England vs Australia - Who has the best depth?

[greg]

Notice I never claimed that Warne was flawless and always successful when the pitch takes turn. The pitch turned big at the end of the OT test, Warne didn't take any second innings wickets because he bowled defensively and rather poorly. Giles didn't take any second innings wickets because he isn't much good, and Australia played him well.

Mind you, it wasn't a great pitch for spin bowling, it was rather slow, but it definitely turned.

Well you can't have it both ways. If it wasn't a great pitch for spin bowling then it seems a bit harsh to castigate a player for not running through a team with survival their primary aim.

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

Well you can't have it both ways. If it wasn't a great pitch for spin bowling then it seems a bit harsh to castigate a player for not running through a team with survival their primary aim.

It was a good pitch for spin bowling, it took turn and plenty of it, and it was rough and a little uneven. It just wasn't perfect because it didn't have a great deal of pace or bounce.

Anyway, I wasn't really castigating him, but Richard claimed that Giles is virtually always a success on turning wickets. It's pretty easy to always be successful on turning wickets when the definition of a turning pitch is "one on which Giles is successful". Really though, there's plenty of them around, and if he was always successful on them his average would be better than 40 odd.

Interestingly, Richard claims that Boje is "almost the same bowler" as Giles, and both are of equal ability. Boje has had two pitches on which he turned it quite a large amount so far in the current series against Australia, and hasn't had much success on either.

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

He's not.
He does bat there for Australia, though.

Err, he also opens for WA. Langer has been an opener his entire career, he just didn't open early on in tests because the opening spots were taken.

 

[aussie]

Err, he also opens for WA. Langer has been an opener his entire career, he just didn't open early on in tests because the opening spots were taken.

apparently Richard forget this little detail.

 

[sledger]

it seems that you have overlooked several "little"details.

 

[Scaly piscine]

It was a good pitch for spin bowling, it took turn and plenty of it, and it was rough and a little uneven. It just wasn't perfect because it didn't have a great deal of pace or bounce.

Anyway, I wasn't really castigating him, but Richard claimed that Giles is virtually always a success on turning wickets. It's pretty easy to always be successful on turning wickets when the definition of a turning pitch is "one on which Giles is successful". Really though, there's plenty of them around, and if he was always successful on them his average would be better than 40 odd.

Yep, rabid Warwickshire fan marc does exactly the same thing.

 

[marc71178]

I'd like to see where I've supposedly posted anything of the sort.

 

[sledger]

rabid ?

 

[luckyeddie]

rabid ?

Supports Coventry, so certainly edging towards hydrophobic.

(looks at self, prepares for own course of injections)

 

[Richard]

Notice I never claimed that Warne was flawless and always successful when the pitch takes turn.

Rather impossible when you play as many Tests as he has.

The pitch turned big at the end of the OT test, Warne didn't take any second innings wickets because he bowled defensively and rather poorly. Giles didn't take any second innings wickets because he isn't much good, and Australia played him well.

Mind you, it wasn't a great pitch for spin bowling, it was rather slow, but it definitely turned.

Not later on, it didn't.
As such, Giles didn't cause any problems. Earlier, however, he did, as he did in the first-innings at Edgbaston.

 

[Richard]

Anyway, I wasn't really castigating him, but Richard claimed that Giles is virtually always a success on turning wickets. It's pretty easy to always be successful on turning wickets when the definition of a turning pitch is "one on which Giles is successful". Really though, there's plenty of them around, and if he was always successful on them his average would be better than 40 odd.

There categorically are not plenty of them around. Really, you'd have to be a fool to call any pitch in England outside the middle 3 in 2004 a turner, because since covered pitches the turning pitch in England has been an extreme rarity - before 2004 we'd not really seen one since The Oval 1997.
Certainly there's no way whatsoever that any of Old Trafford 1998, Edgbaston 2001, Edgbaston 2002, Old Trafford 2002, Edgbaston 2003, Lord's 2003, Trent Bridge 2003, The Oval 2003, Lord's (New Zealand) 2004, Headingley 2004, Old Trafford 2004, The Oval 2004, Lord's 2005, Trent Bridge 2005 or The Oval 2005 turned for more than the odd ball at any point in the game (for fingerspin).
Giles' first 7 overseas Tests were all in the subcontinent, and all on turning pitches. He bowled poorly on 2 of them (First and Second in Sri Lanka 2000\01) and well in the rest. Then he played at Bangalore which was a seamer's paradise without any turn, 3 in New Zealand where there was barely any turn whatsoever, The 'Gabba where there wasn't, 2 more in Sri Lanka where there was and he did very well, 1 in Sri Lanka which could fairly be called the flattest pitch ever, 3 in West Indies which didn't turn at all, 1 in South Africa which did (and he did well on) and 4 that didn't, and 2 more in Pakistan which could again be called as flat as a pitch can be.
If you generalise, you make mistakes. Unless you look at all the material, you won't understand the truth of the situation.

