Harmison - underachiever or overrated ?

[PY]

Haha, everyone loves a patriotic troll, signed up purely to wind Australians up to be honest. Honourable intentions if ever I heard some.

I wouldn't be surprised if I was lauding him as the best thing since Newq Brown tbh, can't remember.

 

[PY]

Good stuff BB, wouldn't expect anything less from you to be honest.

 

[Richard]

Haha, everyone loves a patriotic troll, signed up purely to wind Australians up to be honest. Honourable intentions if ever I heard some.

I wouldn't be surprised if I was lauding him as the best thing since Newq Brown tbh, can't remember.

Something of a PTG, then, young Peter.

Honestly, never knew that - amazing that you became a Mod after such inauspicious beginnings.

 

[Goughy]

He is certainly an underachiever.

He certainly has disappointed on a number of occasions. However, much disappointment is heaped upon him more than others due to his profile.

He has been inconsistent, but when he gets it right (and admitedly its getting less and less so) he is in the top couple of seamers in the World.

Also I feel his contributions are downplayed. He has been a big disappoinment (as we know what a weapon he can be) but he has been the spearhead for England more than his fair share of times.

In the last 5 years England have bowled the opposition (not including Zim and Bang) out for 250 or less on 28 occasions and won 20 and only lost 4 of those Tests.

Its a fair indication that if you have bowlers that can help bowl the opposition out for 250 or under you will win games.

Name		Runs	Wkts	Av	Occas	Wkt per sub 250 In
Jones		344	23	14.96	8	2.88
Harmison	1184	71	16.68	25	2.84
Sidebottom	297	16	18.56	6	2.67
Panesar		507	32	15.84	14	2.29
Hoggard		1104	53	20.83	27	1.96
Flintoff	884	43	20.56	23	1.87
Plunkett	251	13	19.31	7	1.86
Giles		393	20	19.65	11	1.82
Anderson	305	13	23.46	9	1.44
Mahmood		199	9	22.11	7	1.29

Harmison has been the key bowler in winning games by bowling the opposition out cheaply (in the last 5 years against non-Zim or Bang opp).

Also across the last 5 years, Harmison has been the leading wickettaker for England per game.

Name		Wkts per Test
Harmison	3.62
Hoggard		3.55
Flintoff	3.52
Jones		3.50
Panesar		3.42
Sidebottom	3.00
Anderson	2.83
Giles		2.74
Plunkett	2.56
Mahmood		2.50

He has disappointed, he has underachieved, but he is ragged on far too often.

 

[open365]

I think my thoughts are, well, fairly well-documented shall we say. Never thought Harmison was up to much, think those 7 games in early 2004 were a) nowhere near as good they were made-out and b) never something he was likely to repeat anyway.

I think people have clung to "he's mentally soft" and the like to avoid the conclusion that they completely and totally misjudged him in 2004 (and indeed before). Harmison was never any good at all, he's only ever had odd flashes in the pan (The Oval 2004, Lord's 2005, Old Trafford 2006), most of which have involved getting lots of tailenders and\or abysmal batting.

Harmison maybe could have been good, had he changed that awful action and looked to seam and cut the ball more. But no - people have got it into their heads that he can be effective without moving the ball sideways (Kev will insist this is possible I know) and simply by bouncing batsmen out, which, well, he simply cannot.

People have also got it into their heads that he can offer good control over extended periods of time. Again, he cannot. There's now ample evidence of this, I think.

+1000000000000000000000000000000000000

Agree with everything in this post.

 

[FBU]

After Sidebottom and Hoggard had bowled today Collingwood was preferred as the third bowler.(Willis yesterday referring to Collingwood's bowling as throw downs that you get in the nets)

When Harmison did get the ball it was 4-24. The commentators all think he should be given the two Tests left. I wouldn't be surprised to hear Harmison has flown home after this Test and Shreck called up.

 

[BoyBrumby]

After Sidebottom and Hoggard had bowled today Collingwood was preferred as the third bowler.(Willis yesterday referring to Collingwood's bowling as throw downs that you get in the nets)

When Harmison did get the ball it was 4-24. The commentators all think he should be given the two Tests left. I wouldn't be surprised to hear Harmison has flown home after this Test and Shreck called up.

Harmy was only given one over in his initial spell too. That doesn't speak wonders of MPV's faith in him. Gonesville for me, poor bloke's head isn't there.

