375 in sight???

marc71178 · Apr 27, 2003

But one which has no relevance to PwC.

V Reddy · Apr 27, 2003

PY said:
To me it shows the quality of Stephen Fleming as a captain. It must have been so tempting for him to just try and get his 300 or even the record but instead he thought of the team and declared. Good work.

Not so good work is Smith's decision, it was blatantly obvious that SA were going to mash the Bangladesh batting order when it came round to the second innings but he still declared. Not really bad captaincy but he could've let them go on for a while longer. Would've been brilliant for morale if they had carried on and on, possibly breaking records. Think the SA team could do with a bit of psychological lift at the moment.

I watched that match and Smith declared b'coz there was a chance of rain. Pat Symcox and Daryll Cullinan were also saying SA should declare as the forecast said that there was a possibility of Rain in the next 2 days. I think the SA bowling will struggle in Eng though. Pollock doesn't look like a wicket taker anymore b'coz he has lost a lot out on pace. He is now bowling in the 115-125 mark. Dawson looks an OK bowler, useful in the onedayers and i don't think Adams will succeed in Eng. Ntini may succeed there. But it looks like the weakest SA bowling line up till now. I think their batting will succeed in Eng but i don't think the bowling will.

Mr Mxyzptlk · Apr 27, 2003

vishnureddy said:
He is now bowling in the 115-125 mark.

Are you sure this is accurate? That sounds very slow for Pollock. In the WC he was up around 125-128.

krkode · Apr 27, 2003

Mr Mxyzptlk said:
Are you sure this is accurate? That sounds very slow for Pollock. In the WC he was up around 125-128.

But that's still considerably slower for a bowler who used to be called "Fast" or "Fast-Medium"

V Reddy · Apr 27, 2003

Mr Mxyzptlk said:
Are you sure this is accurate? That sounds very slow for Pollock. In the WC he was up around 125-128.

Yes. He is mostly bowling near 121-122. It maybe also be b'coz of the heat in Bangladesh. And also Ntini is at maximum bowling up to 143 where as he used to touch 148-149. Its very hot in Bangladesh with temperatures around 45 that maybe the main reason for that. But still Pollock doesn't look any where near his best. It is better to judge him after the Eng tour but i get the feeling he will struggle in England.

Rik · Apr 27, 2003

Although Pollock hasn't been taking big hauls of late he's still taking wickets pretty cheaply. He's 29 going on 30, he's got plenty more time on his side, maybe he just doesn't feel he needs to bowl as fast any more, and just concentrates on his line and length. In fact his econ rate is the same if not lower than it used to be. He'll be fine, speed isn't everything...just look at Brett Lee...

The only problem Pollock has at the moment is that teams have realised he bowls nearly every ball in the corridor and are "doing a NZ" and leaving most balls that previously they might have nicked. I don't think he's changed at all, it's just other teams have worked him out.

Mr Mxyzptlk · Apr 27, 2003

Rik said:
The only problem Pollock has at the moment is that teams have realised he bowls nearly every ball in the corridor and are "doing a NZ" and leaving most balls that previously they might have nicked. I don't think he's changed at all, it's just other teams have worked him out.

Yes. His accuracy is only challenged by McGrath currently, considering that Wasim isn't in cricket currently. IMO, Pollock is still a very good bowler. West Indies would love to have a player of half his worth. Most teams would appreciate a Pollock.

V Reddy · Apr 27, 2003

Rik said:
Although Pollock hasn't been taking big hauls of late he's still taking wickets pretty cheaply. He's 29 going on 30, he's got plenty more time on his side, maybe he just doesn't feel he needs to bowl as fast any more, and just concentrates on his line and length. In fact his econ rate is the same if not lower than it used to be. He'll be fine, speed isn't everything...just look at Brett Lee...

The only problem Pollock has at the moment is that teams have realised he bowls nearly every ball in the corridor and are "doing a NZ" and leaving most balls that previously they might have nicked. I don't think he's changed at all, it's just other teams have worked him out.

Of course pace matters. You need to be atleast above 125 to be able to trouble the batsman. Do you think McGrath will be the same bowler if he bowls in the low 120's?. Pollock will be economical but won't be the same wicket taking bowler if he bowls at that speed. Better to judge him after the England Series though.

Mr Mxyzptlk · Apr 27, 2003

vishnureddy said:
Of course pace matters. You need to be atleast above 125 to be able to trouble the batsman. Do you think McGrath will be the same bowler if he bowls in the low 120's?. Pollock will be economical but won't be the same wicket taking bowler if he bowls at that speed. Better to judge him after the England Series though.

I agree with Rik here. Pace isn't everything. Sobers and Worrell were quite effective with their medium pacers.

V Reddy · Apr 27, 2003

Mr Mxyzptlk said:
I agree with Rik here. Pace isn't everything. Sobers and Worrell were quite effective with their medium pacers.

