Page 2 of 18 FirstFirst 123412 ... LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 257

Thread: James Anderson

  1. #16
    Cricket Web: All-Time Legend Perm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Clutha Valley, New Zealand
    Posts
    21,816
    James Anderson has a lot of potential in the ODI arena but I don't think he will get too many chances as a regular in the Test side, not if England have all their bowlers fully firing and fit. Simon Jones, Matthew Hoggard, Steve Harmison and Andrew Flintoff are all pretty much assured of their bowling spots and I seriously doubt whether the selectors would drop a quality spinner like Monty Panesar.
    The Future of International Cricket - Rohit Sharma, Suresh Raina, Ravi Bopara, Tim Southee, Ross Taylor, Shahriar Nafees, Raqibul Hasan, Salman Butt, JP Duminy
    Proud Supporter of the Bangladeshi Tigers
    Ryan ten Doeschate - A Legend in the Making
    MSN: zacattack90@hotmail.com

    Quote Originally Posted by Richard View Post
    Romance can be dealt with elsewhere - I just don't enjoy it in cricket.

  2. #17
    Cricket Web Staff Member Richard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    2005
    Posts
    80,401
    I doubt they'd drop an un-quality seamer like Harmison, either, TBH.
    RD
    Appreciating cricket's greatest legend ever - HD Bird...............Funniest post (intentionally) ever.....Runner-up.....Third.....Fourth
    (Accidental) founder of Twenty20 Is Boring Society. Click and post to sign-up.
    chris.hinton: h
    FRAZ: Arshad's are a long gone stories
    RIP Fardin Qayyumi (AKA "cricket player"; "Bob"), 1/11/1990-15/4/2006

  3. #18
    Cricket Web: All-Time Legend Perm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Clutha Valley, New Zealand
    Posts
    21,816
    Well, not if he still has some quality left inside him.

  4. #19
    Hall of Fame Member steds's Avatar
    Breakout Champion!
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    ****ing cold and ****ing wet
    Posts
    17,201
    Quote Originally Posted by Perm View Post
    I seriously doubt whether the selectors would drop a quality spinner like Monty Panesar.
    Yes. Because the selectors have been oh so faithful to old Monty before.


  5. #20
    Cricket Web: All-Time Legend Perm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Clutha Valley, New Zealand
    Posts
    21,816
    Well, now that he has basically established himself as England's top choice ODI spinner and showed the selectors his worth when selected for those last three test's I think it's a lot more likely he will be retained for England's next test series.

  6. #21
    State Captain Nishant's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    london
    Posts
    1,722
    Quote Originally Posted by Richard View Post
    I doubt they'd drop an un-quality seamer like Harmison, either, TBH.


    thats actually true and quite concerning TBH! Even if he has a bit of quality in him...i still think that Hramion should be england's past now...surely there are better bowlers than him! I would at least try anderson b4 harmison!

  7. #22
    Cricket Web: All-Time Legend Perm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Clutha Valley, New Zealand
    Posts
    21,816
    I'm not too sure that Anderson should be tried over Harmison in the Test arena, we all know what Harmison is capable of and he has delivered in the past so the selectors must have a little bit of faith in him. James Anderson is still relatively unproven at Test level and should remain as the first choice backup for any of the seamers, atleast until he starts taking wickets regularly for Lancashire or until one of the established bowlers loses form and the selectors confidence.

  8. #23
    Cricket Web Staff Member Richard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    2005
    Posts
    80,401
    Well, yeah - but that past was 3 years ago now!

  9. #24
    Cricket Web Staff Member Richard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    2005
    Posts
    80,401
    Quote Originally Posted by steds View Post
    Yes. Because the selectors have been oh so faithful to old Monty before.
    Links corrected, BTW.

    I honestly can't see another spinner being picked ahead of Panesar in the immidiate future.

  10. #25
    U19 Vice-Captain Gloucefan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Bristol
    Posts
    595
    Quote Originally Posted by Richard View Post
    Well, yeah - but that past was 3 years ago now!
    Exactly you can't pick him based on the fact he runs through a team on his own every two years on a pitch that suits him. When he's potent he is deadly but that is very rare.

  11. #26
    Cricket Web: All-Time Legend Perm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Clutha Valley, New Zealand
    Posts
    21,816
    While he was disappointing during the Ashes, I don't have a problem with Harmison being selected if he is picking up 2 or 3 wickets in most innings and then occasionally, when the pitch and conditions suit he will be able to run through a side. However, if he isn't taking wickets then get rid of him for a while. Still, I don't feel that it is fair to toss him aside if he is picking up wickets with some sort of regularity.

  12. #27
    Cricket Web Staff Member Richard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    2005
    Posts
    80,401
    But he's not.

