Simon Jones Over-rated?

[Complicated]

To his credit Simon Jones, had excellent figures in the 2005 Ashes series. He was also awarded Wisden Cricketer of the Year for 2006. In addition Simon did well to come back from a terrible knee injury in the earlier Ashes series. Despite these feats though, is it fair to say he is over-rated?

First point is Simon's ODI form, in 8 matches he has managed only 7 wickets at an average of 40. It's fair to say 8 matches is hardly enough to judge a player, however his first class form is actually worse. Here in 21 matches he has managed 16 wickets at over 50.

Simon's test form is better, but should his 2005 ashes heroics be removed he averages over 31, in line with his first class performances. Whilst these results are good, they don't really equate well to other members in the English team especially Flintoff and Harmison. They also seem very average by international standards.

The final point is that Simon has only played 18 test in an injury riddled career. On the face of it, he seems to inconsistently fit to be considered an integral part of any cricket team. Given the few matches he has played, he seems more a good bits and pieces player.

 

[andyc]

I only saw him during the Ashes, and then I got the feeling that he was going to take a wicket with every ball. Whenever he began another spell I started wondering which batsmen he'd get. So in my mind, no he's not over-rated.

 

[Smudge]

To his credit Simon Jones, had excellent figures in the 2005 Ashes series. He was also awarded Wisden Cricketer of the Year for 2006. In addition Simon did well to come back from a terrible knee injury in the earlier Ashes series. Despite these feats though, is it fair to say he is over-rated?

First point is Simon's ODI form, in 8 matches he has managed only 7 wickets at an average of 40. It's fair to say 8 matches is hardly enough to judge a player, however his first class form is actually worse. Here in 21 matches he has managed 16 wickets at over 50.

Simon's test form is better, but should his 2005 ashes heroics be removed he averages over 31, in line with his first class performances. Whilst these results are good, they don't really equate well to other members in the English team especially Flintoff and Harmison. They also seem very average by international standards.

The final point is that Simon has only played 18 test in an injury riddled career. On the face of it, he seems to inconsistently fit to be considered an integral part of any cricket team. Given the few matches he has played, he seems more a good bits and pieces player.

But why remove his Ashes heroics? Aside from twisting the stats to suit your argument...

His Ashes series shows that he can perform when it matters most - and that's good enough for me.

 

[Blaze]

Isn't he Welsh?

And no I don't think he is over rated.

 

[Jono]

Nah he's just unlucky.

 

[JASON]

I expect him to take several 5 wicket hauls against us in the Test series starting in 2 weeks.

 

[Francis]

The jury is a little out on Simon Jones. On another site (a non cricket web site that I talk cricket on for some reason) I called him the break-out star of 2005. He's somebody we all know can take reach amazing heights at his best now, the question is weather he can continue it.

In the Ashes he was the best bowled England had for a few games. His haul at Old Trafford annihilated Australia. He reminds me a bit of Waqar Yunis in the way he bowled.
When I heard he wans't playing the 5th test I felt this great power leaving England for some reason. Probably because England bowlers backed each other so much with their pressure that without Jones, the pressure would go away. And it did. Australia were in a fine position in the 5th test (though it really was heading for a draw) because they really let themselves down.

But you could argue he was England's best bowler in the Ashes and his strike-rate was absolutely amazing. So if he continues that he'll be one of the worlds best.

In teams you have key players... and Simon Jones is somebody who should be more recognised as a key player. When people asked me who the five best players in the Ashes were, I was the only one who put Jones third. He is a key player who holds the bowling together more than people recognise. And people underrating him are underrating England when they say "they're not as good as they were in the Ashes."

Jones not being in the team in a massive reason why England aren't performing at their best. If Jones comes back and doesn't play his best, England have trouble.

An interesting point many, most notedly, people like Murali have made is that the crowny ball used in England swing much better than the kookoburra (can't spell) balls used in India and Australia. Swing becomes such a science that's more complicated than people know. It'll be interesting to see if Simon can swing the ball in Australia.

 

[aussie]

well when Jones came back from injury in 2004 vs WI & all the hype he was getting, then after he really didn't perform that hot during 2004, i thought then he was. But after the ashes hell no, once he can stay fit he surely will be one of the best around

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

Simon Jones is a necessity in the world of cricket, especially English cricket. He bowled some breathtaking spells during last year's Ashes, and on the basis of that, people rate him as being capable of bowling breathtaking spells. How, therefore, can he be over-rated?

 

[tooextracool]

To his credit Simon Jones, had excellent figures in the 2005 Ashes series. He was also awarded Wisden Cricketer of the Year for 2006. In addition Simon did well to come back from a terrible knee injury in the earlier Ashes series. Despite these feats though, is it fair to say he is over-rated?

First point is Simon's ODI form, in 8 matches he has managed only 7 wickets at an average of 40. It's fair to say 8 matches is hardly enough to judge a player, however his first class form is actually worse. Here in 21 matches he has managed 16 wickets at over 50.

who actually rates simon jones in ODIs though? and very few can claim that he doesnt have the required skill in ODIs, hes simply not had the experience in both List A or international cricket to be able to perform.

Simon's test form is better, but should his 2005 ashes heroics be removed he averages over 31, in line with his first class performances. Whilst these results are good, they don't really equate well to other members in the English team especially Flintoff and Harmison. They also seem very average by international standards.

