• Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

***Official*** Australia in England (The Ashes)

chaminda_00

Hall of Fame Member
Scallywag said:
Kumble and Harbhajan have taken his wicket the most but caught in the field is how he most often gets out.

Gilly has absolutely smashed Murali to the point where he is Murali's master.
Well out of the top ten bowlers who has got him out the most 6 have been spinners. With the top 3 all being spinners. I would say that shows a weakness to spin bowling.

Murali hasn't had as much success against Gilly as Kumble and Harbarjan, but he still got him out 3 times in 6 innings, a long way from being his master.

55% of the time that Gilly got out to spin it has been in the outfield, but that doesn't mean most of them have been out purely cus he was slogging. Majority of the time his been beaten by the fight and picked the wrong ball to play the shot that he had played.
 

aussie

Hall of Fame Member
tooextracool said:
except that giles will come on long before he reaches 80 on any wicket. and you can almost guarantee that giles will be on within the first 15-20 overs on a turner.
not really, ponting gets out because he plays spinners with hard hands and is therefore poor against spin.
to say pontingis poor is a bit of an rough call tec, i would say just say he is not that good
 

tooextracool

International Coach
marc71178 said:
A player can't make a career on being very good on 2% of the time and useless in 98%.

(Unless is Michael Clarke ;))
so you're saying that england encounter turners 2% of the time then? apparently they encounter 2 turners for every 100 games 8-)
 

aussie

Hall of Fame Member
Richard said:
Because he's got a very poor ODI average of 26 or so, and has played maybe 4 or 5 good innings in his 4 years as a ODI-cricketer, maybe?
Another foolish one who doesn't know how to criticise.
look.... i agree he doesn't have a great record againts most sides, but he has shown few glimpses of what he can e.g his 100 vs SRI, his valubale 50 vs pak in the WC, his 70 vs IND in 2002 & a few others. But the kinda coach Fletcher, he has faith in his players & those liitle performances would tell him that Collingwood has the ability to be more consistent & he would persist with him.

If he was in the Australian set-up he would be long gone, but thats not the case
 

tooextracool

International Coach
aussie said:
to say pontingis poor is a bit of an rough call tec, i would say just say he is not that good
you can call him whatever you want, fact is that when hes up against a quality spinner on a turner the number of runs that he scores decreases significantly.
 

marc71178

Eyes not spreadsheets
tooextracool said:
so you're saying that england encounter turners 2% of the time then? apparently they encounter 2 turners for every 100 games 8-)
In Croft's career, I wouldn't imagine he's played more than a handful of games on turners.
 

tooextracool

International Coach
aussie said:
look.... i agree he doesn't have a great record againts most sides, but he has shown few glimpses of what he can e.g his 100 vs SRI, his valubale 50 vs pak in the WC, his 70 vs IND in 2002 & a few others.
notice how all of those innings came over 2 years ago. yes i agree that he has potential, but theres only so many failures someone can produce before being dropped, and averaging 19.9 against all teams other than zimbabwe since the series in the WI is simply abysmal.
 

tooextracool

International Coach
marc71178 said:
In Croft's career, I wouldn't imagine he's played more than a handful of games on turners.
he got 2 turners in zimbabwe, 2 in NZ, 1 in the WI, and 3 in SL, and 1 in england on debut. which adds up to 9 out of 21 games, a whole 43% of his career. and it would have been more, had the selectors been smart enough to realise that he shouldnt have been picked to play in england outside the oval.
 

tooextracool

International Coach
archie mac said:
I hardly think you can say a batsman who ave: in the mid 50s can be POOR against spin. otherwise other teams would bring on spinners as soon as he arrives at the crease. He only has hard hands at the start of an innings. (maybe nerves?)
no hes had problems against spin on turners.



archie mac said:
Not playing in SL or India, Not facing same quality attack. Like I said give Gilly an hour and turner or not he will change the game.
yes, yet as his average shows he is only half as effective as he is on any other wicket.
 

tooextracool

International Coach
Scallywag said:
Gilly has played 21innings in SL and India according to cricinfo.

