Answering the critics

[Frome Exile]

I'd just like to offer up two snippets in response to recent criticisms of two players.


NAM McLean has started this morning (on the best batting track in the country) with an opening burst of 4 overs, 3 maidens, 2 for 2.

Meanwhile the "wayward" and allegedly "rubbish" Harmison has opened up with four successive maidens!

 

[jf2001]

McLean

Frome Exile, I will gladly admit the signing of McLean had me shaking my head and wondering why the club did it. However, he is doing the business and is a mean combo with Johnson. Hats off to him. It's more the batting I'm concerned with....

John F

 

[Rik]

Meanwhile the "wayward" and allegedly "rubbish" Harmison has opened up with four successive maidens!

You know, an easy way to bowl a maiden is by bowling it wide enough for a batsman not to reach it (hense the lack of a wicket) and the umpire not giving it as a wide (hense no runs)

 

[Frome Exile]

Grow up!

Such peurile suggestions just make you look silly!

No umpire, however poor, is going to allow 24 consecutive, unstrikable deliveries!

And Harmison ended the morning session with figures of 10 overs, 5 maidens, 0 for 22.

Why not just admit that you, like many others, have been hasty to judge the player on one or two poor one-day performances?

He clearly has genuine pace; a commodity that perhaps is over-rated by the current England management, but which, in the absence of Simon Jones, is clearly lacking amongst other young England qualified bowlers.

Hence, he will be given his chance in the Test arena this summer, and (against Zim certainly) he will probably do well.

 

[Rik]

Re: Grow up!

Such peurile suggestions just make you look silly!

No umpire, however poor, is going to allow 24 consecutive, unstrikable deliveries!

And Harmison ended the morning session with figures of 10 overs, 5 maidens, 0 for 22.

Why not just admit that you, like many others, have been hasty to judge the player on one or two poor one-day performances?

He clearly has genuine pace; a commodity that perhaps is over-rated by the current England management, but which, in the absence of Simon Jones, is clearly lacking amongst other young England qualified bowlers.

Hence, he will be given his chance in the Test arena this summer, and (against Zim certainly) he will probably do well.

I was joking ok, well half joking. Pace isn't everything, it's useful but where you bowl it is more important. Believe me when Harmison was 1st given a go I was excited about seeing a young bowler who was rated as highly as he was, but he's just kept proving to me over 5 Tests as well as the ODIs (there goes your "hasty judgement" arguement) that he currently is not good enough. Unless there is an obvious improvement in Harmison then I would like them to send him to the academy because I don't feel he is Test Standard, although he might be in the future.

Re: his economy, have you noticed his strike rate this season, 76.6? Not so impressive. Being a cricketer myself I know as well as anyone that if you bowl on a length outside off stump most batsmen will leave the delivery alone, and quite often if someone bowls like that they end up with a good econ but a poor strike rate because the batsman rarely plays at anything he doesn't need to play at. Harmison's econ and strike rate indicate that he's not really troubling the batsmen, that he's bowling a lot of overs cheaply but with little reward. That's what those stats tell me, so what do they tell you?

 

[Frome Exile]

You have a point

Admittedly, you have a point. The strike rate isn't (and in First Class Cricket never has been) very good.

Even in his most productive season in the Championship (1999) his 64 wickets came at a strike rate of 53, which isn't earth shattering.

One could argue that the degree of criticism doled out over the winter has actually made him concentrate too much on economy, to the detriment of wicket taking. You could also argue that he is being asked to do a slightly different job for Durham than I would hope he would be asked to do for England.

As to the Academy, I think 25's too old; plus he's had one turn there. He's now got to stand up and do it in the Test arena.

After one Test against the second best batting side in the world, and four against possibly the best ever, he needs to do something against Zimbabwe, and then carry it forward against what will probably be a relatively inexperienced South Africa side.
Believe me, if he doesn't I'll be amongst the first to join you in calling for the selectors to look elsewhere.

 

[Rik]

Just to make things interisting...

No umpire, however poor, is going to allow 24 consecutive, unstrikable deliveries!

Have you forgotten the Infamous drawn Test between England and Zimbabwe in Zimbabwe in 96-97 in which England had 37 overs to score 205 runs but were held one run short as the Zimbabwe bowlers consistantly bowled well outside off-stump, often so wide the batsmen could not reach the ball, yet the umpires only gave a total of 3 wides in the innings. I guess some umpires will

For the record the 2 umpires were Robert Dunne of NZ and Ian Robinson of Zimbabwe, both umpires who have made their fair share of odd calls.

 

[Rik]

Re: You have a point

Admittedly, you have a point. The strike rate isn't (and in First Class Cricket never has been) very good.

Even in his most productive season in the Championship (1999) his 64 wickets came at a strike rate of 53, which isn't earth shattering.

One could argue that the degree of criticism doled out over the winter has actually made him concentrate too much on economy, to the detriment of wicket taking. You could also argue that he is being asked to do a slightly different job for Durham than I would hope he would be asked to do for England.

As to the Academy, I think 25's too old; plus he's had one turn there. He's now got to stand up and do it in the Test arena.

After one Test against the second best batting side in the world, and four against possibly the best ever, he needs to do something against Zimbabwe, and then carry it forward against what will probably be a relatively inexperienced South Africa side.
Believe me, if he doesn't I'll be amongst the first to join you in calling for the selectors to look elsewhere.

I thought the academy because Tudor was sent there and from what I've seen Harmison needs a lot of work. His action, which he has worked on for years, is more of a hinderence than anything else in it's current form and is crying out for speciallist coaching, maybe from someone like Lillee. Oddly Harmison is proud of his action and I've read he thinks it's perfect. No, it's the reason why he is quite often wild.