The final point is that Simon has only played 18 test in an injury riddled career. On the face of it, he seems to inconsistently fit to be considered an integral part of any cricket team. Given the few matches he has played, he seems more a good bits and pieces player.

Simon Jones is overrated i'll give you that. Of course it was amazing how underrated he was before the Ashes. In fact only a couple of members here(myself included) marked him as a clear threat for the Ashes series and the Aussies clearly made a serious mistake underestimating his ability because his improvements in the year or so before the series was remarkable and it was clear in the series against Bangladesh.
AFAIC, Simon Jones during the Ashes was as good as any fast bowler ive seen in recent times. His performances against SA may not have been phenomenal, but they were definetly noteworthy, and for the odd occasion that he was fully fit in the summer of 2004, he was a revelation.

 

[oz_fan]

Jones was devastating during the Ashes. He ran rampant through the Aussie middle order with reverse swing. When fully fit he is probably England's best fast bowler. He may not be as good as some rate him but he is still a quality fast bowler.

 

[Francis]

He bowled some breathtaking spells during last year's Ashes

yes! he destroyed their middle order in no time at old trafford

 

[honestbharani]

The jury is a little out on Simon Jones. On another site (a non cricket web site that I talk cricket on for some reason) I called him the break-out star of 2005. He's somebody we all know can take reach amazing heights at his best now, the question is weather he can continue it.

In the Ashes he was the best bowled England had for a few games. His haul at Old Trafford annihilated Australia. He reminds me a bit of Waqar Yunis in the way he bowled.
When I heard he wans't playing the 5th test I felt this great power leaving England for some reason. Probably because England bowlers backed each other so much with their pressure that without Jones, the pressure would go away. And it did. Australia were in a fine position in the 5th test (though it really was heading for a draw) because they really let themselves down.

But you could argue he was England's best bowler in the Ashes and his strike-rate was absolutely amazing. So if he continues that he'll be one of the worlds best.

In teams you have key players... and Simon Jones is somebody who should be more recognised as a key player. When people asked me who the five best players in the Ashes were, I was the only one who put Jones third. He is a key player who holds the bowling together more than people recognise. And people underrating him are underrating England when they say "they're not as good as they were in the Ashes."

Jones not being in the team in a massive reason why England aren't performing at their best. If Jones comes back and doesn't play his best, England have trouble.

An interesting point many, most notedly, people like Murali have made is that the crowny ball used in England swing much better than the kookoburra (can't spell) balls used in India and Australia. Swing becomes such a science that's more complicated than people know. It'll be interesting to see if Simon can swing the ball in Australia.

we don't use kookaburra balls in India in tests. Maybe from the next series, but not so far in recent years.

 

[honestbharani]

Simon Jones is a necessity in the world of cricket, especially English cricket. He bowled some breathtaking spells during last year's Ashes, and on the basis of that, people rate him as being capable of bowling breathtaking spells. How, therefore, can he be over-rated?

because he has done it in only one series so far?


I agree that Jones was really really good in the AShes and even I felt that he was a major star in the making, but the key word there is "in the making". There were still a couple of areas he could have improved on, I felt and then there was his fitness. Plus, it was one series in his home conditions. I would wait till he has played in a few more conditions before calling him "great" and "England would have won had he been there" and stuff. It is like saying Dhoni is a "Great" in ODIs based on his performances in the subcontinent.

 

[BoyBrumby]

I think TEC is pretty on the mark here. Jones may be a smidge overrated after blowing the Aussies away last year, which is entirley understandable what with them being the best team in the world with (at worst) one of the top 2 batting line-ups, but it's more remarkable that he was so underrated beforehand. I'll give myself a pat-on-the-back here for marking him down as our "dark horse" before The Ashes.

My big fear is that he will prove to be one of those great "coulda been" talents. He obviously has great ability to bowl fast with reverse, but I can't help but think his body may traduce him.

 

[GotSpin]

I only saw him during the Ashes, and then I got the feeling that he was going to take a wicket with every ball. Whenever he began another spell I started wondering which batsmen he'd get. So in my mind, no he's not over-rated.

I hate that feeling.

 

[Craig]

Simon Jones is a necessity in the world of cricket, especially English cricket. He bowled some breathtaking spells during last year's Ashes, and on the basis of that, people rate him as being capable of bowling breathtaking spells. How, therefore, can he be over-rated?

He had a great Test series but outside of that?

 

[age_master]

I only saw him during the Ashes, and then I got the feeling that he was going to take a wicket with every ball. Whenever he began another spell I started wondering which batsmen he'd get. So in my mind, no he's not over-rated.

same.

 

[Matt79]

His fitness and ability to replicate his 2005 form loom as one of the deciding factors in the next Ashes. i guess there he can prove he's not being overrated.

 

[luckyeddie]

The true strength of England's bowling attack last year (over the last 2 or 3 years really) was the fact that they kept coming at you all the time, searching for an opening. Once they prised the door open, they'd charge through. Four bowlers, all subtly different, whose styles complemented each other.

Jones was just an integral part of a well-oiled machine. When he was missing, the machine didn't work as well. Australia had a similar problem - first Gillespie fell apart, then McGrath broke.

England won the Ashes in 2005 because their machine worked longer and better than the Australian one did.