The new hybrid

[Flem274*]

I assuming that's targetted at me?

I'm not anti-vettori. No. No. No.


I am a Vettori-basher. With reason.

 

[BoyBrumby]

Received wisdom on Vettori fluctuates, doesn't it? In the first test I remember Nasser Hussain talking of him in the most glowing terms, about how he was the best SLA bowler in the world & how much Monty could learn from him; now he only gets a go because of his batting!

Monty is something of a thorwback because (certainly under Fletcher) ability with the willow was an absolute prerequisite for our twirlers. Previously blokes who were (in my estimation) better bowlers (say Such & Tufnel) were passed over for your Richard Illingworths & your Robert Crofts because of the promise of a few extra lower-order runs.

 

[Richard]

Robert Croft > Philip Tufnell and Peter Such (as a bowler) AFAIC. In any case, Croft, with his whole 5 Tests during Duncan Fletcher's reign (all during the first 18 months of), wasn't exactly a firm favourite, was he?

Also, Richard Illingworth really wasn't much of a batsman.

 

[Richard]

With the emergence of Vettori's exploits in batting, in some cases to the detriment to him as a bowler of spin, the question must be raised... is this the new prototype for a spinner?

Should a spinner, like the wicket keeper, be an accomplished batsman as well?

Panesar is the traditional spinner - can't bat, can't field only bowls well. Murali is another traditional spinner. At least in my mind. Name other spinners in the world, upcoming or not (like Harris) that doesn't spin the ball that much, but can bat a bit.

Murali and Monty Panesar are hardly comparable, are they? Murali is so good he's almost as good as a top-quality seam-bowler, MSP is someone who'll usually (though not always) do you a job on a turning surface - probably a very good one - but won't offer much on a fairly large number of Test pitches.

Something that might also be looked at is that spinners who can bat have never been that rare. While there's been your out-and-out rabbits like Derek Underwood, there's also been your all-round players like Raymond Illingworth and John Emburey.

 

[BoyBrumby]

Robert Croft > Philip Tufnell and Peter Such (as a bowler) AFAIC. In any case, Croft, with his whole 5 Tests during Duncan Fletcher's reign (all during the first 18 months of), wasn't exactly a firm favourite, was he?

Also, Richard Illingworth really wasn't much of a batsman.

Croft takes his FC wickets at just over 36; Such & Tuffers are both finished around 30 (just over & just under respectively). I'm actually interested to know why you rate the tubby Welshman as superior.

Illingworth managed 4 first class tons too, which makes him positively Bradmanesque compared to Such & Tufnell.

 

[Richard]

Croft takes his FC wickets at just over 36; Such & Tuffers are both finished around 30 (just over & just under respectively). I'm actually interested to know why you rate the tubby Welshman as superior.

Such for starters had a generally far more spin-friendly home ground than Croft. This immediately puts fingerspinners on an uneven footing. I'd not have either Such nor Croft as overwhelmingly superior to one another, but Croft's skills with loop and drift were for mine superior to Such's. Such simply benefited from better tools at his disposal (ie, pitch) with which to purvey his skills.

Tufnell may possibly indeed have ended-up a better bowler than Croft but for his volatile nature. However, this has always counted big-time against him in my book. Tufnell, when available, probably did bowl well more often than Croft. But too often he was unavailable, and too often he was a hugely disruptive influence because of this.

Illingworth managed 4 first class tons too, which makes him positively Bradmanesque compared to Such & Tufnell.

Yet his highest score in Test cricket was 28.

 

[Neil Pickup]

From the Kenyan Perspective all the frontline spinners are also batsmen in their own right even Hiren Varaiya who bats at 11 in ODI's reportedly struck a ton in a club game a few weeks back

In fairness Monty Panesar has a ton in club cricket.

 

[Richard]

What? Seriously?

 

[Swervy]

Such for starters had a generally far more spin-friendly home ground than Croft. This immediately puts fingerspinners on an uneven footing. I'd not have either Such nor Croft as overwhelmingly superior to one another, but Croft's skills with loop and drift were for mine superior to Such's. Such simply benefited from better tools at his disposal (ie, pitch) with which to purvey his skills.

Tufnell may possibly indeed have ended-up a better bowler than Croft but for his volatile nature. However, this has always counted big-time against him in my book. Tufnell, when available, probably did bowl well more often than Croft. But too often he was unavailable, and too often he was a hugely disruptive influence because of this.

Are you sure about this?

I have always had it in my head that Sophia Gardens was considered quite a turner for a large chunk of the late 90s early 00's, where as Such , who played at Notts, when the county pitches were totally geared to fast bowling, and also Essex, where it must be said, I never really considered Chelmsford to be a dust bowl, considering the number of top notch quicks that played at Essex in the early to mid 90s .

