• 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.

The demise of the spinner...

archie mac

archie mac

International Coach
The Windies seem convinced that only through fast bowling can they restore themselves to the top of Cricket. What about 'those two little pals of mine'
 
S

Scallywag

Banned
marc71178 said:
Mind you I think the article is better for his comments about a certain Australian leggie:

"xxx xxx bowls four and five bad balls an over, but he still plays for Australia"
Click to expand...
I see what you mean when you look at his stats against England

Tests.....6...wickets...39.......average.....24.71....economy........2.72...//S/R......54.5

:p
 
age_master

age_master

Hall of Fame Member
Scallywag said:
I see what you mean when you look at his stats against England

Tests.....6...wickets...39.......average.....24.71....economy........2.72...//S/R......54.5

:p
Click to expand...

lol, yeah but we all know about how good england have been over the last decade :p
 
Top_Cat

Top_Cat

Request Your Custom Title Now!
'Four or five' bad balls per over? IF a bowler was to do that at Test level, of course they wouldn't play. But MacGill doesn't. He's not even unusually inaccurate for a leggie. WI need to pick the best bowlers they have, not pick a spinner for the sake of it OR a pace bowler for the same.

Clive Lloyd said it best; they didn't pick four fast bowlers in his era. They picked the best four bowlers who all happened to be fast. I'm sure that's not strictly the whole truth (I'm sure the intimidation factor came into it a bit) but the fact remains that they WERE also the best bowlers in the Carribean at the time.
 
aussie

aussie

Hall of Fame Member
whats the big fuss to pic a spinner when they dont have any proper one's in the caribbean.
Mohammed, Banks and i heard on commentary tony cozier mentioning a bloke by the name of Miller :mellow:, but who cares they are all garbage bowlers
 
aussie

aussie

Hall of Fame Member
dinu23 said:
Hall says Miller has potential.
Click to expand...
i heard the same term ``potential`` used to describe the other two jokers Banks & Mohammed so i wont be surprised per say if he does get picked for WI & turns out to be crap
 
Nate

Nate

You'll Never Walk Alone
Dave Mohammed crap?

I see evil within you... :@


And please may this not be turned into a Stuie MacGill d-bait.
 
honestbharani

honestbharani

Whatever it takes!!!
I thought Banks was alright. If he could again be patient and just put the ball in the right areas, he would have been a more than handy offie. He had good height and therefore, can get the ball pitched up without flighting it much. And he had a decent top spinner too. I really don't know why he isn't given a chance. He could provide good variation, along with Chris Gayle.
 
chaminda_00

chaminda_00

Hall of Fame Member
aussie said:
whats the big fuss to pic a spinner when they dont have any proper one's in the caribbean.
Mohammed, Banks and i heard on commentary tony cozier mentioning a bloke by the name of Miller :mellow:, but who cares they are all garbage bowlers
Click to expand...
They may not be the greatest spinners in the world, but they are better then some of the losers quicks that have been picked infront of them. Surley Banks is a better bowler then Collymore, King, Powell, Washington etc.
 
Nate

Nate

You'll Never Walk Alone
chaminda_00 said:
They may not be the greatest spinners in the world, but they are better then some of the losers quicks that have been picked infront of them. Surley Banks is a better bowler then Collymore, King, Powell, Washington etc.
Click to expand...
Collymore and King NO. Surely those two are better bowlers. Though I guess I`m not an expert on the current Windies team. :)
 
chaminda_00

chaminda_00

Hall of Fame Member
Nnanden said:
Collymore and King NO. Surely those two are better bowlers. Though I guess I`m not an expert on the current Windies team. :)
Click to expand...
Personally i think outside Best, Edwards and Collins they are pretty crap.
 
steds

steds

Hall of Fame Member
aussie said:
i heard the same term ``potential`` used to describe the other two jokers Banks & Mohammed so i wont be surprised per say if he does get picked for WI & turns out to be crap
Click to expand...
:-O :dry: :sleep: :@ :dry: How dare you say that about Dave Mohammed. He's a very good bowler with a good FC record, who on test debut in South Africa did no worse than the seamers Drakes, Edwards and Sanford but ended up not playing again for the West Indies for 7 months. When he finally got another chance it was in a team which had lost the previous 2 tests and whse bowlers(with the exception of Bravo), again, weren't pulling their fingers out. And to add insult to Dave the opening batsmen, Joseph and Gayle, were used before him. How're you as a specialist bowler supposed to bowl if you know your captain doesn't trust you so much he bowls his opening batsmen before you? Then he gets dropped AGAIN. At least give him a chance to prove himself before slagging him off. How long did it take Flintoff and Harmison to come good? :****ed: :mad:
 
Nate

Nate

You'll Never Walk Alone
steds said:
:-O :dry: :sleep: :@ :dry: How dare you say that about Dave Mohammed. He's a very good bowler with a good FC record, who on test debut in South Africa did no worse than the seamers Drakes, Edwards and Sanford but ended up not playing again for the West Indies for 7 months. When he finally got another chance it was in a team which had lost the previous 2 tests and whse bowlers(with the exception of Bravo), again, weren't pulling their fingers out. And to add insult to Dave the opening batsmen, Joseph and Gayle, were used before him. How're you as a specialist bowler supposed to bowl if you know your captain doesn't trust you so much he bowls his opening batsmen before you? Then he gets dropped AGAIN. At least give him a chance to prove himself before slagging him off. How long did it take Flintoff and Harmison to come good? :****ed: :mad:
Click to expand...
You argue your case very well. It reminds me of a post where I defend Bracken.

I`m jumping on this boat.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Top