13 in India with 1no and averaging 28.5 with 2 100's and a 49

8 in Sri Lanka with 2 no averaging 45.3 with 1 100 and 61* and 31*
umm the 4th game was in SL, but it was against pakistan, which is a completely different topic. and the 66*(not 61*) came against pakistan

Scallywag said:
Kumble and Harbhajan have taken his wicket the most but caught in the field is how he most often gets out.
rubbish, hes been stumped twice, bowled twice, and lbw thrice. and you can almost guarantee that about half of his caught dismissals have been caught at forward short leg or silly point.

Scallywag said:
Gilly has absolutely smashed Murali to the point where he is Murali's master.
yes in a whole 1 inning! give him a medal.
 
Last edited:

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
Mister Wright said:
I love how all this analysing of Giles performance can be done and we can take out his 'bad' tests, but when the same thing is done for MacGill you ridicule it.
If we take out his bad Tests we take out the anomalies.
If we take out MacGill's bad Tests we take out the normality.
 

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
marc71178 said:
Irrelevant.

If a bowler cannot do a half decent job on wickets he plays 95% of his game on, he is useless.
95%?
What does that figure come from?
How the hell has Croft played 95% of his games on turners?
I'd say it was nearer 30%
 

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
chaminda_00 said:
So only pitches that Giles takes wickets on a turner, if he doesn't take wickets then there not turners. Great work Richard that the best load of rubbish i read in a long time, made my morning.
Where did I say that?
If the pitch turns Giles almost invariably takes wickets, not the other way around.
Bangladesh not tradition sub continent pitches the funnist thing i read in a long time...Rafique, Enmal Haque Jnr, Vettori look at their figures their
Where did I say the Bangladesh Tests weren't typical subcontinent pitches? I said they were Tests which are meaningless to proper Test-cricket, and that Giles had recently totally reconstructed his action.
 

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
Scallywag said:
Any bowler on a turner is good
Absolute rubbish, countless spinners have bowled poorly on turners.
what makes a spinner good is when he does not have to rely on a turner to be effective.
What makes a spinner exceptional is when he does not have to rely on a turner - only a tiny handful of spinners can bowl well on non-turning pitches.
A good fingerspinner is one who bowls well on turners; a poor one is one who bowls poorly on any pitch (eg Gareth Batty, Richard Dawson, Nathan Hauritz).
 

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
tooextracool said:
or how he took 18 wickets at 29 a piece in SL?
Which goes down to 16 wickets at 22 when you only take the turners and eliminate the pitch that could fairly be called as flat as possible.
 

chaminda_00

Hall of Fame Member
Ponting isn't really that bad aganist spin on turner. he is only bad aganist India on turner, where he averages 12. If you take out his record against India then his average in the sub-continent is 65 from 16 innings. Also out of the bowlers that have dismissed him 3 or more times only two have been spinners, Kumble and Harbhajan, 11 bowlers have dismissed 3 or more times.
 

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
aussie said:
look.... i agree he doesn't have a great record againts most sides, but he has shown few glimpses of what he can e.g his 100 vs SRI, his valubale 50 vs pak in the WC, his 70 vs IND in 2002 & a few others. But the kinda coach Fletcher, he has faith in his players & those liitle performances would tell him that Collingwood has the ability to be more consistent & he would persist with him.
If he's not managed it in 4 years don't you think it's time to realise he's not very likely to?
 

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
aussie said:
first of all giles was going through a bad patch in the caribbean last winter even up to the final test against the kiwis where many where questioning his place in the England side, and the tracks in the caribbean where more helpful to the fast bowlers, come on didn't u watch the series it was the fast bowlers who had most effect for both WI & ENG.

