ian harvey Vs Shane Watson

vicpride29 · 06-06-2003, 01:22 AM

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?

Simon · 06-06-2003, 01:25 AM

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.

Kenny · 06-06-2003, 01:50 AM

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.

luckyeddie · 06-06-2003, 03:21 AM

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.

Eclipse · 06-06-2003, 03:23 AM

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.

luckyeddie · 06-06-2003, 03:26 AM

Oh, and welcome to the best cricket board in the world, vicpride29

Rik · 06-06-2003, 05:47 AM

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.

Tim · 06-06-2003, 05:52 AM

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.

Kenny · 06-06-2003, 09:34 AM

Quote:

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.

Rik · 06-06-2003, 09:40 AM

Quote:

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.

Kenny · 06-06-2003, 09:44 AM

Quote:

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.

marc71178 · 06-06-2003, 10:37 AM

Quote:

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!

Rik · 06-06-2003, 10:41 AM

Quote:

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.

marc71178 · 06-06-2003, 10:51 AM

I was talking about your comment about English "all-rounders"

Rik · 06-06-2003, 10:57 AM

Quote:

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:

06-06-2003, 01:22 AM	#1 (permalink)
vicpride29 Cricket Spectator 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?

06-06-2003, 03:21 AM	#4 (permalink)
luckyeddie Hall of Fame Member Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Derby, England Posts: 17,625	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

06-06-2003, 05:47 AM	#7 (permalink)
Rik Cricketer Of The Year 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 :(:(:(

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

06-06-2003, 01:25 AM	#2 (permalink)
Simon Request Your Custom Title Now! Join Date: May 2002 Location: Canberra Posts: 25,596	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.

06-06-2003, 01:50 AM	#3 (permalink)
Kenny 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.

06-06-2003, 03:23 AM	#5 (permalink)
Eclipse 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.

06-06-2003, 03:26 AM	#6 (permalink)
luckyeddie Hall of Fame Member Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Derby, England Posts: 17,625	Oh, and welcome to the best cricket board in the world, vicpride29

06-06-2003, 05:52 AM	#8 (permalink)
Tim Cricketer Of The Year 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.

06-06-2003, 10:51 AM	#14 (permalink)
marc71178 Eyes not spreadsheets Join Date: Nov 2001 Location: England Posts: 56,334	I was talking about your comment about English "all-rounders"

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)