Cricket Player Manager

View Poll Results: Can Graeme Swann be succesful in the Ashes?

Voters
35. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes

    23 65.71%
  • No

    4 11.43%
  • Nathan McCullum

    8 22.86%
Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 67

Thread: Graeme Swann

  1. #16
    Hall of Fame Member aussie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Cricket
    Posts
    16,845
    Quote Originally Posted by Uppercut View Post
    Obviously weren't watching the third SA-Aus test in March then. Harris well and truly ripped them open.
    I saw the test of course. He got some turn & bowled well - i give him some credit. But he didn't rip them open by any means, the way of Johnson smashed him at the end, showed that maybe again - Australia batting didn't play him with enough conviction.

  2. #17
    Hall of Fame Member aussie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Cricket
    Posts
    16,845
    Quote Originally Posted by GingerFurball View Post
    That's the batsmen's own stupid fault though.
    Exactly. Thats why his record do date, flatters him.

    Harris is a decent bowler, gets a bit of turn and whenever I've seen him he's generally been tidy and hasn't offered much in the way of free runs.

    Quote Originally Posted by GingerFurball View Post
    He's taken 70-odd wickets at 32 or 33, and that's entirely a fair reflection of his ability. He's decent. He's nothing special, but nor is he a rank pie chucker either.
    I have seen him in 14 test, (3 vs IND, 5 vs ENG, 6 vs AUS). In which in SA's 5-man attack where the quicks 90% excpet of Chennai, Lord's & a on 50/50 basis vs AUS - the quicks have had the opposition batting-lineups under control.

    His role has in most cases has been to block up & end given he is an accurate bowler. But too many times batsmen give him wickets, i remember KP & Symonds playing some awful shots to get out to him & a few others as well.

  3. #18
    Cricket Web: All-Time Legend Uppercut's Avatar
    Tournaments Won: 1
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    .
    Posts
    23,862
    Quote Originally Posted by aussie View Post
    I saw the test of course. He got some turn & bowled well - i give him some credit. But he didn't rip them open by any means, the way of Johnson smashed him at the end, showed that maybe again - Australia batting didn't play him with enough conviction.
    It's odd- you say he only normally gets wickets because batsman are too aggressive to him, but now you're saying he only got wickets in that match because noone was attacking him. There's a bit of a lack of consistency there.

    Besides, i give Harris credit for the attitudes batsman take to him in the same way that Warne should be credited for making batsman play him in awe. Everything about Harris just screams "incompetent", from his horrid bleached hairdo to his ridiculously inept batting style to his inadequate-looking action with no front arm (although aesthetics aside, it's actually a pretty efficient one). Then you throw a few fielding gaffes into the mix and the guy just seems like a clown.

    All of which makes Kevin Pietersen and Andrew Symonds think "i'll be hitting this bell-end over long-on" and gifts the man big wickets. Once you get over the fact that Harris looks dire it's evident that he's actually a pretty good bowler.
    Quote Originally Posted by zaremba View Post
    The Filth have comfortably the better bowling. But the Gash have the batting. Might be quite good to watch.

  4. #19
    Cricket Web Staff Member Richard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    2005
    Posts
    80,401
    Yeah there's always a handful of people too quick to judge on cosmetics, and Harris is going to be one of those most spectacularly understimated by such types. Harris is a perfectly OK bowler, as several have said. No worse than Pat Symcox or Nicky Boje, the two fingerspinners to have extended spells in South Africa's Test team post-readmission. And considerably better than Paul Adams.
    RD
    Appreciating cricket's greatest legend ever - HD Bird...............Funniest post (intentionally) ever.....Runner-up.....Third.....Fourth
    (Accidental) founder of Twenty20 Is Boring Society. Click and post to sign-up.
    chris.hinton: h
    FRAZ: Arshad's are a long gone stories
    RIP Fardin Qayyumi (AKA "cricket player"; "Bob"), 1/11/1990-15/4/2006


  5. #20
    Hall of Fame Member Son Of Coco's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Brisbane, Australia
    Posts
    17,229
    I haven't seen a lot of Swann so far, but am looking forward to seeing him bowl in The Ashes.
    "What is this what is this who is this guy shouting what is this going on in here?" - CP. (re: psxpro)

    R.I.P Craigos, you were a champion bloke. One of the best

    R.I.P Fardin 'Bob' Qayyumi

    Member of the Church of the Holy Glenn McGrath

    "How about you do something contstructive in this forum for once and not fill the forum with ****. You offer nothing." - theegyptian.