Interestingly, Richard claims that Boje is "almost the same bowler" as Giles, and both are of equal ability. Boje has had two pitches on which he turned it quite a large amount so far in the current series against Australia, and hasn't had much success on either.

Let me assure you, Boje's wasted turning pitches before now, too. See Sri Lanka 2004.

 

[Richard]

Err, he also opens for WA. Langer has been an opener his entire career, he just didn't open early on in tests because the opening spots were taken.

Really?
I seem to remember Hussey and Campbell were at one point a pretty secure opening pair, and both have had pretty similar career times to Langer.

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

Really?
I seem to remember Hussey and Campbell were at one point a pretty secure opening pair, and both have had pretty similar career times to Langer.

When Langer plays for WA he opens, and has for some time, usually with Hussey.

Here's a few examples.

05/06: http://www.cricketarchive.co.uk/Archive/Scorecards/84/84658.html
03/04: http://www.cricketarchive.co.uk/Archive/Scorecards/78/78987.html
01/02: http://www.cricketarchive.co.uk/Archive/Scorecards/73/73832.html

To find him batting at 3 you have to go back to the 90s, when of course he was batting at 3 for Australia.

Go back to his first game for WA in 91/92 and you have: http://www.cricketarchive.co.uk/Archive/Scorecards/55/55242.html

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

There categorically are not plenty of them around. Really, you'd have to be a fool to call any pitch in England outside the middle 3 in 2004 a turner, because since covered pitches the turning pitch in England has been an extreme rarity - before 2004 we'd not really seen one since The Oval 1997.
Certainly there's no way whatsoever that any of Old Trafford 1998, Edgbaston 2001, Edgbaston 2002, Old Trafford 2002, Edgbaston 2003, Lord's 2003, Trent Bridge 2003, The Oval 2003, Lord's (New Zealand) 2004, Headingley 2004, Old Trafford 2004, The Oval 2004, Lord's 2005, Trent Bridge 2005 or The Oval 2005 turned for more than the odd ball at any point in the game (for fingerspin).
Giles' first 7 overseas Tests were all in the subcontinent, and all on turning pitches. He bowled poorly on 2 of them (First and Second in Sri Lanka 2000\01) and well in the rest. Then he played at Bangalore which was a seamer's paradise without any turn, 3 in New Zealand where there was barely any turn whatsoever, The 'Gabba where there wasn't, 2 more in Sri Lanka where there was and he did very well, 1 in Sri Lanka which could fairly be called the flattest pitch ever, 3 in West Indies which didn't turn at all, 1 in South Africa which did (and he did well on) and 4 that didn't, and 2 more in Pakistan which could again be called as flat as a pitch can be.
If you generalise, you make mistakes. Unless you look at all the material, you won't understand the truth of the situation.

Let me assure you, Boje's wasted turning pitches before now, too. See Sri Lanka 2004.

What crap. Quite a number of the pitches in the Ashes turned significantly. Lords didn't, no, and The Oval didn't turn very much either, but the middle three pitches certainly did, and Giles got turn on all of them in the later stages of the innings. Really, what qualifies as a "turning pitch" is entirely subjective, but since you apparently don't beleive in subjective assessments of such things, the only criteria you can go by is really whether or not Giles regularly turned the ball significantly off the straight, and in the 2nd, 3rd and 4th tests of the 2005 Ashes he certainly did.

Mind you, Giles isn't as big a spinner of the ball as say Boje (though he is a better bowler, without doubt), so he's not going to turn it on as many wickets, but certainly he turned it on those three and didn't have any real success on any of them. The best return he managed was 3 wickets for a fair number of runs, which isn't exactly a brilliant performance, merely average.

 

[Richard]

When Langer plays for WA he opens, and has for some time, usually with Hussey.

