Supposed lack of quality bowling-do you lot think its starting to come right now?

[Flem274*]

Asking this because we've had some young new exciting bowlers come through like Sharma and Southee and some previously middle range bowlers like Lee are improving, heck even Chris Martin has gotten better. Malinga of course is always exciting to watch and is developing as a bowler quite nicely. There are others as well but to all those (Richard as the most memorable example) who say there is a lack of good bowlers what do you guys think of the promise shown in the last year or two?

 

[NUFAN]

Yeah the bowling is going well at the moment which is great and was always going to happen.

Dale Steyn and Mitchell Johnson could be added to your list also.

 

[Debris]

I think there is a lack of quality in the spinners coming through. I can't think of any quality spinners who have started playing international cricket in the last 4 or 5 years.

Would love to be proved wrong though

 

[silentstriker]

I think there is a lack of quality in the spinners coming through. I can't think of any quality spinners who have started playing international cricket in the last 4 or 5 years.

Would love to be proved wrong though

Paul Harris is one. Though most sides play only one spinner the vast majority of the time, so you'll naturally have less spinners making their debut than other types of bowlers.

 

[Richard]

I think there is a lack of quality in the spinners coming through.

Well of course there is. There's been a lack of quality spinners coming through since, well, since pitches were covered in this country really, and spin became something that was no longer terribly viable over here.

Since 1970, there've only been a very small handful of quality spinners debut, 3 of whom appeared around about the same time, in Murali, Warne and Kumble.

 

[Richard]

Asking this because we've had some young new exciting bowlers come through like Sharma and Southee and some previously middle range bowlers like Lee are improving, heck even Chris Martin has gotten better. Malinga of course is always exciting to watch and is developing as a bowler quite nicely. There are others as well but to all those (Richard as the most memorable example) who say there is a lack of good bowlers what do you guys think of the promise shown in the last year or two?

As to the seamers, there's no doubt that in the last 2 seasons we've had something of an upturn in things, though naturally there's still much mediocrity and too many unresponsive surfaces.

Towards the end of 2005\06 Asif, the most promising bowler since Allan Donald IMO, emerged; we had Clark at about the same time too; Steyn had a 2nd go and looked the goods as he emphatically had not done in his 1st; Sidebottom, well, almost certainly not in that class, but his re-appearance was welcome. In Steyn and Sidebottom's case, they also benefited from the calibre of pitches and balls improving; in South Africa in 2006\07 and England in 2007, we had more seaming surfaces than I can remember since 2000\01 or 2001, and the balls really swung last summer here for the first time since 2000.

So there's promising signs, and now this Australian summer we have Lee and to an extent Sharma, much as I remain to be convinced about either. Laaasith Maaalinga too has never quite suggested to me that he's the sort of bowler who can have a long, prosperous career but he's certainly a far better bet to do so than some of the dross we've seen since 2001\02. Heck, there's even Kyle Mills, never mind Chris Martin.

Then of course there's the likes of Franklin, Hoggard and Vaas, workmanlike bowlers who've slogged their way through the hard times, doing not doing extraordinarily well but certainly more than respectibly, in their vaastly contrasting ways. Until recently there was Pollock, in the same sort of class since 2001\02. And Gillespie too, until less recently.

In the last 6-and-a-half years, there were really just 2 seam-bowlers of the highest class: McGrath and, when fit, Shoaib Akhtar. Hopefully that might soon change; a return to the glory days of the 1990s would be expecting a bit much, as that decade was almost certainly the strongest for bowling in history; but maybe something more akin to most of the rest of the game's history might be around the corner.

 

[Debris]

Paul Harris is one. Though most sides play only one spinner the vast majority of the time, so you'll naturally have less spinners making their debut than other types of bowlers.

I always think of a quality bowler as one who can win a test match for you. I have not seen a lot of Harris. Do you think he could win test matches for SA?

There are a lot of "honest operators" out there. Bowlers who fill a role but you don't really expect much of.

 

[Debris]

As to the seamers, there's no doubt that in the last 2 seasons we've had something of an upturn in things, though naturally there's still much mediocrity and too many unresponsive surfaces.