  6. #21
    Cricket Web: All-Time Legend Furball's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    #banblocky
    Posts
    20,471
    Quote Originally Posted by aussie View Post
    I have seen him in 14 test, (3 vs IND, 5 vs ENG, 6 vs AUS). In which in SA's 5-man attack where the quicks 90% excpet of Chennai, Lord's & a on 50/50 basis vs AUS - the quicks have had the opposition batting-lineups under control.

    His role has in most cases has been to block up & end given he is an accurate bowler. But too many times batsmen give him wickets, i remember KP & Symonds playing some awful shots to get out to him & a few others as well.
    To be expected. SA's quicks are better bowlers than Harris.

    Harris has a role in the South Africa side, and he does it well because he's a decent bowler. Given the right conditions he can pose problems, but if opposition batsmen want to have brain explosions and gift him wickets then that's up to them.

    Uppercut put it quite nicely actually. If Warne is bowling beautifully, getting a bit of drift, landing it on a perfect length 6 balls out of 6 and ripping it, no batsman in his right mind would dream of giving him the charge. It's the same with any bowler, you play the ball and not the man.

  7. #22
    Cricket Web: All-Time Legend Furball's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    #banblocky
    Posts
    20,471
    Quote Originally Posted by Uppercut View Post
    All of which makes Kevin Pietersen and Andrew Symonds think "i'll be hitting this bell-end over long-on" and gifts the man big wickets. Once you get over the fact that Harris looks dire it's evident that he's actually a pretty good bowler.
    Pietersen is an interesting example to use. At times he's played Warne and Murali very well, even smashed them on a couple of occasions, yet he's got himself into plenty of trouble against spinners who aren't anywhere near as good as those two. Primarily in my opinion because of a lack of respect.

  8. #23
    Cricket Spectator Oasisbob's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    21
    I think that to a large extent, England's fortunes will depend on how well Graeme Swann bowls to the Australian left handers. In his short career so far he has excelled at bowling against left handed batsmen and has bagged a number of high class batsmen. He has the control and variation to cause them problems if and it's a big if the pitches offer some turn. We are due a hot summer by English standards so fingers crossed he can get the job done.

    I'm guessing he will take 22 wickets at 28's - including one match winning performance.
    "The best of 'em today is half as good as Barnie." - Wilfred Rhodes on SF Barnes

  9. #24
    U19 12th Man Bonnie Prince C's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Scotland
    Posts
    255
    Swann>>>Hauritz

    I think Swann will be key to any chance England possess.

  10. #25
    Hall of Fame Member aussie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Cricket
    Posts
    16,845
    Quote Originally Posted by Uppercut View Post
    It's odd- you say he only normally gets wickets because batsman are too aggressive to him, but now you're saying he only got wickets in that match because noone was attacking him. There's a bit of a lack of consistency there.
    I'm not changing my position. That one instance in Capetown, the series was already won by Australia & did play a bit lazily. But overall Harris doesn't get wicket because he does anything special with the ball - but rather due to batsmen being stupidy aggressive towards him.

    Quote Originally Posted by Uppercut View Post
    Besides, i give Harris credit for the attitudes batsman take to him in the same way that Warne should be credited for making batsman play him in awe. Everything about Harris just screams "incompetent", from his horrid bleached hairdo to his ridiculously inept batting style to his inadequate-looking action with no front arm (although aesthetics aside, it's actually a pretty efficient one). Then you throw a few fielding gaffes into the mix and the guy just seems like a clown.
    I don't see how you can give him credit. Harris as i mentioned before, gets wickets given that batsmen as an ease in pressure after Steyn/Ntini/Morkel come out of the attack.