Here's a few examples.

05/06
03/04
01/02

To find him batting at 3 you have to go back to the 90s, when of course he was batting at 3 for Australia.

Go back to his first game for WA in 91/92 and you have: http://www.cricketarchive.co.uk/Archive/Scorecards/55/55242.html

Err - the point is, was he batting at three or opening (on a regular basis - never mind which one he was doing occasionally) for most of his career in the 1990s?
What he was doing post-2001 is hardly relevant, because as you say, he was opening for Australia in that period. It's pretty logical to do domestically what you've been doing internationally.

 

[Richard]

What crap. Quite a number of the pitches in the Ashes turned significantly. Lords didn't, no, and The Oval didn't turn very much either, but the middle three pitches certainly did, and Giles got turn on all of them in the later stages of the innings. Really, what qualifies as a "turning pitch" is entirely subjective, but since you apparently don't beleive in subjective assessments of such things, the only criteria you can go by is really whether or not Giles regularly turned the ball significantly off the straight, and in the 2nd, 3rd and 4th tests of the 2005 Ashes he certainly did.

Mind you, Giles isn't as big a spinner of the ball as say Boje (though he is a better bowler, without doubt), so he's not going to turn it on as many wickets, but certainly he turned it on those three and didn't have any real success on any of them. The best return he managed was 3 wickets for a fair number of runs, which isn't exactly a brilliant performance, merely average.

Boje certainly isn't a bigger spinner of the ball than Giles, they're both exactly the same. Just watch them bowling in the same matches in South Africa to see that.
If you seriously think Giles turned enough deliveries later at Edgbaston and Old Trafford, or at all at Trent Bridge, to make him dangerous IMO you're very mistaken.
Indeed, you seem rather too keen on The Ashes, when Giles has played plenty more before, and against better players of spin than the Australians (ie the Sri Lankans).

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

Err - the point is, was he batting at three or opening (on a regular basis - never mind which one he was doing occasionally) for most of his career in the 1990s?
What he was doing post-2001 is hardly relevant, because as you say, he was opening for Australia in that period. It's pretty logical to do domestically what you've been doing internationally.

He began his career opening, and moved down to 3 when WA had two solid openers (Marsh and Veletta, I believe). He was certainly batting at 3 when he was picked for Australia, but he's far from the first batsmen to move between the two positions at will. Regardless, he's obviously an opener now, and he opened plenty of times at first class level before he ever did for Australia. I think it's been around 5 years since the last time he batted at 3, in fact.

 

[Richard]

Yes, the same amount of time as since he last batted at three for Australia, amazingly enough.
Langer might be an opener, he might not be, but IMO he's certainly not one of the top openers in The World in any case, I've said that before.
I still think that if he's played the greater part of his career at three, regardless of what's been most recent, he's not an opener, but a manufactured one.

 

[marc71178]

A world XI at the moment would far likely see Langer in then not.

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

Boje certainly isn't a bigger spinner of the ball than Giles, they're both exactly the same. Just watch them bowling in the same matches in South Africa to see that.
If you seriously think Giles turned enough deliveries later at Edgbaston and Old Trafford, or at all at Trent Bridge, to make him dangerous IMO you're very mistaken.
Indeed, you seem rather too keen on The Ashes, when Giles has played plenty more before, and against better players of spin than the Australians (ie the Sri Lankans).

Sri Lanka certainly aren't better players of spin on the whole than Australia, except relative to their ability against pace. In fact, most spin bowlers dominate Sri Lanka, Warne, Kaneria, Giles etc have all done so. Regarldess, I'm focusing on the Ashes because it contains several obvious examples of pitches which took turn on which Giles did nothing in particular. Obviously Giles is sometimes very good on turners, but he's certainly not all the time, or even very close to it, which is why he has all things considered the worst statistical record of any frontline bowler in test history.

And Boje definately turns the ball more than Giles, as most fingerspinners do. The pitches in the first two tests in South Africa turned a bit, but they weren't raging turners by any means, and Boje moved them a long way on both pitches. Giles is a better bowler because he is massively more accurate, where Boje gives you a four ball at least every couple of overs if not more, Giles rarely loses his probing length and he's usually pretty good in terms of line as well. In terms of spin, he doesn't do a great deal, and even on turning wickets he only spins it just enough to be dangerous.