 

[Richard]

After Sidebottom and Hoggard had bowled today Collingwood was preferred as the third bowler.(Willis yesterday referring to Collingwood's bowling as throw downs that you get in the nets)

When Harmison did get the ball it was 4-24. The commentators all think he should be given the two Tests left. I wouldn't be surprised to hear Harmison has flown home after this Test and Shreck called up.

Not sure about Charles Shreck TBH. Remind me what his figures were last season? I don't remember.

Apart from him, and Graham Onions, who are the others who've recently appeared to be in the frame?

 

[BoyBrumby]

Not sure about Charles Shreck TBH. Remind me what his figures were last season? I don't remember.

Apart from him, and Graham Onions, who are the others who've recently appeared to be in the frame?

Pfft. Davies at Durham at a (large-ish) stretch? Kirby at a bigger one?

After that the cupboard is bare. Caddick?

EDIT: McLaren, actually, but he's still two years off qualifying I think. Will play for England tho, unless SA call him up.

 

[Richard]

I don't want Stephen Kirby anywhere near an England team. Nor, of course, am I terribly keen on Shreck or Onions either.

FFS, why did Tremlett have to get injured?

Go for Caddick IMO. Been waiting for this for 5 years.

 

[Jamee999]

Broad in for the next Test. Gotta be.

 

[Prince EWS]

After Sidebottom and Hoggard had bowled today Collingwood was preferred as the third bowler.(Willis yesterday referring to Collingwood's bowling as throw downs that you get in the nets)

When Harmison did get the ball it was 4-24. The commentators all think he should be given the two Tests left. I wouldn't be surprised to hear Harmison has flown home after this Test and Shreck called up.

Bell should have been given one over at second change as well IMO, just to make a statement.

 

[Swervy]

I don't want Stephen Kirby anywhere near an England team. Nor, of course, am I terribly keen on Shreck or Onions either.

FFS, why did Tremlett have to get injured?

Go for Caddick IMO. Been waiting for this for 5 years.

to be honest I think Shreck might be worth a punt

Caddick would be plain daft, a huge backwards step

 

[Richard]

If Caddick would be a backward step, so would Shreck. At 29 and 39 they're both not-with-age-on-side.

TBH, too, Broad would be a backward step - he's 22, all but, now, same age as me FFS. Gotta be planning for the future, need to be getting these 15-year-olds in. Heck, they probably won't be around long enough - there must be some decent 10-year-olds out there?

Frankly, I couldn't give two ****s about backward-steps. All I care about is who can best help us perform well in Test-matches here and now. However long they can do it for afterwards, we'll only find-out afterwards.

 

[Nate]

Haha Rich. Bringing in a 29 year-old hugely different to a 37 bloke tbh.

 

[Richard]

But when it's a case of a 29-year-old to make his debut and a 39-year-old to make a comeback, the gap narrows just a little, no?

For mine, both would fall into the "step backward" category. As I said, though - for me that's little other than a fantasy. You pick the team to try and win the matches at your disposal right now, and pick the team for 4 years' time in 4 years' time. Building for 4 years' time should be done in other areas, and there's no way I want to see the chances jeopardised in current Tests because people are trying to use the current Test to prepare for some time in the future.

 

[Swervy]

If Caddick would be a backward step, so would Shreck. At 29 and 37 they're both not-with-age-on-side.

TBH, too, Broad would be a backward step - he's 22, all but, now, same age as me FFS. Gotta be planning for the future, need to be getting these 15-year-olds in. Heck, they probably won't be around long enough - there must be some decent 10-year-olds out there?

Frankly, I couldn't give two ****s about backward-steps. All I care about is who can best help us perform well in Test-matches here and now. However long they can do it for afterwards, we'll only find-out afterwards.

Chillax

 

[Spitfires_Fan]

*puts on rose-tinted specs*

Amjad Khan's on his way back from injury...

 

[Richard]

Ah, yes, I forgot him... 'tis cos you haven't been around the forums massively of late.

Chillax

Classical.

 

[wpdavid]

Not sure about Charles Shreck TBH. Remind me what his figures were last season? I don't remember.

Apart from him, and Graham Onions, who are the others who've recently appeared to be in the frame?

I suppose the thing about Shreck is that he's currently playing in NZ and, I gather, doing well. So I'm told, anyway. That being said, it would be criminal if he leapfrogged the other guys already in the squad.