA handled him rather better than WI did.
As such you simply have to look at them separately.

fair enough..

 

[marc71178]

He averaged 25 over the whole summer, which is pretty good given it was quite a high scoring summer for opposition sides.

27.09 according to Cricinfo.

 

[marc71178]

i was refering to the entire summer where he averaged 25 when for the majority except for the super test & the 1st test vs WI McGrath was his wicket-taking best..

Except it wasn't 25 (unless I believe you ignore the Super Test, but then that would take away some of your evidence)

 

[tooextracool]

That was the point Sean was making.
Really, straight balls are perfectly effective if they're an exception to a load of away-swingers.

yes but thats not exactly variety though, when i mention swing bowler its glaringly obvious that he has a straight ball, because who doesnt?
point is that Brackens straight ball only becomes useful when the conditions favor swing bowling,otherwise his straight ball becomes useless and he usually has nothing in the way of trying to get the batsman out.

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

Better than 1999\2000?

Comfortably, yes. I don't know how extensively you've seen Lee in his debut season, but I don't think he was all that great, really. He was quick and bowled some excellent deliveries, but I think the changes he has made to his action have made him a much better bowler. He gets more bounce off a length now and is much more accurate, and this summer he was twice the bowler he was when he first appeared on the scene.

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

yes but thats not exactly variety though, when i mention swing bowler its glaringly obvious that he has a straight ball, because who doesnt?
point is that Brackens straight ball only becomes useful when the conditions favor swing bowling,otherwise his straight ball becomes useless and he usually has nothing in the way of trying to get the batsman out.

Actually, it really wasn't a straight ball. It jagged back quite sharply at Chanderpaul off the pitch, after the normal deliveries had been swinging away. I don't know if you have access to highlights of that series or anything, but I suggest you watch it again.

For what it's worth, cricinfo:

39.6 Bracken to Chanderpaul, OUT: One more for Bracken! short of length
delivery just outside off stump, nipping back in, Chanderpaul
offers no stroke and gets on the pads, bit high but Rudi gives it
out

West Indies 99/4, Partnership of 14
S Chanderpaul lbw b Bracken 7 (25b 1x4 0x6)

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

Except it wasn't 25 (unless I believe you ignore the Super Test, but then that would take away some of your evidence)

Obviously I meant against the West Indies and South Africa, because it was before the West Indies tour that he had his talk with Taylor (after failing in the Super Test) and changed his strategy visibily leading into the Gabba test.

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

Better than Gillespie?
(Note - the real Gillespie, not the imposter who appeared in The Ashes)

Yes. Gillespie doesn't really bowl for swing so much any more as opposed to seam movement (as we saw the last time he bowled extremely well - in India), and while Gillespie at his best is obviously a far better bowler than Bracken, Bracken is more of a swing specialist. I believe the two times he got swing-friendly conditions in domestic cricket last season he took 7/4 and 6/39.

 

[tooextracool]

Actually, it really wasn't a straight ball. It jagged back quite sharply at Chanderpaul off the pitch, after the normal deliveries had been swinging away. I don't know if you have access to highlights of that series or anything, but I suggest you watch it again.

For what it's worth, cricinfo:

39.6 Bracken to Chanderpaul, OUT: One more for Bracken! short of length
delivery just outside off stump, nipping back in, Chanderpaul
offers no stroke and gets on the pads, bit high but Rudi gives it
out

West Indies 99/4, Partnership of 14
S Chanderpaul lbw b Bracken 7 (25b 1x4 0x6)

From what i saw during the game(no i dont have highlights of it), the ball just came back off the angle, i certainly dont know what cricinfo means by 'nipping back in', and they could well have meant that it was just angled into chanderpaul. nonetheless i dont think that getting seam movement from the pitch gives someone variety, because every county bowler can land a ball on the seam at least occasionally.