Towards the end of 2005\06 Asif, the most promising bowler since Allan Donald IMO, emerged; we had Clark at about the same time too; Steyn had a 2nd go and looked the goods as he emphatically had not done in his 1st; Sidebottom, well, almost certainly not in that class, but his re-appearance was welcome. In Steyn and Sidebottom's case, they also benefited from the calibre of pitches and balls improving; in South Africa in 2006\07 and England in 2007, we had more seaming surfaces than I can remember since 2000\01 or 2001, and the balls really swung last summer here for the first time since 2000.

So there's promising signs, and now this Australian summer we have Lee and to an extent Sharma, much as I remain to be convinced about either. Laaasith Maaalinga too has never quite suggested to me that he's the sort of bowler who can have a long, prosperous career but he's certainly a far better bet to do so than some of the dross we've seen since 2001\02. Heck, there's even Kyle Mills, never mind Chris Martin.

Then of course there's the likes of Franklin, Hoggard and Vaas, workmanlike bowlers who've slogged their way through the hard times, doing not doing extraordinarily well but certainly more than respectibly, in their vaastly contrasting ways. Until recently there was Pollock, in the same sort of class since 2001\02. And Gillespie too, until less recently.

In the last 6-and-a-half years, there were really just 2 seam-bowlers of the highest class: McGrath and, when fit, Shoaib Akhtar. Hopefully that might soon change; a return to the glory days of the 1990s would be expecting a bit much, as that decade was almost certainly the strongest for bowling in history; but maybe something more akin to most of the rest of the game's history might be around the corner.

The 70s might give it a run.

 

[Richard]

I always think of a quality bowler as one who can win a test match for you. I have not seen a lot of Harris. Do you think he could win test matches for SA?

There are a lot of "honest operators" out there. Bowlers who fill a role but you don't really expect much of.

Harris undoubtedly can win matches (or make substantial contributions to winning them rather) on turning surfaces, and indeed has already hinted at such.

But neither he nor any fingerspinner will ever be able to win matches on non-turning surfaces, and turning surfaces are not that common any more, and haven't been for nearly 4 decades (even longer in some countries) now.

A few other fingerspinners going around currently who will (or should) do juuuust fine on a turning pitch include MS Panesar, Daniel Vettori and Harbhajan Singh, though Harbhajan has been poor more than once of late.

The only spinner you expect to dominate everywhere at the current time is Murali. And Kumble offers more than the three named above, but nowhere near as much as Murali. Neither of them can be expected to play for that much longer, either.

 

[Debris]

As to the seamers, there's no doubt that in the last 2 seasons we've had something of an upturn in things, though naturally there's still much mediocrity and too many unresponsive surfaces.

Towards the end of 2005\06 Asif, the most promising bowler since Allan Donald IMO, emerged; we had Clark at about the same time too; Steyn had a 2nd go and looked the goods as he emphatically had not done in his 1st; Sidebottom, well, almost certainly not in that class, but his re-appearance was welcome. In Steyn and Sidebottom's case, they also benefited from the calibre of pitches and balls improving; in South Africa in 2006\07 and England in 2007, we had more seaming surfaces than I can remember since 2000\01 or 2001, and the balls really swung last summer here for the first time since 2000.

So there's promising signs, and now this Australian summer we have Lee and to an extent Sharma, much as I remain to be convinced about either. Laaasith Maaalinga too has never quite suggested to me that he's the sort of bowler who can have a long, prosperous career but he's certainly a far better bet to do so than some of the dross we've seen since 2001\02. Heck, there's even Kyle Mills, never mind Chris Martin.

Then of course there's the likes of Franklin, Hoggard and Vaas, workmanlike bowlers who've slogged their way through the hard times, doing not doing extraordinarily well but certainly more than respectibly, in their vaastly contrasting ways. Until recently there was Pollock, in the same sort of class since 2001\02. And Gillespie too, until less recently.

In the last 6-and-a-half years, there were really just 2 seam-bowlers of the highest class: McGrath and, when fit, Shoaib Akhtar. Hopefully that might soon change; a return to the glory days of the 1990s would be expecting a bit much, as that decade was almost certainly the strongest for bowling in history; but maybe something more akin to most of the rest of the game's history might be around the corner.

Well of course there is. There's been a lack of quality spinners coming through since, well, since pitches were covered in this country really, and spin became something that was no longer terribly viable over here.

