Page 3 of 15 FirstFirst 1234513 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 213

Thread: Nathan Hauritz

  1. #31
    Cricket Web Staff Member Richard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    2005
    Posts
    80,401
    Quote Originally Posted by Son Of Coco View Post
    Yeah, as far as I was aware it was categorised according to what they bowl to a right-handed batsman. And therefore a left-handed bowler is called 'orthodox' or 'chinaman' and not 'off-break' or 'leg-break' as it'd get confusing. Keeps it pretty simple and you always know what the bowler is bowling.
    The point is LHBs are hardly so irregular that you need to categorise everything according to a RHB. What's even more ridiculous is that you don't know what someone's bowling at all - all bowlers have a change-up ball of some sort, and more ridiculous still is that some bowlers have that change-up included in their old-school classification (it's generally standard to classify a right-arm wristspinner as "leg-break-googly") and some don't.

    Personally I just prefer right-arm fingerspin, right-arm wristspin, left-arm fingerspin and left-arm wristspin. Keeps it simple and exceptions to the rule are recognised as exceptions. None of this "orthodox" or "chinaman" lark.
    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

  2. #32
    International Regular
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    3,536
    I thought I posted this before but it appears I didn't or it got deleted somehow.

    Hauritz is a very underrated Test cricketer and a very overrated limited overs cricketer. I reckon he will surprise a few people during this series.

  3. #33
    International Vice-Captain Noble One's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    4,113
    Quote Originally Posted by Jakester1288 View Post
    I thought I posted this before but it appears I didn't or it got deleted somehow.

    Hauritz is a very underrated Test cricketer and a very overrated limited overs cricketer. I reckon he will surprise a few people during this series.
    Overrated as a limited overs cricketer is a tad harsh. I believe his recent ODI efforts have been well above expectation and proved he has some ability in the limited overs game. He has been far superior to any other domestic spinner in the limited overs format for years now, and deserves the recognition as our number one ODI spinner.

    As a Test cricketer, well he will never be a star. Just a solid contributor, should only play if the pitch is turning or is an obvious road.

  4. #34
    International Regular
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    3,536
    Quote Originally Posted by Noble One View Post
    Overrated as a limited overs cricketer is a tad harsh. I believe his recent ODI efforts have been well above expectation and proved he has some ability in the limited overs game. He has been far superior to any other domestic spinner in the limited overs format for years now, and deserves the recognition as our number one ODI spinner.

    As a Test cricketer, well he will never be a star. Just a solid contributor, should only play if the pitch is turning or is an obvious road.
    No, he is overrated. A few good limited overs domestic games, lots of people think he is great, but he's not. He could probably get by playing for Australia as a spinner in both forms, but will never set the world on fire, but he won't let you down.


  5. #35
    RTDAS pasag's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Looking for milksteak
    Posts
    31,678
    Quote Originally Posted by Jakester1288 View Post
    No, he is overrated. A few good limited overs domestic games, lots of people think he is great, but he's not. He could probably get by playing for Australia as a spinner in both forms, but will never set the world on fire, but he won't let you down.
    Which is where most rate him. I don't think anyone in their right mind thinks he'll set the world on fire.
    Rest In Peace Craigos
    2003-2012

  6. #36
    International Vice-Captain Noble One's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    4,113
    Quote Originally Posted by Jakester1288 View Post
    No, he is overrated. A few good limited overs domestic games, lots of people think he is great, but he's not. He could probably get by playing for Australia as a spinner in both forms, but will never set the world on fire, but he won't let you down.
    I have never heard of anyone who speaks of Nathan Hauritz as a great finger spinner. Recognised as the most consistent ODD bowler, but thats not overrating Hauritz.

    All Australia have needed since the retirement of Brad Hogg is a limited overs spinner than can send down 10 tightish overs, and possibly produce a wicket or two. Hauritz has been able to achieve that since his return for Australia, and it is an ability he has always displayed playing for Queensland and New South Wales.

    No expectation that Hauritz will produce anything like a Vettori, Murali or Harby. But he is the best Australian limited overs spinner by a considerable margin, and he is rated spot on as a decent little cricketer. Nothing more.

  7. #37
    Cricket Web: All-Time Legend andyc's Avatar
    Yeti Sports 1.5 Champion!
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Canberra
    Posts
    23,853
    Quote Originally Posted by Noble One View Post
    I have never heard of anyone who speaks of Nathan Hauritz as a great finger spinner. Recognised as the most consistent ODD bowler, but thats not overrating Hauritz.

    All Australia have needed since the retirement of Brad Hogg is a limited overs spinner than can send down 10 tightish overs, and possibly produce a wicket or two. Hauritz has been able to achieve that since his return for Australia, and it is an ability he has always displayed playing for Queensland and New South Wales.