    If batsmen play him with controlled aggression, the pressure would back on the pace trio to take more wickets.


    Quote Originally Posted by Uppercut View Post
    All of which makes Kevin Pietersen and Andrew Symonds think "i'll be hitting this bell-end over long-on" and gifts the man big wickets. Once you get over the fact that Harris looks dire it's evident that he's actually a pretty good bowler.
    I am not judging him on his demenour at all. I'd say if KP & Symo hadn't played such shots againts him he would look even more pedestrian.

  11. #26
    Cricket Web Staff Member Richard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    2005
    Posts
    80,401
    Quote Originally Posted by aussie View Post
    If batsmen play him with controlled aggression, the pressure would back on the pace trio to take more wickets.
    "Controlled aggression" is essentially a figment of imagination. It basically means "aggression that comes-off". If agressive strokes fail they're perceived as reckless; if they succeed they're perceived as controlled aggression.

    It's the result that determines the term, not the other way around.

  12. #27
    Cricket Web: All-Time Legend Uppercut's Avatar
    Tournaments Won: 1
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    .
    Posts
    23,862
    Quote Originally Posted by aussie View Post
    If batsmen play him with controlled aggression, the pressure would back on the pace trio to take more wickets.
    That's like saying "if batsmen played Shane Warne with more conviction, he wouldn't be so effective". Or "if batsmen weren't so terrified of Curtly Ambrose, they wouldn't get out to him so often." The attitudes batsmen take to you are part and parcel of your bowling, and hence you deserve credit when it benefits you. Batsmen didn't play Warne with more conviction, and they didn't counter the fear factor of Ambrose, so it's a stupid thing to say.

  13. #28
    Hall of Fame Member Goughy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    still scratching around in the same old hole
    Posts
    15,233
    Quote Originally Posted by Uppercut View Post
    That's like saying "if batsmen played Shane Warne with more conviction, he wouldn't be so effective". Or "if batsmen weren't so terrified of Curtly Ambrose, they wouldn't get out to him so often." The attitudes batsmen take to you are part and parcel of your bowling, and hence you deserve credit when it benefits you. Batsmen didn't play Warne with more conviction, and they didn't counter the fear factor of Ambrose, so it's a stupid thing to say.
    But they could have. It is intimidation. Guy like Ambrose, Warne, Tyson and Lomu (the last 2 I had a conversation about this topic today) were all great players but were better because they could intimidate. Those that could get past that still faced great players but they were mortal. Those that were intimidated faced 'Gods'.
    If I only just posted the above post, please wait 5 mins before replying as there is bound to be edits

    West Robham Rabid Wolves Caedere lemma quod eat lemma

    Happy Birthday! (easier than using Birthday threads)

    Email and MSN- Goughy at cricketmail dot net

  14. #29
    Cricket Web Staff Member Richard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    2005
    Posts
    80,401
    That's pretty much exactly the point Will was making. Those who incite a certain reaction in the batsman - whether it be intimidation or contempt or whatever - have done so because of something off their own back. So thus, they deserve credit for it when it benefits them.

    Equally, batsmen who are able to be strong-willed enough to play the ball and not the man tend to come rather closer to competing on terms.

  15. #30
    International Regular
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    3,548
    Quote Originally Posted by Son Of Coco View Post
    I haven't seen a lot of Swann so far, but am looking forward to seeing him bowl in The Ashes.
    Same here. I'm really keen to see how he goes, how the Aussies handle him, and if the Australian batmsen (particularly the left handers) can nullify him.

Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast


Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Monty and Swann
    By Goughy in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 79
    Last Post: 16-12-2008, 10:49 AM
  2. Caption This : Graeme Swann/ Ryan Sidebottom
    By andruid in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 21-01-2008, 07:35 PM
  3. Graeme Mourie
    By Francis in forum General Sports Forum
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 30-07-2007, 07:19 AM
  4. Graeme Smith warns Panesar of racist abuse
    By Legglancer in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 260
    Last Post: 19-12-2006, 07:29 AM
  5. Replies: 21
    Last Post: 22-09-2003, 02:15 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •