Appreciating cricket's greatest legend ever - HD Bird...............Funniest post (intentionally) ever.....Runner-up.....Third.....Fourthcricket player"; "Bob"), 1/11/1990-15/4/2006
(Accidental) founder of Twenty20 Is Boring Society. Click and post to sign-up.
Pretty poor international bowler, but at least he was better than Croft,Batty, Dawson and co.
I must say i never realised his domestic stats are as good as they are before this thread.
It has been much publicised that this was the reason for his selection in the 2006-07 Ashes series (and although anyone who saw the tour matches will actually tell you otherwise - ie. how Panesar was looking completely innocuous and how Giles was actually bowling quite well - I'll concede it as a truth for the sake of argument), but how often other than that was it true? AFAIK, he was selected, for the most part anyway, because he was England's best spinner at the time. He was never consistently outperformed by any spinners in English first class cricket during his test career to my knowledge, and those who called for his head generally wanted another batsman or another fast bowler to take his place.
Secondly, this business of "bowlers picked for their batting" became a neccessary evil the day Alec Stewart retired. England locked themselves into picking a batsman - that is, someone selected in a specialist batsman's position - for his bowling: Andrew Flintoff. Flintoff has never in his test career ever been a justified selection in the England test team on his batting alone, so if England were to persist with him batting 6, a counter-balancing player at 8 was required. All the talk of Giles balancing the side all those years wasn't just a Fletcheristic idea focused on multi-skilled players - it was simply common sense once England had decided to pick only 5 batsmen.
I was never a fan of Giles, but his role in balancing the side was often a key one, and the quality of his bowling has been far-too-often played down simply because he can bat a bit.
Rejecting 'analysis by checklist' and 'skill absolutism' since Dec '09
Giles was a very useful spinner.......N' he was da best in England..in his time......he dun well for England .. cos we dint had any other quality spinner......N' stats dun shows everything.....he has performed wen it matters.......he was fantastic in d Ashes2005 .. most glorious series for England...And boy he skored a pretty gud half-century...2 save da last Test too...
shame he retired even though it was ludicris to pik him ahead of monty down under he was a solid performer for england through a vital perios which saw us climb from bottom of test rankings to 2nd in the world and without him we would never have toppled the aussies. he gave his all and before his hip mangled id say he was on a par with monty. its just that the people like monty more. i think the king of spain very good for england
ENGLAND CB SERIES CHAMPS FUTURE WORLD CUP CHAMPS(2011) AND IN 2009 THE ASHES HOLDERS
the official England 'patriotic cheerleader'
Proud supporter of the England national cricket, football and rugby teams and of TOTTENHAM HOTSPUR FOOTBALL CLUBS
come on CW BLUE
With 31 wickets, was England's second-leading wicket taker in home Tests as recently as 2004, not to mention the 17 he took in three Tests in Pakistan on his first tour.
Damn straight, and if my memory serves me correctly his FC stats were even better for a lot of his carear (bowling average of around 26-27 up until last 3 years).
Compare his stats to those of the other spinners seriously challenging for a spot throughout his carear - Jason Brown (bat 7.09, ball 32.7), Robert Croft (bat 26.4, ball 36.3), Dawson (bat 21.1, ball 42), Keedy (bat 10.9, ball 30.9), Batty (bat 26.6, ball 32.4).
You get the picture he was not only the best batsman out of the candidates and offered the most at number 8, but he was also simply the best bowler.
His international figures may not be the best but he was never an easy bowler to face, he was very thoughtful with his field settings and variations and his height meant sweeping and playing confidently forward were never easy, he very rarely produced the jaffas Warne or Murali could and therefore didnt take a huge bag of wickets but on plenty of occasions he did his job, and given a turner he could be very potent.
Don't care what his FC stats were. Don't care if he serviced his purpose in the NT and balanced out the side. He still was one of the worst spinners to play Test Cricket in the last decade. Yeah they maybe have been worse spinners in England, but the point is he was one of worst spinners to play Test Cricket. He failed more often then he succeed and if it was for his batting the poor selection of England selectors to pick a bowler at number 6, he would have never got so many games. His crap which ever way sugar coat his performance. But oh his got a good FC record, he did well on turning pitches, he balanced a side, he got asked to bowl defensive. Simple put he was crap nothing more, nothing less.
The man, the mountain, the Mathews. The greatest all rounder since Keith Miller. (Y)
Jaffna Jets CC (Battrick & FTP)
RIP WCC and CW Cricket
Member of the MSC, JMAS and CVAAS
No, he was no more crap than any number of other bowlers. It's just most fingerspinners don't play so often when the conditions don't suit them.
If Giles had only played when a fingerspinner should have played (ie, not on pitches which patently obviously didn't suit spin) his record would be considerably better and he'd not get this "worst to do blah-blah" rubbish he does.
Yes, he was good enough for international cricket on turning pitches, and he proved that many times.
How come Panesar has been effective on those pitches? He hasn't. Panesar has failed on pitches that don't turn many times (and also succeeded when West Indies decided to miss a load of straight balls). He's also succeeded on turners.
There's nothing Panesar has done in his career to date that Giles hasn't. Only difference is Panesar has played on turning pitches plenty so far.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)