Your views on...

[cover drive man]

Monty Panesar

 

[GIMH]

Where's the option in between "a great" and "there are better spinners for England" because that would be my choice

 

[Richard]

An excellent fingerspinner. Simple as. No more, no less. No superman, and no wristspinner.

Performs very well within his own limitations.

 

[archie mac]

A good player, and has improved his batting and fielding, could well turn into the best finger spinner in the world

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

A good player, and has improved his batting and fielding, could well turn into the best finger spinner in the world

Not a great deal of genuine competition, mind.

I pretty much agree with Richard. More than his ability though, he brings such passion and heart to the game. Every team needs a Monty Panesar in that regard.

 

[nightprowler10]

Not a great deal of genuine competition, mind.

No great competition to become the best finger spinner in the world?

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

No great competition to become the best finger spinner in the world?

Murali is hardly a fingerspinner. He uses his wrist far too much for that.

 

[nightprowler10]

Murali is hardly a fingerspinner. He uses his wrist far too much for that.

Last I checked he was classed as a finger spinner, but yeah I see your reasoning.

 

[Goughy]

None of the poll options really seem to fit.

Anyway, Monty is a bit of a tweener but that may be to his advantage.

He is somewhere between the flat grinders of Giles and Boje and the artists such as Tufnell and Raju. That may mean he is more balanced and will have a good career but only time will tell.

The problem with Monty is that it is hard to seperate and analyse his bowling when all the other stuff like the goofy celebrations and the terrible fielding and cult personality plays such a big role in defining him as a cricketer.

He has certainly done little wrong with the ball so far and looks to have at least a decent career ahead of him.

My only issue (as Ive said before) with his bowling is that he gets cut far too often for a LA spinner. His line is pretty good but his length to a little too variable to be classed as top bracket just yet.

 

[Richard]

Last I checked he was classed as a finger spinner, but yeah I see your reasoning.

Haha, who on Earth classed Murali a fingerspinner? Think there was a CW poll on the matter not so long ago (can't remember who was responsible) and there was far more on here who consider him a wristspinner than finger. And personally, I don't understand why on Earth anyone would call him a fingerspinner any more than they would Stuart MacGill.

 

[Richard]

More than his ability though, he brings such passion and heart to the game. Every team needs a Monty Panesar in that regard.

That too. You couldn't wish for a more enthusiastic cricketer, really. And that, far more than his (and that only of times) comic fielding, is why he's so well-loved.

 

[cover drive man]

Where's the option in between "a great" and "there are better spinners for England" because that would be my choice

Probably decent.

 

[Perm]

Very good finger spinner.

 

[headhunter]

a great spinner the best test bowler england have at the the moment the seamers just cant seem to take the preasure. possibility to become a great wicket taker since umpires are giving more lbw's.

 

[GIMH]

Haha, who on Earth classed Murali a fingerspinner? Think there was a CW poll on the matter not so long ago (can't remember who was responsible) and there was far more on here who consider him a wristspinner than finger. And personally, I don't understand why on Earth anyone would call him a fingerspinner any more than they would Stuart MacGill.

It was me, because the debate has been done in plenty of threads. Thought it was worth having a specific thread on it. Wasn't hugely successful tbh

 

[grecian]

Yeah, Despite my raving about him, I'm still not sure. It can go either way for me. It certainly would be nice to see a spinner who could bat, if he's not going to be another Murali, Warne. This is why everyone's looking at Rashid. Really hope they keep with Monty for at least a year, Adil needs cricket before he can be considered.

I do think his batting and fielding is less of a detriment atm, then when he started, I do think the contact-lenses he's had put in, has improved that. On the last test match, Harmison was much more of a liability in the field.

Tomorrows match should be very interesting for him, as I'm sure the Windies will not play behind the pad as much, so you hope that bat-pad will come into the equation. I think his biggest attribute, is not so much turn as bounce, the Lords pitch really didn't suit his bowling at all, imho.

Does give away too many four-balls, but hopefully he can improve on that.

Don't really know which option to choose, tbh.

 

[Richard]

It was me, because the debate has been done in plenty of threads. Thought it was worth having a specific thread on it. Wasn't hugely successful tbh

I thought it might have been you, indeed was about to post "think GIMH did a poll not so long ago" but then realised I wasn't quite sure.

 

[shortpitched713]

I went for the first option although I really think he will get his chances now.

 

[Langeveldt]

A good player who does get enough chances?

 

[cover drive man]

I went for the first option although I really think he will get his chances now.

I feel that Monty is denied things such as overs and apperances possibly because of something social. I know it sounds stupid but it is not impossible.