Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 40

Thread: ian harvey Vs Shane Watson

  1. #1
    Cricket Spectator vicpride29's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Victoria, Australia
    Posts
    22

    ian harvey Vs Shane Watson

    I was just wondering who Australia will play when our summer comes around again and Watson has recoverd from injury. And to all the people from England who would you rather have play for your side?

  2. #2
    Request Your Custom Title Now! Simon's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    Canberra
    Posts
    25,599
    im sure the english would like both in their side, but they cant have either.
    Shane Watson is a better player for sure, not only that he is still developing. He will be major part of the aussie side for years to come.
    And i see harvey as a bits player. nothing more than someone who comes in to cover injuries, i guess we are just blessed.

  3. #3
    U19 Debutant
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Western Australia
    Posts
    359
    I think Watson probably has the edge in terms of his batting, but I think Ian Harvey is a smarter bowler at this stage.
    Of course Watson will improve in that area especially, and he certainly is the future.

  4. #4
    Hall of Fame Member luckyeddie's Avatar
    Target Champion! Stuarts Xtreme Skateboarding Champion!
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    Derby, England
    Posts
    17,752
    Harvey has so many tricks up his sleeve - and quite often they come off.

    A bit like Ronnie Irani, only good.

    I'm a big fan.
    Nigel Clough's Black and White Army, beating Forest away with 10 men


  5. #5
    International Debutant
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    Nere a Spoon
    Posts
    2,873
    Well Watson has plenty of Talent and I really respect his work ethic for a young player.

    I know alot of the senior aussie players have been extremly impressed with his dedication to improving himself and working hard on all fasets of his game.

    I dont think Harvey has ever had that kind of dedication.

    It will be interesting to see how Watson goes with re-modeling his action because no doubt it will be hard and he may take some time to regain form with the ball.

    I tend to agree that Harvey is the better bowler but Watson is much better as a batsman & should injury preventing one day be a better bowler to.

  6. #6
    Hall of Fame Member luckyeddie's Avatar
    Target Champion! Stuarts Xtreme Skateboarding Champion!
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    Derby, England
    Posts
    17,752
    Oh, and welcome to the best cricket board in the world, vicpride29

  7. #7
    Rik
    Rik is offline
    Cricketer Of The Year Rik's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Shropshire, England
    Posts
    8,353
    I don't think we would want Watson, we've got enough "all-rounders" who can barely bowl...

    I'd go for Harvey, sometimes he gets runs though not all the time, but he is a much more effective bowler and that's more important when your playing in a strong batting side.
    "Age is just a stupid number"

    20...that's a rather big number :(:(:(

  8. #8
    Tim
    Tim is offline
    Cricketer Of The Year Tim's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    Auckland
    Posts
    7,888
    The standard of all-rounders in Australia is probably their weakest link. Harvey has been good at bowling but has struggled with the bat, Symonds the reverse..infact both for Symonds up until recently where he's improved alot with the bat.
    Watson looks to be good at both but hasn't really made his mark yet.

    I'd stick with Watson, they've invested time in him & he's probably close to paying the ACB off.

  9. #9
    U19 Debutant
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Western Australia
    Posts
    359
    Originally posted by luckyeddie
    A bit like Ronnie Irani, only good.
    I was gobsmacked that England persisted with Irani last (Australian) summer.........he had no impact, but was played again and again.

    Must wear the right colour tie.

  10. #10
    Rik
    Rik is offline
    Cricketer Of The Year Rik's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Shropshire, England
    Posts
    8,353
    Originally posted by Kenny
    I was gobsmacked that England persisted with Irani last (Australian) summer.........he had no impact, but was played again and again.

    Must wear the right colour tie.
    Adam Hollioake and Hussain don't get on, so he picked Irani as if to say "there ain't no chance in hell your getting a game"

    Irani played in all the games and did not deserve to play in any of them.

  11. #11
    U19 Debutant
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Western Australia
    Posts
    359
    Originally posted by Rik
    Adam Hollioake and Hussain don't get on, so he picked Irani as if to say "there ain't no chance in hell your getting a game"

    Irani played in all the games and did not deserve to play in any of them.
    Agreed - like I said, Irani wore the right coloured tie!!
    Hollioake is a vastly superior all - rounder, no question.

  12. #12
    Eyes not spreadsheets marc71178's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    England
    Posts
    57,593
    Originally posted by Rik
    I don't think we would want Watson, we've got enough "all-rounders" who can barely bowl...
    Yet again you make a thinly veiled attack on someone who has not been selected as an all rounder, but a batsman who can fill in!
    marc71178 - President and founding member of AAAS - we don't only appreciate when he does well, but also when he's not quite so good!

    Anyone want to join the Society?

    Beware the evils of Kit-Kats - they're immoral apparently.

  13. #13
    Rik
    Rik is offline
    Cricketer Of The Year Rik's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Shropshire, England
    Posts
    8,353
    Originally posted by marc71178
    Yet again you make a thinly veiled attack on someone who has not been selected as an all rounder, but a batsman who can fill in!
    Marc, get a life, your going insane. Unless you are both blind and stupid Watson IS an all-rounder and is considered as such by everyone in Australian cricket in every form of the game he plays.
    Last edited by Rik; 06-06-2003 at 10:57 AM.

  14. #14
    Eyes not spreadsheets marc71178's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    England
    Posts
    57,593
    I was talking about your comment about English "all-rounders"

  15. #15
    Rik
    Rik is offline
    Cricketer Of The Year Rik's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Shropshire, England
    Posts
    8,353
    Originally posted by marc71178
    I was talking about your comment about English "all-rounders"
    So why are you mentioning it in a thread about the Australian ALL-ROUNDER Shane Watson? :rolleyes:

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast


Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •