Richard
Cricket Web Staff Member
And you'll say "not if you ask me he wasn't" and it'll all be nice and simple.tooextracool said:yes and then not long later, you'll talk about how ramprakash was a glaring success post 98.
And you'll say "not if you ask me he wasn't" and it'll all be nice and simple.tooextracool said:yes and then not long later, you'll talk about how ramprakash was a glaring success post 98.
and im getting tired of not responding to rubbish like that. it would be better if you didnt post it in the first place, especially when there was no necessity too.Richard said:And you'll say "not if you ask me he wasn't" and it'll all be nice and simple.
thank you!! finally someone who watched that game and actually remembers what the pitch was like.nzidol said:The pitch at the WACA was not a 'turner' by any stretch of the imagination, I watched the entire match and Vettori took his wickets by flight and guile and a lot of overspin and bounce. There wasn't significant sidespin for either spinner.
If it was such a turner then why did Damien Martyn bowl 10 overs in the NZ innings and Mark Waugh, an offspinner of some note bowl only 6.
Hmm, interesting how you can apply this bowled well and was unlucky theory all of a sudden...Richard said:he certainly bowled really well in the two Trans-Tasman Tests and was very unlucky not to get a better average.
If it happened for a long time I'd say otherwise.marc71178 said:Hmm, interesting how you can apply this bowled well and was unlucky theory all of a sudden...
Because they're both pretty rubbish bowlers, and it wouldn't really matter who bowled?nzidol said:The pitch at the WACA was not a 'turner' by any stretch of the imagination, I watched the entire match and Vettori took his wickets by flight and guile and a lot of overspin and bounce. There wasn't significant sidespin for either spinner.
If it was such a turner then why did Damien Martyn bowl 10 overs in the NZ innings and Mark Waugh, an offspinner of some note bowl only 6.
Well, except the identification of patterns in Vettori's career.tooextracool said:and im getting tired of not responding to rubbish like that. it would be better if you didnt post it in the first place, especially when there was no necessity too.
Mark Waugh wasn't that bad a bowler actually. 59 Tests wickets at 41.16 and 85 ODI wickets at 34.56. Then there were his 208 FC wickets at 40.98 and 173 List-A wickets (same number as his highest score ironically) at 33.44.Richard said:Because they're both pretty rubbish bowlers, and it wouldn't really matter who bowled?
can u tell me a spinner who has bowled as well as vettori to austalia recently?thierry henry said:Vettori is an ok bowler. Above average, I would say. Considering the ups and downs of his career, I think the figures pretty much tell the story.
Whether you have seen him or not does not effect how well he bowled.cric_manic said:havent seen him bowl
Kumble home and away...cric_manic said:can u tell me a spinner who has bowled as well as vettori to austalia recently?
seen as australia are seen as the worlds best in both forms of the games