Giles role in that series has it has been for most of his career was to contain, but because of his bad patch during that series, the ineffectiveness of his containing role wasn't missed has Harmison and rest ran havoc on the windies batsmen. I was their all 5 days here at Old Trafford and has was the case in the caribbean it didn't offer much assistance to the spinners.
Err - no, Giles was not going through a bad patch in The Caribbean - he simply wasn't getting anything from the pitches, and when he doesn't he's useless.
People have questioned his place, many times, quite rightly, because on most pitches he offers little or nothing. It's only stupid selection that sees him picked on pitches that don't turn.
he bowled wicket taking deliveries, yes........., but they were also many occasions where the WI batsmen gave their wickets away via bad shots, for E.G at the Old Trafford test in the second innings when WI had a 1st innings lead of 65 and Gayle & Sarwan were batting with so much ease, Vaughan intelligently set in out fields for Gayle & he hit Gilo right down to hoggard at long on, Sarwan & Mohammed were also out to poor stroke play and the amount of times he worked out dwayne bravo in the first two test with the tactic of bowling around the wicket to him & leaving the gap at mid-wicket & forcing him to play through the vacant gap had nothing to do with the turn in the pitch, that was inexperice, stupidity & good captaincy on Vaughan's part, their were also some rough decision towards the WI batsmen so the argument of Giles getting wickets via poor shots, wicket-taking deliveries & rough decisions by the umpire can go on and on.
There were poor strokes, of course there were - there always are, lots of them. That doesn't matter - the fact is Giles bowled wicket-taking deliveries in these matches, where he doesn't bowl them on non-turners. No-one is possibly going to take 24 wickets in 3 Tests and have every single one come from a wicket-taking delivery. The fact is, Giles would never bowl a single wicket-taking delivery on a non-turner and he bowled quite a few on those turners. Any plan is not going to work, either, if the pitch isn't turning, we've seen that time and again.
and i totally disagree that were your theory that the pitches at those 3 venue's turned similary to sub-continent proportions no way. At trent bridge i dont recall Giles spinning the ball that much on day 1, the spin came more on the on day 4 when if u can recall he bowled around the wicket into the rough where there was assistance for him, Lord's had some turn but has is my point it cannot be compared to a typical Mumbai or Chennai pitch on day 1, neither was the case at edgbagston since the only spinner on view for the entire first day ``SARWAN`` barely extracted turn, the turn came more later in the test match.
No, none of the 3 can be compared to the turners at Mumbai and Chennai last winter, but they can be compared very accurately with a normal subcontinent pitch, a slowish pitch that turns to a reasonable degree from the first day. And ALL THREE of those pitches did, because I remember very clearly seeing balls turn and being near-enough certain that Giles would take wickets in the matches.
His role could alter a bit, but you have to read between the lines the shots that the WI batsmen played were poor at times & the tactics Vaughan used againts them as to the one he used againts Bravo, he definately wont use againts Australia. You cant compare those pitches to sub-continent like pitches since they were not so much of similar to sub-continent proportions. So basically his role will be to contain, so i dont see how he will become a potent strike force in the series, you are the only one who has that idea[/QUOTE]
No, I'm not - all the others who've noticed Giles' career pattern will realise that he'll be a force if the pitches turn.
 

aussie

Hall of Fame Member
force it a bit of a highly related term Richard, just lets say he will become more of an attacking option ok..
 

aussie

Hall of Fame Member
Richard said:
If he's not managed it in 4 years don't you think it's time to realise he's not very likely to?
look at andrew symonds richard, he didn't produce anything in the first 4 years of so in AUS ODI side 1998 - 2002/2003, it was until the WC when he really warranted his place. Look i'm a patriotic supporter i agree that he hasn't really done much with the BAT but has i stated before duncan fletcher is the kinda coach that will persist with players like him.

You must agree that he has potential, why not let us back him do be more consistent & hope for better in the future. Ponting abcked Symo in because he knew he ahd potential & look at his results since the WC
 

Top