Since 1970, there've only been a very small handful of quality spinners debut, 3 of whom appeared around about the same time, in Murali, Warne and Kumble.

An interesting point. Do you think that spinners are more dependant on favourable conditions than seamers? You still get the occasional dust-bowl for a spinner but I can't remember the last time I saw a green seamer for the pacemen.

 

[Richard]

The 70s might give it a run.

Not really. A comfortable second, undoubtedly (at least, the second half of it; don't even mention the first, as that was not that much better than the 2001\02-2005\06 period) but not in the class of the 1990s, if only because there were less teams playing.

 

[Richard]

An interesting point. Do you think that spinners are more dependant on favourable conditions than seamers? You still get the occasional dust-bowl for a spinner but I can't remember the last time I saw a green seamer for the pacemen.

Fingerspinners, beyond question to my mind, are totally dependent on conditions. Wristspinners aren't, but quality wristspin has always been exceptionally rare because the style is so hard to bowl with the requistite control.

No fingerspinner has ever been able to make a high-class career without consistently encountering turning pitches. That's why the best ones were English pre-1970 (Underwood, Laker, Verity, Rhodes the creme-de-la-creme) or from the subcontinent (the Bedi-Prasanna-Venkat triumvarate; Iqbal Qasim). There were a couple of Australians who bowled fingerspin in addition to seam (Bert Ironmonger and Bill Johnston) but otherwise Australia has always been about wristspin, and more than ever since the 1950s when they started covering their pitches; South Africa have only ever had 1 fingerspinner of note, Hugh Tayfield, in the 1950s when I presume their wickets were still uncovered; West Indies had 2 in the 1950s and 1960s when likewise I presume theirs were, in Valentine then Gibbs; and New Zealand have never had any spinners of much note, be they wrist or finger. Sri Lanka have never had any fingerspinners of much note, though that might change when Murali leaves.

Of course, there are also hundreds of seam-bowlers who are dependent on green surfaces to be dangerous. But there are far more top-class seamers, capable of prevailing on all surfaces due to possession of other weapons besides seam and conventional-swing, than there are wristspinners. Even such a seam-bowler, though, is relatively rare.

Mostly, bowlers need something in the pitch to be effective. That's why a non-seam\spin-friendly surface is such a bad thing, really. I only ever like to see them about once a series.

 

[Debris]

Harris undoubtedly can win matches (or make substantial contributions to winning them rather) on turning surfaces, and indeed has already hinted at such.

But neither he nor any fingerspinner will ever be able to win matches on non-turning surfaces, and turning surfaces are not that common any more, and haven't been for nearly 4 decades (even longer in some countries) now.

A couple of other fingerspinners going around currently who will (or should) do juuuust fine on a turning pitch include MS Panesar and Harbhajan Singh, though Harbhajan has been poor more than once of late.

The only spinner you expect to dominate everywhere at the current time is Murali. And Kumble offers more than the three named above, but nowhere near as much as Murali. Neither of them can be expected to play for that much longer, either.

That's all I ask of a spinner is that he can win a match on a turner. Looking forward a bit more to the SA tour if they have a quality spinner.

Forgot about Panesar who I still have hope for. Singh has been around for more than 5 years though so I would not call him a new talent

 

[Richard]

Oh, no, I certainly wasn't suggesting he was, just that he, like MSP and Harris, is a decent fingerspinner capable of performing on a turner. I also forgot Vettori, who certainly also possesses that capability.

Incidentally, performing on turners is all I'd expect of a fingerspinner. Top-quality wristspinners like Warne and Murali, and occasionally these days Kumble, can and should do more. Same was true very briefly for Mushtaq Ahmed.

Danish Kaneria, however, appears short of that class, and of late has not even been able to perform on turners, even allowing for the mitigation of his team's poor catching.

 

[Debris]

Oh, no, I certainly wasn't suggesting he was, just that he, like MSP and Harris, is a decent fingerspinner capable of performing on a turner. I also forgot Vettori, who certainly also possesses that capability.

Incidentally, performing on turners is all I'd expect of a fingerspinner. Top-quality wristspinners like Warne and Murali, and occasionally these days Kumble, can and should do more. Same was true very briefly for Mushtaq Ahmed.