Just to show I'm not just picking on him, I think if Anderson and Jones were coached to not bend their heads to one side and keep their eyes on the target then they could become more consistant. I don't mean in the ECB coaching manual style of head bolt upright, because that is almost impossible, but rather just keeping their eyes on where they are bowling because they both look away at the moment of delivery. This is the reason why Jones is sometimes erratic, and although Anderson is showing himself to be remarkably accurate, it could become a problem later.

 

[Rich2001]

Re: Just to make things interisting...

Have you forgotten the Infamous drawn Test between England and Zimbabwe in Zimbabwe in 96-97 in which England had 37 overs to score 205 runs but were held one run short as the Zimbabwe bowlers consistantly bowled well outside off-stump, often so wide the batsmen could not reach the ball, yet the umpires only gave a total of 3 wides in the innings. I guess some umpires will

For the record the 2 umpires were Robert Dunne of NZ and Ian Robinson of Zimbabwe, both umpires who have made their fair share of odd calls.

But in Test cricket you have to bowl nearly off the square to get the ump to even consider it, yet in ODI you bowl a ball that brushes leg stump and it's a wide, and about a foot outside off.

In Tests you can quite easy bowl continually miles wide and get away with it, like Rik's example above and what about A.Giles approach back in India about 2 foot outside of the leg stump every time he bowled, yet was allowed to get away with it.

And iam sure many many more examples, test cricket is alot easier to bowl in a there is alot more leaway, a wide in ODI is regarded as tactical bowling in Tests.

 

[Frome Exile]

Comparisons

Just to make things interisting...

.......if not a little mischievious.

After 5 Tests, your declared favourite player, Mr. Streak, had only two more wickets, at the very slightly better strike rate of 73.4

 

[Rich2001]

Re: Comparisons

.......if not a little mischievious.

After 5 Tests, your declared favourite player, Mr. Streak, had only two more wickets, at the very slightly better strike rate of 73.4

LOL

That ones all yours Rik

 

[Rik]

Re: Comparisons

.......if not a little mischievious.

After 5 Tests, your declared favourite player, Mr. Streak, had only two more wickets, at the very slightly better strike rate of 73.4

...very mischievious!

How dare you slag off an International Captain like that!

To be fair I think he had a lot less experiance than Harmison has had before he was thrust into the International scene, still learning his trade so to speak.

 

[Langeveldt]

I think this will be a case of time will tell...

Personally i think guys like Kallis and Gibbs are going to have a feast on Harmisons bowling...

Why arent we raving about Anderson? Pace and accuracy, and a hat trick today.. Him, Vaughan and Tres could well push SA further down the table....

 

[marc71178]

Whatever happens, SA wil not be pushed down the table, since England are defending the series.

 

[marc71178]

It can't all be just wide bowling

Harmo now has 21-12-30-2 against a pretty reasonable batting side.

 

[Rik]

Re: It can't all be just wide bowling

Harmo now has 21-12-30-2 against a pretty reasonable batting side.

27-14-55-2 now, Kabir wacking him round a bit. Worcestershire are talented but inconsistant. Either way Harmison has been economical more than anything else so far.

 

[Frome Exile]

Have to admire your doggedness, Rik.

Your utter refusal to back down is quite exemplary, young man.:saint:

Even when there's plenty of contradictory evidence.

The "talented but inconsistent" Worcs side averaged around 325 on first innings last year, and scored more batting bonus points than anyone bar Middx and Surrey.

Incidentally, Harmison has finished the innings with figures of

S J Harmison 29.0 14 69 3, which compares quite favourably with J Srinath 27.0 10 70 3

 

[Rik]

Re: Have to admire your doggedness, Rik.

Your utter refusal to back down is quite exmplary, young man.:saint:

Which would you pick for your team? Someone who took 21-10-30-1 or someone who took 10-1-30-3?

I'm not being dogged, you seriously think Harmison's figures state that he's answered his critics and he deserves a place in the side?

Sorry but figures of 8 wickets at 25.12 in 3 games with an econ of 2.12, are not groundbreaking. I would expect a lot more from an England regular. He might have improved his accuracy but his strike rate is close to that of a spinner's! He's a very fast bowler and that takes up a lot of energy, I'm pretty amazed he's being asked to bowl so many overs, for England he would be used as a short-spell strike bowler, something that at the moment he looks ill-suited to.

 

[Rik]

Re: Have to admire your doggedness, Rik.

Even when there's plenty of contradictory evidence.

What like the fact that there are many bowlers who have done better than Harmison this season? Or the fact that this is one of only 2 seasons that Harmison has averaged under 30, and he's only played 3 matches so far this season?

 

[Frome Exile]

That's not really the point.

There are many batsmen who've done better this year than Vaughan, Tres, Nasser et al. But I really don't think we'll be seeing Mal Loye in the Test side.

Yes, Harmison will be asked to do a different job for England, as I pointed out several posts ago. And yes, I do think he should be picked, not because these figures have completely answered his critics, but because I believe they've shown that the waywardness of the Ashes tour was a blip.

Caddick and Anderson with the new ball, a la McGrath and Gillespie, followed by raw pace in short, now more controlled bursts, a la Brett Lee.

And before you get all agitated, I'm not suggesting that any one of our three is fit to lace the boots of any one of theirs. Nor am I saying that just because it's their formula it should necessarily be ours.

But, it's a formula which has been shown to work, and is, I believe, the best we've got available at present. I'd certainly rather see Harmison in than Silverwood or Sidebottom, and I'm not convinced that Tudor is any less likely to chuck in one four-ball an over than he has been in the past.

Give Harmsion a go. Who knows, in another 45 Test matches his record might still bear comparison with Mr. Streak's. :P