I agree pace isn't every thing but you atleast need some pace. You should have seen how easily Bangladesh was playing Pollock . They were easily going on to either the front or the back foot without any trouble. He is supposed to be one of the great bowlers.

Mr Mxyzptlk · Apr 27, 2003

vishnureddy said:
I agree pace isn't every thing but you atleast need some pace. You should have seen how easily Bangladesh was playing Pollock . They were easily going on to either the front or the back foot without any trouble. He is supposed to be one of the great bowlers.

Since when is Pollock one of the great bowler?? He's a very good bowler, but not great. Great is Ambrose or Donald or Walsh or McGrath.

I'm just looking at stats, but 3/34 from 24 overs (all 3 were top order batsmen) doesn't look all that bad to me.

Rik · Apr 27, 2003

Mr Mxyzptlk said:
Since when is Pollock one of the great bowler?? He's a very good bowler, but not great. Great is Ambrose or Donald or Walsh or McGrath.

I'm just looking at stats, but 3/34 from 24 overs (all 3 were top order batsmen) doesn't look all that bad to me.

He's a very fine bowler and even in this "slump" he's still keeping his Test average under 21...now compare that to McGrath's

(for the record Pollock's stands at 20.72)

Mr Mxyzptlk · Apr 27, 2003

Pollock's Test stats in the last 2 years

Matches=20 (69 Career)
Wickets=78 (281 Career)
Average=21.53 (20.61 Career)
BB=6/30
SR=57.3
5W=4

That looks pretty decent to me.

Overseas matches.

Matches=11 (69 Career)
Wickets=37 (281 Career)
Average=26.67 (20.61 Career)
BB=5/28
SR=72.5
5W=1

Not bad.

V Reddy · Apr 27, 2003

Mr Mxyzptlk said:
Since when is Pollock one of the great bowler?? He's a very good bowler, but not great. Great is Ambrose or Donald or Walsh or McGrath.

I'm just looking at stats, but 3/34 from 24 overs (all 3 were top order batsmen) doesn't look all that bad to me.

Mayebe Should leave it to the England tour

Mr Mxyzptlk · Apr 27, 2003

Rik said:
He's a very fine bowler and even in this "slump" he's still keeping his Test average under 21...now compare that to McGrath's

(for the record Pollock's stands at 20.72)

I'm a big fan of Pollock. I agree with you, but I'm just making it clear that I'm not going to rate him as a great bowler as yet. Perhaps after 300 wickets

...

V Reddy · Apr 27, 2003

Mr Mxyzptlk said:
Pollock's Test stats in the last 2 years

Matches=20 (69 Career)
Wickets=78 (281 Career)
Average=21.53 (20.61 Career)
BB=6/30
SR=57.3
5W=4

That looks pretty decent to me.

Overseas matches.

Matches=11 (69 Career)
Wickets=37 (281 Career)
Average=26.67 (20.61 Career)
BB=5/28
SR=72.5
5W=1

Not bad.

You should check his performances from the WC and not before that.

Mr Mxyzptlk · Apr 27, 2003

vishnureddy said:
Mayebe Should leave it to the England tour

We're going to use one tour as the basis of our judgement? If that was an acceptable method, Lara must be crap....considering his series in England in 2000. Gilchrist must be crap, considering his series in India. Add Ponting to this list.

Mr Mxyzptlk · Apr 27, 2003

vishnureddy said:
You should check his performances from the WC and not before that.

You can't judge a man on one series. He was certainly not the worst bowler there. Also Test cricket is the true test of a cricketer.

V Reddy · Apr 27, 2003

Mr Mxyzptlk said:
You can't judge a man on one series. He was certainly not the worst bowler there. Also Test cricket is the true test of a cricketer.

That's what i was saying that maybe we should judge him after the English Series but had to make that statement b'coz you brought up all those stats. I am not saying that he will be a bad bowler . I think he will not the same amount of wickets as he is used to taking like the 4-5 wicket hauls regularly and at that average.

anzac · Apr 28, 2003

speaking from a layman's point of view...

if you are a line & length bowler you would need something else to trouble disciplined top order international batsmen when there is little or no seam movement. Those options are generally pace (with good variation) or bounce.

McGrath uses the latter, Cairns (when he used to bowl) used a bit of bounce but mainly change of pace.

375 in sight???

Eyes not spreadsheets

International Debutant

Request Your Custom Title Now!

State Captain

International Debutant

Cricketer Of The Year

Request Your Custom Title Now!

International Debutant

Request Your Custom Title Now!

International Debutant

Request Your Custom Title Now!

Cricketer Of The Year

Request Your Custom Title Now!

International Debutant

Request Your Custom Title Now!

International Debutant

Request Your Custom Title Now!

Request Your Custom Title Now!

International Debutant

International Debutant