"The almighty Flintoff" and "the below test standard Lee"

Zinzan · 23-07-2005, 11:59 PM

It seems kind of ironic that after all the hype about the mighty "Flintoff" in the lead up to the ashes and the incredible talking down of Brett lee and his ability at test level that it is Lee that comes out of this First test with a good amount of credit as opposed to Flintoff whose performance was below par.

Admittedly its only the first test, but apart from out foxing Gilchrist, Flintoffs bowling in the conditions was disappointing. He went for around 5 an over in the 2nd innings. Not to mention his total of 3 runs in 2 innings with the bat.

I know its only early days in the series, but I can't imagine Flintoff's confidence is sky high, whereas I think Lee will only get more confidence.

Haven't heard much from the likes of Marc and TEC on Flintoff and Lee's performance so far, I'm interested to read their reactions

Whoops....almost forgot to mention the dolly Flintoff put down at slip and Lee's great caught and bowled.

Oh the irony !!!

age_master · 24-07-2005, 12:02 AM

Flintoff will be back im sure, particularly with the ball - hes a better bowler than that.

FaaipDeOiad · 24-07-2005, 12:32 AM

Flintoff is a great player as far as I'm concerned. He's England's best and most consistent bowler, and he's got a good technique against pace bowling with the bat and is quite capable of being a 40 average player if he can learn to play spin a bit and stop throwing his wicket away.

Lee is highly underrated by many people, and said people refuse to acknowledge the way he has changed as a player in the last 18 months. Two years ago, Lee had severe problems which stopped him from being effective at test level. He wasn't as shocking as some people made out, but he wasn't worth his place over other bowlers Australia have. He's certainly corrected some of those problems, particularly his ability to be consistently accurate and bowl lengthy spells without becoming ragged, but there are still a few questions to answer. I'm confident he's improved all-round enough to be a good test bowler, but only time will tell. Certainly an excellent start to his comeback... McGrath, Lee, Harmison and Warne have been all class with the ball all test.

King_Ponting · 24-07-2005, 01:58 AM

I believe he is still englands best player

luckyeddie · 24-07-2005, 03:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by zinzan12

It seems kind of ironic that after all the hype....blah blah slaver

Be very, very careful with the predictions and the writing off.

After all, the whole of Australia (and Richard) wrote Steve Wayward-Harmison off after a single over in Australia last time, although in fairness the whole of Australia have actually watched him bowl a ball or two since and a couple of you have changed your mind.

I've always advocated that a test side needs one out-and-out speedster, although over the last few years Australia have had two all-time greats at the same time and some more than adequate 'stock' bowlers so they have never really been exposed in that department. For me, Lee would have been the third bowler on the sheet every time because I just LOVE pacemen.

Flintoff has been very out of sorts so far, and will have to get his act together if England are to bounce back.

simmy · 24-07-2005, 04:37 AM

Ive always thought that he is a little overrated with the bat... but with the ball he has been consistently bowling tight and wicket taking spells for England over the last 18 months or so. He will be back! Just a shame that he didnt bowl better on a pitch that would have offered him something.

Lee is class... and is bowling a lot more accurately these days. He has never been below test standard (as bowling these days... especially outside this series seems to be on a decline) just that he wasnt good enough for a very strong Aus side.

Craig · 24-07-2005, 04:43 AM

How many runs did Flintoff give away to no-balls?

That is one thing that will need fixing.

FaaipDeOiad · 24-07-2005, 04:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Craig

How many runs did Flintoff give away to no-balls?

That is one thing that will need fixing.

Yes indeed. He was way too indisciplined in that regard, and I'm surprised fewer England fans have brought it up, given the bashing Lee usually gets over it. Even when he wasn't bowling no balls, he was really pushing it a lot of the time. Given that his run up isn't as rapid as someone like Lee or Akthar, there's really no excuse for it, and one day he's going to take a vital wicket with one and get called.

sledger · 24-07-2005, 04:50 AM

to be honest i wouldnt say there is anything wrong with flintoffs performace, he has bowled well, and his two dismissals were good balls, warnes was well disguised, and mcgraths was well placed and stayed low. I would say there are much greater concerns to be had over the likes of bell and even vaughn at the moment.

Craig · 24-07-2005, 04:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by FaaipDeOiad

Yes indeed. He was way too indisciplined in that regard, and I'm surprised fewer England fans have brought it up, given the bashing Lee usually gets over it. Even when he wasn't bowling no balls, he was really pushing it a lot of the time. Given that his run up isn't as rapid as someone like Lee or Akthar, there's really no excuse for it, and one day he's going to take a vital wicket with one and get called.

Well 14 no-balls in a match by him isn't good enough to be frank (or by any bowler to be fair).

That's 14 more runs England have to chase off him alone and a total of 19 from England bowlers in this match - 19 more runs need to be scored and that is not including runs scored off them either.

Craig · 24-07-2005, 04:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sledger

to be honest i wouldnt say there is anything wrong with flintoffs performace, he has bowled well, and his two dismissals were good balls, warnes was well disguised, and mcgraths was well placed and stayed low. I would say there are much greater concerns to be had over the likes of bell and even vaughn at the moment.

Well his econ wasn't the best either - 4.54 in the 1st innings and 4.55 in the second when you consider his role is too keep it tight and allow people like Harmison to attack at the other end. And nor is he a strike bowler to justify going for a few in the hope of getting a wicket or two in his spells of bowling.

I think he has bowled well in patches, but surely he can bowl a lot better and I'm sure he has and will.

Pratters · 24-07-2005, 07:05 AM

Its laughable regarding the comments on Lee on the forum by so many people. Do not rule out a new justification for what they said, meant or did not say

aussie · 24-07-2005, 07:14 AM

well i always felt that Freddie would have stuggled with the bat in this series while even though his bowling was on the expensive side in the second innings he is still englands best all-round bowler.

