Andrew Symonds

[Richard]

I was talking about batting. Symonds is certainly the better all-rounder. I personally think Katich is a dud bowler.

Well Symonds is a good bowler only in extremely seam-friendly conditions. His fingerspin is as bad as Katich's wristspin.

 

[Prince EWS]

Well Symonds is a good bowler only in extremely seam-friendly conditions. His fingerspin is as bad as Katich's wristspin.

I agree with that whole-heartedly.

In one day games, Symonds' finger spin can be useful, but in the longer version, I actually rate Katich's spin over Symonds' spin.

 

[Mr Casson]

And I mentioned limited-overs cricket where exactly?
If you read carefully you might have seen that we were talking specifically about Test-cricket.

The point still stands.

In a test match, you rate a first innings knock of 150 off 470 deliveries highlier than a knock of 145 off 150 to chase down 250 in 50 overs?

 

[Crazy Sam]

symonds is much better than katich in batting, bowling, fielding, and overall. I'd rather watch Symonds bat than Katich.

 

[Dasa]

Symonds doesn't have patience. Katich is willing to score 'ugly runs'.

 

[Josh]

symonds is much better than katich in batting, bowling, fielding, and overall. I'd rather watch Symonds bat than Katich.

1. Well, yes, he is of course most probably the best ground fielder in the world behind Ponting.

2. Entertainment value has nothing to do with who is the better batsman.

 

[vic_orthdox]

actually, i would disagree with that view, i enjoy watching katich craft his innings', he plays so straight and correctly. i can go down to the local ground and get the same excitement watching a slogger as what i can get from symonds, but katich has so many more dimensions to his game.

and andrew symonds will never be good enough to average 40 at test level (over a sustained period against good opposition)

 

[Mister Wright]

1. Well, yes, he is of course most probably the best ground fielder in the world behind Ponting.

2. Entertainment value has nothing to do with who is the better batsman.

I'd say he is a better ground fielder than Ponting.

 

[Josh]

I'd say he is a better ground fielder than Ponting.

I'd say he's all but level with him.

 

[Richard]

The point still stands.

In a test match, you rate a first innings knock of 150 off 470 deliveries highlier than a knock of 145 off 150 to chase down 250 in 50 overs?

I never like to compare Test-match innings with ODI innings.
Totally different games.

 

[Richard]

I'd say he is a better ground fielder than Ponting.

Ponting is no longer more than a very good fielder.
He's not top-five-fielders-of-The-World material any more.
Symonds is possibly the best fielder in The World - though really it's not fair to say anyone is much better than some others.

 

[Prince EWS]

Totally different games.

Quote of the year!

Where were you when I needed you in my thread about ODI and test form?

 

[Mr Casson]

I never like to compare Test-match innings with ODI innings.
Totally different games.

I wasn't comparing them... I meant chasing 250 in 50 overs in a test match to win.

 

[Prince EWS]

I wasn't comparing them... I meant chasing 250 in 50 overs in a test match to win.

It really depends on the situation though.

If that 150 off 470 was scored in the last innings on a turning track to save the game, when you were 600 behind with 2 days play remaining, it would be an incredible knock.

If 145 was scored off 150 balls in the same situation, it wouldnt be nearly as valuable.

 

[Richard]

Quote of the year!

Where were you when I needed you in my thread about ODI and test form?

I replied a few times!
Out of the thread's 50 posts, I was top with 13 - you were 2nd with 7.

 

[Richard]

I wasn't comparing them... I meant chasing 250 in 50 overs in a test match to win.

No-one will ever score 250 off 50 overs to win a Test-match - you mark my words.

 

[vic_orthdox]

please tell me that was tongue in cheek

 

[Richard]

Nope - Test-match conditions and Rules make it completely implausible.

 

[vic_orthdox]

as far as i see it, when one views mr cassons quote in context of what was already said, he is insinuating that a 150 off 180 balls is more valuable than a slow 150, (edit--->) and especially so when chasing a total as described above (<---). he was referring to the team's chase of 250 off 50 overs in the 4th innings, not that a batsman would score 250 off 50 overs.

 

[Richard]

I don't see that talking about an innings in a non-existent context is fair.