Nathan Hauritz

[Son Of Coco]

Personally I think they just imply that they assume most people can work out there'll be standard change-ups each type of bowler uses. If people can't work it out they need to watch more cricket IMO

 

[Richard]

People who watch enough cricket don't even need the classification. The idea behind them should be to inform a relative ignoramus.

 

[Son Of Coco]

People who watch enough cricket don't even need the classification. The idea behind them should be to inform a relative ignoramus.

If that was the case we'd have classifications like : right-arm legspin, but he also bowls a topspinner (which is a ball that has a lot of topspin on it causing the ball to bounce more than usual and go straight), and a flipper (which is a ball that comes out of the front of his hand and has underspin on it meaning it skids through and goes straight), and a wrong-un (which is a ball that spins the opposite way to his normal delivery), and a bigger spinning legspinner than his normal ball (which spins more than his normal delivery therefore moving more off the wicket)...and so on.

I don't think you'll find too many subjects where such leniency is applied to people who know absolutely nothing about it.

People who watch cricket regularly still need the classification as it helps when a new player comes along. You generally know what you're going to get (with a few discrepancies in variations).

 

[social]

Nah, there's really no such thing as an "off-spinner", just an off-break or a leg-break - and that depends 50% on batsman and 50% on bowler (an off-break to a RHB is a leg-break to a LHB and vice-versa).

There's just fingerspin and wristspin, and Murali is neither fingerspinnner nor orthodox wristspinner.

They didn't, they changed the rules because they realised they were based on false ideals. But anyway, Murali is incomparable to most other bowlers, because he has a physical deformity of the elbow which makes any straightening more apparent and even makes straightening appear apparent where there is none.

Nah, Botha isn't neccessarily using the same technique and has been found to be outside the limits. None of those others were - some, of course, were never tested.[/QUOTE]

Botha has admitting to copying Murali's "technique" so make of that what you will

 

[Richard]

I don't know how he's managed to do that because Botha's Off-Break is completely different to Murali's. Murali is a wristspinner; Botha a fingerspinner. Anyone trying to copy Murali is going to meet with almost certain failure because Murali has a double-jointed wrist; most people don't, so thus his technique is un-copy-able by the vast majority.

 

[Richard]

If that was the case we'd have classifications like : right-arm legspin, but he also bowls a topspinner (which is a ball that has a lot of topspin on it causing the ball to bounce more than usual and go straight), and a flipper (which is a ball that comes out of the front of his hand and has underspin on it meaning it skids through and goes straight), and a wrong-un (which is a ball that spins the opposite way to his normal delivery), and a bigger spinning legspinner than his normal ball (which spins more than his normal delivery therefore moving more off the wicket)...and so on.

I don't think you'll find too many subjects where such leniency is applied to people who know absolutely nothing about it.

People who watch cricket regularly still need the classification as it helps when a new player comes along. You generally know what you're going to get (with a few discrepancies in variations).

And "right-arm fingerspin" and\or "left-arm seam" would do that job juuuuuuuuust fine, and it'd more accurately describe matters as well.

 

[Son Of Coco]

And "right-arm fingerspin" and\or "left-arm seam" would do that job juuuuuuuuust fine, and it'd more accurately describe matters as well.

No more accurately than the system we have now Richard in my opinion. It's just a different version of the same thing.

 

[Richard]

Well... suffice it to say I think it would be, quite a bit better.

Agree to disagree you might say.

 

[Son Of Coco]

Well... suffice it to say I think it would be, quite a bit better.

Agree to disagree you might say.

Yes I think so, I was going to type the same thing in my last reply

 

[howardj]

Give me a break Howie...

I think you have a man crush on Horrie. Pick the team and decide who will take more wickets - "Horrie" or the 4th Quick (which maybe Stuart Clark, or at worst case Hillfy).

I'd play piggy riddle as a spinner before horrie...

Horrie, hands down.

 

[howardj]

I think Horrie deserves to play in the 1st Test. There is nothing wrong with his Test record -

Four Tests with 14 wickets @ 31 apiece.

He also has an economy rate of a mere 2.69 (Australia have missed miserly bowlers since Warne and McGrath retired).

Furthermore, his confidence is up after his outstanding ODI performances against Pakistan.

People should look at these facts rather than their perceptions of Hauritz.

Plus, it would be madness to not take a specialist spinner into a Test played on a slow wicket which takes turn.

Case closed.

 

[Burgey]

Well he'll have a chance to stake a reasonable claim here, given we'll be bowling last.

 

[BoyBrumby]

As I just posted in the 1st test thread:

Interesting to see what Hauritz does tomorrow (assuming we actually do take the last 2 wickets). If he has another horrible game (and there wasn't a lot of turn for Rashid today) would he really still be a shoo in?

If North and/or Lee outbowls him it seems almost perversely stubborn to pick him solely because he's nominally a specialist twirler. As I believe PEWS said in another thread North's FC bowling record is actually better than his and there's also Plans B & C in Katich & Clarke (back allowing).

 

[Mister Wright]

Hauritz must play.

 

[Burgey]

If he plays, and they then pick Lee over Clark, I'll catch the next plane over and nut some bastard.

 

[TT Boy]

Hauritz must play.

Agreed.

 

[dontcloseyoureyes]

As I just posted in the 1st test thread:

North's bowling record may be better, but it's a hell of a lot easier coming on and bowling 4 or 5 overs maybe twice a day than being the leading spin bowler in a side.

 

[BoyBrumby]

North's bowling record may be better, but it's a hell of a lot easier coming on and bowling 4 or 5 overs maybe twice a day than being the leading spin bowler in a side.

Fair point. Man himself just coming on now, as it goes.

First four balls full, outside off, no turn. Moore smacks 4th back down ground for 4. Good use of the feet.

& drives the 5th through the covers for another boundary. Hmm.

 

[Son Of Coco]

If he plays, and they then pick Lee over Clark, I'll catch the next plane over and nut some bastard.

 

[GIMH]

If he plays, and they then pick Lee over Clark, I'll catch the next plane over and nut some bastard.

One way or another you're gonna be great value through this series