 

[social]

From what i saw during the game(no i dont have highlights of it), the ball just came back off the angle, i certainly dont know what cricinfo means by 'nipping back in', and they could well have meant that it was just angled into chanderpaul. nonetheless i dont think that getting seam movement from the pitch gives someone variety, because every county bowler can land a ball on the seam at least occasionally.

It doesnt really matter whether it went straight swung in or jagged in.

The fact is that it was a variation that completely flumoxed a world-class batsman.

BTW, I dont really rate Bracken all that highly (just as I dont really rate Hoggard).

 

[tooextracool]

It doesnt really matter whether it went straight swung in or jagged in.

The fact is that it was a variation that completely flumoxed a world-class batsman.

whether it flumoxed him or not is questionable, especially considering that it shouldnt have gotten a wicket anyways, the point is that bracken has no variations when the ball is not swinging viciously, and when the ball is swinging he has the same variations as every swing bowler in the history of cricket has had-a straight ball and one that swings away or into the right hander.

BTW, I dont really rate Bracken all that highly (just as I dont really rate Hoggard).

i dont rate either of them highly either, but hoggard can swing the ball in more conditions than bracken can, and hoggard can also swing the ball both ways.

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

whether it flumoxed him or not is questionable, especially considering that it shouldnt have gotten a wicket anyways, the point is that bracken has no variations when the ball is not swinging viciously, and when the ball is swinging he has the same variations as every swing bowler in the history of cricket has had-a straight ball and one that swings away or into the right hander.

I'm afraid that the ball that got Chanderpaul wasn't just a straight ball, which is why I brought it up. Chanderpaul played for a straight one, with the intent of (I assume) pulling out of the shot if the ball swung away, and it jagged back from outside off and trapped him in front. It probabl would have gone over the top, but the main reason it was given out is because Chanderpaul looked so clueless against it. As you know, the way the batsman handles the delivery often has an impact on how likely it is that the umpire will be convinced he was out.

Anyway, that's the variation that Bracken has which is very effective, and it's also his stock ball when the old ball isn't swinging. He can swing it back in, to the left-hander, but really when the ball is swinging he doesn't have to.

 

[social]

whether it flumoxed him or not is questionable, especially considering that it shouldnt have gotten a wicket anyways, the point is that bracken has no variations when the ball is not swinging viciously, and when the ball is swinging he has the same variations as every swing bowler in the history of cricket has had-a straight ball and one that swings away or into the right hander.



i dont rate either of them highly either, but hoggard can swing the ball in more conditions than bracken can, and hoggard can also swing the ball both ways.

When it's swinging, Bracken is an extremely difficult proposition - he's tall and left-handed.

His weakness is that he doesnt move the ball consistently and this is due to flaws in his action but he has improved significantly over the past 12 months - not enough to be a top-line test bowler but better nonetheless.

As for Hoggard swinging the ball more consistently, he'd want to! He virtually only bowls when conditions are in his favour (new ball or when conditions suit).

For mine, theyre both on about a par with each other.

 

[tooextracool]

When it's swinging, Bracken is an extremely difficult proposition - he's tall and left-handed.

His weakness is that he doesnt move the ball consistently and this is due to flaws in his action but he has improved significantly over the past 12 months - not enough to be a top-line test bowler but better nonetheless..

yes but in his career so far, the ball has swung for him once in 10 innings, i cant see the point of having someone in the side if hes performing once every 5 test matches.

As for Hoggard swinging the ball more consistently, he'd want to! He virtually only bowls when conditions are in his favour (new ball or when conditions suit).

err yes, but the conditions 'suit' him a lot more often than they suit bracken. for example i doubt bracken would have swung the ball significantly at trent bridge in the ashes.

 

[tooextracool]

I'm afraid that the ball that got Chanderpaul wasn't just a straight ball, which is why I brought it up. Chanderpaul played for a straight one, with the intent of (I assume) pulling out of the shot if the ball swung away, and it jagged back from outside off and trapped him in front. It probabl would have gone over the top, but the main reason it was given out is because Chanderpaul looked so clueless against it. As you know, the way the batsman handles the delivery often has an impact on how likely it is that the umpire will be convinced he was out.

Anyway, that's the variation that Bracken has which is very effective, and it's also his stock ball when the old ball isn't swinging. He can swing it back in, to the left-hander, but really when the ball is swinging he doesn't have to.

from what i saw chanderpaul just let it go thinking it would swing away just like the rest of the deliveries had and the ball just didnt do anything and came in with the angle. there is no suggestion that it 'jagged' back in because it certainly didnt move off the seam signifcantly.
either way though, when the ball isnt swinging bracken couldnt be more useless, and given that that happens for the large majority of the time when he bowls, you can only expect his average to get worse.

 

[social]

err yes, but the conditions 'suit' him a lot more often than they suit bracken. for example i doubt bracken would have swung the ball significantly at trent bridge in the ashes.

Urrrm, he's English, i.e. the home of conventional swing bowling, so of course he's going to get "swinging' conditions more often than Bracken.

As for Tent Bridge, look at Hoggy's wickets - lbw (inside edge), lbw (inside edge), etc. He bowled predominantly straight up but got the benefit of accurate bowling and dodgy decisions.

The only legitimate dismissal he got via a swinging delivery was Gilchrist (and that was only after being deposited in the stands a few times).

Hardly a great example.

The test in SA, on the other hand, was a fine example of swing bowling.

Interesting to see whether Bracken can do the same.

 

[tooextracool]

Urrrm, he's English, i.e. the home of conventional swing bowling, so of course he's going to get "swinging' conditions more often than Bracken..

that maybe the case, but hoggards average in england is no better or worse than his career average. his averages get better when he plays in NZ, SA and the WI.

As for Tent Bridge, look at Hoggy's wickets - lbw (inside edge), lbw (inside edge), etc. He bowled predominantly straight up but got the benefit of accurate bowling and dodgy decisions.

The only legitimate dismissal he got via a swinging delivery was Gilchrist (and that was only after being deposited in the stands a few times).

Hardly a great example..

were you not watching the 4th test?haydens wicket was a classic inswinger, that hayden missed by a mile and was caught almost plumb in front. and the ball before that was the exact same delivery except that hayden saved himself by getting a slight inside edge. same with langers wicket, inswinger, caught at short leg, and then the next ball katich nearly got himself caught at short leg by another inswinger. only the martyn ball was a straight ball, and that was the variation that most people expect when you swing every other ball away from the right hander, although martyn was unlucky.

The test in SA, on the other hand, was a fine example of swing bowling.

Interesting to see whether Bracken can do the same.

i doubt it, but we'll soon find out.

 

[open365]

As for Tent Bridge, look at Hoggy's wickets - lbw (inside edge), lbw (inside edge), etc. He bowled predominantly straight up but got the benefit of accurate bowling and dodgy decisions.

Ermm...if i remeber rightly,all of his wickets at Trent Bridge were excellent swinging deliveries.

I think it's too hard to say whther Bracken is a good as Hoggard,as Bracken hasn't had much of a chance so far.

Personaly i think Hoggy swings it more/better but Bracken is a tad better when it's not swinging.

I think they're pretty different bowlers though,Hoggard bowls a tighter(more on the stumps) line which is probably why he doesn't play ODI cricket.From what i've seen of Bracken, he gets a lot of cheap wickets in ODIs but is very accurate and hard to get away.

Still,i'd rather have Hoggard in my side any day.

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

There's no doubt that right now Bracken is a far better player in ODIs and Hoggard a far better player in tests. Bracken has a chance to cement his place in the test side in South Africa, and until he's at least proven that he is good enough for tests, comparing him outright to Hoggard is silly.

I think Bracken has the potential to be as good as Hoggard though, if he shows that he can swing the ball relatively often in tests and get results when he does so.