Best left arm seamer?

[Prince EWS]

Not that he'd get my vote for either form of the game at this stage, but I think Zaheer Khan has looked a completely different bowler since his reinstatement. He has really led the Indian pace attack and led it well recently IMO. Obviously a couple of series isn't a particularly good measure though so it'll be interesting to see how he goes.

Obviously though, it's Vaas for tests and Bracken for ODIs. I voted for Vaas on the basis that I always assume tests are being discussed unless specifally stated otherwise.

 

[Prince EWS]

Well... it "works" if someone makes it up. Statistics don't "work", they're just... there... if someone compiles them!

You could quite easily do such thing for bowlers (wouldn't be a first-chance average where they're concerned, though - more an all-chance bowling-average) and would IMO have some merit. If there's no difference as far as a batsman's concerned, there's certainly none for a bowler either.

But as for Munaf... No way. Munaf is a serious bowler, he's looked The Biz every time he's stepped onto a Test field (except, obviously, the half-fit-at-best most recent game, which was something of an embarrassment to all concerned - even Vikram Rajvir Singh would have been a far better choice). Bracken hasn't.

I haven't seen a lot of Munaf at all. As far as tests go, I've only seen him play in his injury-ridden state. So I'll give you that one.

I still think you're under-rating Bracken's improvement though.

 

[James90]

Vaas > Bracken > Johnson > Zaheer > Bradshaw > Pathan > Rasel.

 

[Richard]

I haven't seen a lot of Munaf at all. As far as tests go, I've only seen him play in his injury-ridden state. So I'll give you that one.

I still think you're under-rating Bracken's improvement though.

No, certainly not. I doubt the bowler of 2003\04 could have taken 7\5 in any game at all.

But I'm certainly still not convinced about his Test credentials, though it's quite possible he might get another chance. But if that's ahead of Gillespie, it's criminal.

 

[Richard]

Vaas > Bracken > Johnson > Zaheer > Bradshaw > Pathan > Rasel.

In what form of the game?

Surely not ODIs.

In ODIs Bradshaw is certainly far > Johnson & Zaheer.

 

[Prince EWS]

In what form of the game?

Surely not ODIs.

In ODIs Bradshaw is certainly far > Johnson & Zaheer.

I think he's doing an overall version - amalgamating the two forms of the game in his head and creating an average rating for each bowler, then ranking them.

 

[Fiery]

I think he's doing an overall version - amalgamating the two forms of the game in his head and creating an average rating for each bowler, then ranking them.

Telepathic Prince?

 

[NZTailender]

If we can get the crystal ball out, perhaps.

Will Bracken have a future in tests (i.e. string together 20 tests in a row)?

Will Syed Rasel become a 'must pick' for Bangladesh second only to Mortaza in their seamer ranks?

Will Irfan Pathan live up to his potential that everyone talks about?

Could Franklin be more successful than Vaas in tests?

Mitchel Johnson - once in a lifetime bowler or overhyped quick?

 

[Prince EWS]

Telepathic Prince?

Indeed.

Either that, or I just guessed at the most likely cause of the outcome. If I did that though, I probably would have started my sentence with "I think" though. Oh wait...

 

[Fiery]

Indeed.

Either that, or I just guessed at the most likely cause of the outcome. If I did that though, I probably would have started my sentence with "I think" though. Oh wait...

haha, I'm just messing with ya mate. It's fun...I like our little chats

 

[Prince EWS]

Will Bracken have a future in tests (i.e. string together 20 tests in a row)?

I doubt it. He's handy backup but I don't think he'll get an extended run unless something seriously goes run in the development of Johnson, Tait and Hilfenhaus.

Will Syed Rasel become a 'must pick' for Bangladesh second only to Mortaza in their seamer ranks?

I doubt it. It's possibly if he develops physically as he gets older, but he is just too toothless for mine at this stage.

Will Irfan Pathan live up to his potential that everyone talks about?

Again I highly doubt it. He's certainly a bit over-rated. I think he'll force his way back into the test and ODI sides regularly (on merit, rather than the "on potential" selection he is atm) as an allrounder, but I don't think he'll do what many were predicting of him.

Could Franklin be more successful than Vaas in tests?

Strictly on bowling, I highly doubt it. He isn't anywhere near accurate enough, even though I'm quite a fan. His batting is coming along well too, though, so if you class both as allrounders, Franklin could well end up being more successful.

Mitchel Johnson - once in a lifetime bowler or overhyped quick?

Anyone who seriously thinks he's a once in a lifetime bowler is kidding themselves. He's a tad overhyped but I still think he'll have a good test and ODI career.

 

[Richard]

I think he's doing an overall version - amalgamating the two forms of the game in his head and creating an average rating for each bowler, then ranking them.

Tests =! ODIs!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Gaahh, you can't amalgamate them, they're different! There's no point doing an overall rating.

 

[Richard]

I doubt it. He's handy backup but I don't think he'll get an extended run unless something seriously goes run in the development of Johnson, Tait and Hilfenhaus.

Guessing you mean "wrong" not "run": such a thing certainly isn't impossible.

 

[Fiery]

Tests =! ODIs!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Gaahh, you can't amalgamate them, they're different! There's no point doing an overall rating.

It's all cricket Richard. When I think about how good a cricketer is I take into account both of forms of the game. It's normal to do that.

 

[Prince EWS]

Tests =! ODIs!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Gaahh, you can't amalgamate them, they're different! There's no point doing an overall rating.

Haha, I'm not saying I agree what he did - I'm just having a guess at what he did do.

Even if you are right, which in this case I believe you are, you can't assume that everyone agrees with you...

Unless you only asked the question to induce the answer I gave and then post the above without giving him an opportunity to say he meant one form over the other after you had posted it.. in which, mission accomplished.

 

[Richard]

It's all cricket Richard. When I think about how good a cricketer is I take into account both of forms of the game. It's normal to do that.

It's silly IMO. The two things are different, and there's no point trying to rate someone at a combination of them.

Would be the same if someone played both Union and League rugby and someone tried to rate them as a combination.

 

[Prince EWS]

It's silly IMO. The two things are different, and there's no point trying to rate someone at a combination of them.

Would be the same if someone played both Union and League rugby and someone tried to rate them as a combination.

I frequent rugby league forums and people have tried to do that.

Nice comparison though - I've used it myself before on cricket sections of rugby league forums (yes, I know, strange..).

 

[Fiery]

It's silly IMO. The two things are different, and there's no point trying to rate someone at a combination of them.

Would be the same if someone played both Union and League rugby and someone tried to rate them as a combination.

Union and league are different codes. ODI and tests are different formats of the same code

 

[Smudge]

Union and league are different codes. ODI and tests are different formats of the same code

Twenty20, ODIs and tests are all different sports.[/Richard]

 

[Fiery]

Twenty20, ODIs and tests are all different sports.[/Richard]

I see. Thanks for clarifying that Richard