Danish Kaneria, however, appears short of that class, and of late has not even been able to perform on turners, even allowing for the mitigation of his team's poor catching.

The point about Singh was that I was looking at new spinners. There were a lot of great spinners in the late 90's but they don't seem to be coming through any more. Vettori is in the same category as Singh.

I can't let you mention top-quality wrist-spinners without giving MacGill a mention who I think was as good or better than everyone except Warne or Murali.

 

[Richard]

The point about Singh was that I was looking at new spinners. There were a lot of great spinners in the late 90's but they don't seem to be coming through any more. Vettori is in the same category as Singh.

Well, I'm not sure there were really. Unless you count Sunil Joshi, Robert Croft, Patrick Symcox and Niroshan Bandaritilleke as great spinners.

About the only fingerspinner of much note in the late-1990s who comes to mind is Saqlain Mushtaq, who was basically the Harbhajan Singh of his day, their bowling style is just about identical. In the mid-1990s, there was also Mushtaq Ahmed to go with Warne and Murali, but his heyday was sadly short. Then of course there was Kumble, who in those days was generally dynamite at home, utterly anodyne away. And of course Vettori, who was broadly speaking the same as what he is now, useful on the rare occasion New Zealand encounter a turning surface.

I can't let you mention top-quality wrist-spinners without giving MacGill a mention who I think was as good or better than everyone except Warne or Murali.

Well, TBH I don't think he's much better than Kaneria. And certainly no better than Mushtaq. And I've always felt both Pakistanis underachieved \ have underachieved. MacGill has never been someone I've thought all that much of really.

One name who should, however, not be forgotten is Dinanath Ramnarine, who could easily have been a very decent bowler had he been picked more often, when there was no good reason for him not to be.

 

[Debris]

Well, I'm not sure there were really. Unless you count Sunil Joshi, Robert Croft, Patrick Symcox and Niroshan Bandaritilleke as great spinners.

About the only fingerspinner of much note in the late-1990s who comes to mind is Saqlain Mushtaq, who was basically the Harbhajan Singh of his day, their bowling style is just about identical. In the mid-1990s, there was also Mushtaq Ahmed to go with Warne and Murali, but his heyday was sadly short. Then of course there was Kumble, who in those days was generally dynamite at home, utterly anodyne away. And of course Vettori, who was broadly speaking the same as what he is now, useful on the rare occasion New Zealand encounter a turning surface.

Well, TBH I don't think he's much better than Kaneria. And certainly no better than Mushtaq. And I've always felt both Pakistanis underachieved \ have underachieved. MacGill has never been someone I've thought all that much of really.

One name who should, however, not be forgotten is Dinanath Ramnarine, who could easily have been a very decent bowler had he been picked more often, when there was no good reason for him not to be.

Have to agree to disagree about MacGill. I thought his test record was outstanding and he would have been even better if he had been given a regular run. His misfortune to play at the same time as Warne.

Warne, Kumble, Murali, Singh, Vettori, MacGill all started in the 90s. What spinner from the last 5 years has the potential to match them?

 

[Richard]

Have to agree to disagree about MacGill. I thought his test record was outstanding and he would have been even better if he had been given a regular run. His misfortune to play at the same time as Warne.

TBH I reckon he'd be recognised for being moderate the way he isn't, had he played at a different time to Warne. Not playing regularly helped him, IMO.

Undoubtedly, his Test record is OK, but so are Mushtaq Ahmed's and Danish Kaneria's. They're all very blatantly a class below the very top, though as I said, with Mushtaq especially I always got the feeling he was a wasted talent. I never got that with MacGill; I don't think he could have done anything more than he did had certain stars aligned differently.

Warne, Kumble, Murali, Singh, Vettori, MacGill all started in the 90s. What spinner from the last 5 years has the potential to match them?

No-one has the potential to come close to Warne and Murali, highly unlikely there'll be another Kumble for a long time either. Reckon Harris and MSP will be as good as Vettori, though. Probably a cut behind Saqlain and Harbhajan due to their special attributes (ie, Doosra).

 

[NUFAN]

I reckon the fast bowling improvement should be talked about more then some random spinners.

 

[Flem274*]

I reckon the fast bowling improvement should be talked about more then some random spinners.

Agreed.