Peter Such did benefit a lot from having an experienced veteran like John Childs often bowling with him,. but as I say, never really put Essex as being a spinners paradise

 

[Neil Pickup]

What? Seriously?

As far as I knew, yes, for Dunstable Town.

I'm pretty sure I didn't make that up, cause if I'd made it up I wouldn't have picked a team that a quick Google tells me that Panesar played for.

 

[Neil Pickup]

Are you sure about this?

I have always had it in my head that Sophia Gardens was considered quite a turner for a large chunk of the late 90s early 00's, where as Such , who played at Notts, when the county pitches were totally geared to fast bowling, and also Essex, where it must be said, I never really considered Chelmsford to be a dust bowl, considering the number of top notch quicks that played at Essex in the early to mid 90s .

Peter Such did benefit a lot from having an experienced veteran like John Childs often bowling with him,. but as I say, never really put Essex as being a spinners paradise

Sophia Gardens has seen Croft-Cosker in tandem for plenty of Championship games IIRC...

 

[Neil Pickup]

As far as I knew, yes, for Dunstable Town.

I'm pretty sure I didn't make that up, cause if I'd made it up I wouldn't have picked a team that a quick Google tells me that Panesar played for.

Thank you Grauniad.

 

[Goughy]

Robert Croft > Philip Tufnell and Peter Such (as a bowler) AFAIC. .

Im reading that right am I? It says Croft was better than Tufnell? Doesnt it? Wow! If Im reading it right then I couldnt disagree more

 

[Swervy]

Are you sure about this?

I have always had it in my head that Sophia Gardens was considered quite a turner for a large chunk of the late 90s early 00's, where as Such , who played at Notts, when the county pitches were totally geared to fast bowling, and also Essex, where it must be said, I never really considered Chelmsford to be a dust bowl, considering the number of top notch quicks that played at Essex in the early to mid 90s .

Peter Such did benefit a lot from having an experienced veteran like John Childs often bowling with him,. but as I say, never really put Essex as being a spinners paradise

Further to this:

Croft averages over 45 with the ball at Chelmsford over his career...and at the other grounds that Peter Such mainly played at, Croft averaged 49 at Grace Road, and 80 at Trent Bridge

 

[Goughy]

Croft was a very, very ordinary bowler. Could do a decent job in OD cricket and capable of scoring useful runs, but he wasnt anything more than a bog-standard off spinner.

 

[Richard]

And Such was?

 

[Richard]

Sophia Gardens has seen Croft-Cosker in tandem for plenty of Championship games IIRC...

Yeah, and not extraordinarily often has said combo been remarkably effective.

 

[Richard]

Are you sure about this?

I have always had it in my head that Sophia Gardens was considered quite a turner for a large chunk of the late 90s early 00's, where as Such , who played at Notts, when the county pitches were totally geared to fast bowling, and also Essex, where it must be said, I never really considered Chelmsford to be a dust bowl, considering the number of top notch quicks that played at Essex in the early to mid 90s .

Peter Such did benefit a lot from having an experienced veteran like John Childs often bowling with him,. but as I say, never really put Essex as being a spinners paradise

Actually clean forgot Such ever played at Notts, but he had just 5 seasons with them, the last of which was before my 1st birthday.

Essex did indeed in Mark Ilott and Ashley Cowan (and to a lesser extent Ronnie Irani after he moved from Lancs) have several good seamers in the mid-late-1990s, and before that of course Neil Foster (when fit). However, they often went into games with just the two specialist seamers (often plus Irani). Ilott and Foster especially were high-class swing bowlers, meaning they could take the pitch out the equation, and allow turning surfaces to be prepared to bring Childs and Such into the equation.

 

[Swervy]

Ilott and Foster especially were high-class swing bowlers, meaning they could take the pitch out the equation, and allow turning surfaces to be prepared to bring Childs and Such into the equation.

Is this fact, or something you have conjured up in order to fit your opinion on Croft/Such?

 

[Richard]

Other way around - I've formed my opinions on Croft and Such because of this.

I've heard plenty of reliable-seeming sources suggest Chelmsford tended to turn a fair bit in the 1990s - and certainly I've seen pitches in the 2000s with my own eyes which suggest it's plausible.

Should someone unearth some evidence about Chelmsford being less routinely spin-friendly, I'd be open to changing my opinions on Such vis-a-vis Croft.

Both remain, however, fingerspinners. Such was not a bowler capable of taking big hauls on non-turning pitches, as Croft was not.