    No expectation that Hauritz will produce anything like a Vettori, Murali or Harby. But he is the best Australian limited overs spinner by a considerable margin, and he is rated spot on as a decent little cricketer. Nothing more.
    Yeah, this.
    Quote Originally Posted by flibbertyjibber View Post
    Only a bunch of convicts having been beaten 3-0 and gone 9 tests without a win and won just 1 in 11 against England could go into the home series saying they will win. England will win in Australia again this winter as they are a better side which they have shown this summer. 3-0 doesn't lie girls.

  8. #38
    Cricket Web Staff Member Burgey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    The Castle
    Posts
    41,249
    Quote Originally Posted by jondavluc View Post
    piggy riddle
    May mean Piggy Riddell, former Saints and Parra hooker, now earning squillions in Uk Super League, and probably asleep in a gutter somewhere surrounded by beer cans and cheeseburger wrappers.

    Good footy player though,and could turn his off break tbf.
    WWCC - Loyaulte Mi Lie
    "People make me happy.. not places.. people"

    "When a man is tired of London, he is tired of life." - Samuel Johnson

    "Hope is the fuel of progress and fear is the prison in which you put yourself" - Tony Benn

  9. #39
    Hall of Fame Member Son Of Coco's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Brisbane, Australia
    Posts
    17,227
    Quote Originally Posted by Richard View Post
    The point is LHBs are hardly so irregular that you need to categorise everything according to a RHB. What's even more ridiculous is that you don't know what someone's bowling at all - all bowlers have a change-up ball of some sort, and more ridiculous still is that some bowlers have that change-up included in their old-school classification (it's generally standard to classify a right-arm wristspinner as "leg-break-googly") and some don't.

    Personally I just prefer right-arm fingerspin, right-arm wristspin, left-arm fingerspin and left-arm wristspin. Keeps it simple and exceptions to the rule are recognised as exceptions. None of this "orthodox" or "chinaman" lark.
    I think you'd find most people do Richard. I fail to see how what you've described makes it any easier. The change-up is irrelevant...you won't find any bowler classified solely on what they bowl as a change-up delivery. It sounds as though you have, but I've never seen it.

    "And now coming on at the Member's End, Brett Lee the right-arm slower ball bowler."

    And no, you don't need to categorise everything for a right-handed bat but I'd say it was done out of simplicity and not because there weren't any left-handers around at the time.
    "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.

  10. #40
    Cricket Web Staff Member Richard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    2005
    Posts
    80,401
    Classifications essentially imply that there aren't any change-up deliveries. That's why I don't like them. I prefer a classification that says only something a bowler does all the time. IE, a bowler is always a seamer even if he's fast sometimes and medium-fast on his slower-delivery; a bowler is always a fingerspinner whether they're bowling standard fingerspinner's (to like-hander) Off-Break or Doosra; a bowler is always a wristspinner whether they're bowling a standard wristspinner's Leg-Break (to like-hander) or Googly (or Flipper). And a right-armer is always a right-armer whether they're bowling seam or spin.

    Either that or just use "right-arm orthodox" and "left-arm orthodox" or whatever.

  11. #41
    Hall of Fame Member Son Of Coco's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Brisbane, Australia
    Posts
    17,227
    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

  12. #42
    Cricket Web Staff Member Richard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    2005
    Posts
    80,401
    People who watch enough cricket don't even need the classification. The idea behind them should be to inform a relative ignoramus.

  13. #43
    Hall of Fame Member Son Of Coco's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Brisbane, Australia
    Posts
    17,227
    Quote Originally Posted by Richard View Post
    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).

  14. #44
    International Coach social's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    AUSTRALIA
    Posts
    12,380
    [QUOTE=Richard;1918035]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

  15. #45
    Cricket Web Staff Member Richard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    2005
    Posts
    80,401
    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.

Page 3 of 15 FirstFirst 1234513 ... LastLast


Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

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

Similar Threads

  1. Hauritz vs Krejza
    By susudear in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 72
    Last Post: 12-03-2009, 07:55 AM
  2. The Google 'Who Am I?' Thread
    By Jungle Jumbo in forum Off Topic
    Replies: 70
    Last Post: 19-02-2007, 08:05 AM
  3. Nathan Hauritz picks up a NSW contract.
    By Haddin in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 03-06-2006, 04:20 AM
  4. Hauritz now dropped from state team...
    By Waughney in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 39
    Last Post: 02-03-2005, 12:50 AM
  5. Hauritz in
    By age_master in forum World Cup 2003
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 25-02-2003, 04:55 AM

Posting Permissions

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