Lee on the other hand before this series was consistently written (on this forum for sure) of about his ability to well in test matches, which was justifiable 2 years ago but even when he came back & bowled so superbly in the VB series & in NZ clearly showing improvements in every aspect of his game he was still written off. I was always defending him & few backed me u such as FaaipDeOaid (sean).But after his good bowling performance at lord's they should be convinced now.

King_Ponting · 24-07-2005, 07:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aussie

well i always felt that Freddie would have stuggled with the bat in this series while even though his bowling was on the expensive side in the second innings he is still englands best all-round bowler.

Lee on the other hand before this series was consistently written (on this forum for sure) of about his ability to well in test matches, which was justifiable 2 years ago but even when he came back & bowled so superbly in the VB series & in NZ clearly showing improvements in every aspect of his game he was still written off. I was always defending him & few backed me u such as FaaipDeOaid (sean).But after his good bowling performance at lord's they should be convinced now.

As was i, haent really said a bad word about the bloke.
im glad he has repayed my confidence in him

Shane Warne · 24-07-2005, 07:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Craig

How many runs did Flintoff give away to no-balls?

That is one thing that will need fixing.

And how many wickets does he take with them?

I remember three so far in his career, one in this match.

23-07-2005, 11:59 PM	#1 (permalink)
Zinzan Cricketer Of The Year Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: cover point Posts: 9,734	"The almighty Flintoff" and "the below test standard Lee" It seems kind of ironic that after all the hype about the mighty "Flintoff" in the lead up to the ashes and the incredible talking down of Brett lee and his ability at test level that it is Lee that comes out of this First test with a good amount of credit as opposed to Flintoff whose performance was below par. Admittedly its only the first test, but apart from out foxing Gilchrist, Flintoffs bowling in the conditions was disappointing. He went for around 5 an over in the 2nd innings. Not to mention his total of 3 runs in 2 innings with the bat. I know its only early days in the series, but I can't imagine Flintoff's confidence is sky high, whereas I think Lee will only get more confidence. Haven't heard much from the likes of Marc and TEC on Flintoff and Lee's performance so far, I'm interested to read their reactions Whoops....almost forgot to mention the dolly Flintoff put down at slip and Lee's great caught and bowled. Oh the irony !!!

24-07-2005, 12:02 AM	#2 (permalink)
age_master Hall of Fame Member Join Date: Nov 2001 Location: Sydney, NSW, Australia Posts: 15,777	Flintoff will be back im sure, particularly with the ball - hes a better bowler than that. __________________ Member of CW Green Kerry O'Keefe - Worlds funniest Commentator

24-07-2005, 12:32 AM	#3 (permalink)
FaaipDeOiad Hall of Fame Member Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: Australia Posts: 18,682	Flintoff is a great player as far as I'm concerned. He's England's best and most consistent bowler, and he's got a good technique against pace bowling with the bat and is quite capable of being a 40 average player if he can learn to play spin a bit and stop throwing his wicket away. Lee is highly underrated by many people, and said people refuse to acknowledge the way he has changed as a player in the last 18 months. Two years ago, Lee had severe problems which stopped him from being effective at test level. He wasn't as shocking as some people made out, but he wasn't worth his place over other bowlers Australia have. He's certainly corrected some of those problems, particularly his ability to be consistently accurate and bowl lengthy spells without becoming ragged, but there are still a few questions to answer. I'm confident he's improved all-round enough to be a good test bowler, but only time will tell. Certainly an excellent start to his comeback... McGrath, Lee, Harmison and Warne have been all class with the ball all test. __________________ I know a place where a royal flush Can never beat a pair

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

24-07-2005, 01:58 AM	#4 (permalink)
King_Ponting International Regular Join Date: May 2005 Location: Western Australia Posts: 3,043	I believe he is still englands best player

24-07-2005, 04:37 AM	#6 (permalink)
simmy International Regular Join Date: Jul 2004 Location: Kent, England Posts: 3,039	Ive always thought that he is a little overrated with the bat... but with the ball he has been consistently bowling tight and wicket taking spells for England over the last 18 months or so. He will be back! Just a shame that he didnt bowl better on a pitch that would have offered him something. Lee is class... and is bowling a lot more accurately these days. He has never been below test standard (as bowling these days... especially outside this series seems to be on a decline) just that he wasnt good enough for a very strong Aus side.

24-07-2005, 04:50 AM	#9 (permalink)
sledger Spanish_Vicente Join Date: Aug 2004 Location: cricsim, lol Posts: 28,076	to be honest i wouldnt say there is anything wrong with flintoffs performace, he has bowled well, and his two dismissals were good balls, warnes was well disguised, and mcgraths was well placed and stayed low. I would say there are much greater concerns to be had over the likes of bell and even vaughn at the moment.

24-07-2005, 07:05 AM	#12 (permalink)
Pratters Banned Join Date: Jan 2004 Location: Kolkata, India Posts: 20,794	Its laughable regarding the comments on Lee on the forum by so many people. Do not rule out a new justification for what they said, meant or did not say

24-07-2005, 07:14 AM	#13 (permalink)
aussie Hall of Fame Member Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: Cricket Posts: 16,845	well i always felt that Freddie would have stuggled with the bat in this series while even though his bowling was on the expensive side in the second innings he is still englands best all-round bowler. Lee on the other hand before this series was consistently written (on this forum for sure) of about his ability to well in test matches, which was justifiable 2 years ago but even when he came back & bowled so superbly in the VB series & in NZ clearly showing improvements in every aspect of his game he was still written off. I was always defending him & few backed me u such as FaaipDeOaid (sean).But after his good bowling performance at lord's they should be convinced now.

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)