    Here are Harmison's match-figures for the past 28 Tests for England (Bangladesh games excluded):
    42-150-2 - abysmal
    19-93-1 - abysmal
    37-134-2 followed by a few end-of-innings wickets to get 2.4-3-3 - poor in my book
    31-121-9 - good figures (didn't actually bowl particularly well, but we'll leave that for there)
    39-142-1 - abysmal
    47-153-5 - decent enough
    45-137-1 (and should've been 0 - that 1 came just before the declaration) - abysmal
    26.5-89-0 - abysmal
    33-138-2 (and again should've been 0 - those 2 came just before the declaration) - abysmal
    39-97-8 - good figures (but most wickets were end-of-innings - just 2 top-order batsmen who weren't batting with the tail)
    28.3-110-2 - abysmal (and even then it should have been just the 1 wicket)
    32-114-2 - exactly as above
    39-141-4 - poor (and was still extremely flatted - 2 wickets were tailenders, the other 2 poor decisions)
    22.4-87-1 - abysmal
    36.1-89-6 - looks good, but was actually no more than OK, and didn't really bowl that well
    43.4-146-5 - looks OK, but again didn't really bowl that well
    43-154-1 - abysmal
    44.2-123-3 - abysmal (again, massively flattered by the figures, 2 of those wickets came when the bat was being thrown)
    32-70-2 - actually reasonable enough
    44.3-137-4 - not too bad
    31.1-76-11 - excellent figures, but mostly just poor batting if you look at the wickets
    45-204-1 - absolutely bloody dreadful
    30.5-125-4 - loooks OK, but in truth was just a load of end-of-innings wickets... again
    42.1-177-1 - abysmal
    29-111-0 - abysmal
    43-164-5 - boosted by 2 tailend first-innings wickets, very poor in reality
    28-69-2 - not great
    28-93-2 - very poor

    So you see? Harmison has very, very rarely been effective since that short purple patch in March, April, May and June 2004, and given that the times he has have mostly been due to bad batting, there's no way of guessing when the next one will be.

  13. #28
    Cricket Web: All-Time Legend Perm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Clutha Valley, New Zealand
    Posts
    21,816
    To be fair, I wouldn't care how he was getting wickets aslong as he was actually taking them (not just tailenders mind you), it's a bit the same as someone scoring runs but not actually looking comfortable whilst doing so. It's what is in the paper on Monday morning that counts.

    But you are right, he has been very poor since destroying the West Indies. Mind you, I'm always of the opinion that for the start of a new season you should field what appears to be your stongest team and stick with the incumbents, give them a chance to perform and if they are bad then replace them. It's probably just a personal preference, but if England had a Test series directly after the Ashes then I wouldn't have played Harmison. But given that their next series is a little way in the future, I would have him in my starting XI unless Anderson does something to prove his value.

  14. #29
    Cricket Web Staff Member Richard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    2005
    Posts
    80,401
    I'd guess most people will feel the same way - time lends disperspective and all that.

    It will be interesting, though, if Anderson starts the season well (though obviously there isn't going to be that much chance for him to play with the WC running so crazily deep into the season).

    As to how the wickets are taken - it's completely different to looking uncomfortable and scoring runs IMO - because as I say, if a bowler only takes wickets when the batting's bad there's no predictability to it, it's just completely random. It can and does go without happening for 5 and 6 games in a row.

  15. #30
    FBU
    FBU is offline
    State Vice-Captain FBU's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    London
    Posts
    1,107
    Anderson's place in the ODI side should be nailed down and he should get better as he is only 24. They should also decide very quickly who his opening partner is and stick with him. I see three contenders - Lewis, Plunkett and Broad. Once that is settled and the bowlers learn to bowl together as a unit we can progress. At the moment it is one bad game and try someone else. We have had Gough, Johnson, Harmison, Hoggard, Ali, Lewis, Jones, Chapple, Plunkett, Broad, Flintoff, Anderson and Mahmood opening the bowling. I would like to see Anderson, Lewis and Plunkett all bowling. No wonder we have trouble bowling sides out with just Anderson, whoever and Flintoff. Australia have McGrath, Bracken, Tait and Watson as their fast bowlers. South Africa have Pollock, Ntini, Langeveldt and Hall as theirs. New Zealand Bond, Franklin, Gillespie and Oram.

    Anderson should carry on playing county cricket until there is an injury in the opening bowling department. When he has opened in 10 Tests he has taken 35 wickets and as first change 6 Tests 11 wickets.

    I see the replacements in Test cricket, if there is injury or loss of form -

    1. Harmison - Broad - Tremlett,
    2. Hoggard - Anderson - Lewis - Kirtley
    3. Jones - Plunkett - Mahmood - Onions

    Kirtley and Onions are in the A team so I guess they have to be considered but some other names could come into contention Shreck, Silverwood, Sidebottom etc. The ECB identify players and invest in them and usually stick with them.

    I don't think Anderson bowled very well in the last game. I think the bowlers were unhappy they didn't get the best conditions. So trying to get the ball to swing and reverse swing (when there wasn't any) showed up with the wides and Vaughan kept telling the bowlers what to bowl. He is naturally a full length bowler and banging it in half way down is a waste for time. Heavy strapping on his finger can't have helped either. Mahmood was bowling well and economically and Vaughan has a chat and the runs started coming. Hussain had a habit of telling the bowlers what to bowl and now Vaughan is starting it. Bowlers are picked because they take wickets and should be left to read what the batsmen are up to and use their own brains.

Page 2 of 18 FirstFirst 123412 ... LastLast


Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Simon Jones or James Anderson?
    By sledger in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 266
    Last Post: 13-06-2008, 03:12 AM
  2. Battle of CW members II
    By Pratters in forum Off Topic
    Replies: 2881
    Last Post: 27-11-2006, 07:54 PM
  3. Surrey 2002: A Cricket Captain Diary
    By SIX AND OUT in forum General
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 17-02-2005, 08:25 AM
  4. Is it time James Anderson is dropped?
    By Craig in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 53
    Last Post: 17-09-2003, 05:15 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •