Cricket Betting Site Betway
Page 1 of 13 12311 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 182
Like Tree89Likes

Thread: *Official* (only joking) Stephen Harmison thread

  1. #1
    Cricket Web Staff Member Richard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    2005
    Posts
    80,401

    *Official* (only joking) Stephen Harmison thread

    Well, someone suggested the *Official* England in Bangladesh thread was getting swamped by the Harmison debate, so here we are:
    Fred Tetanus likes this.
    RD
    Appreciating cricket's greatest legend ever - HD Bird...............Funniest post (intentionally) ever.....Runner-up.....Third.....Fourth
    (Accidental) founder of Twenty20 Is Boring Society. Click and post to sign-up.
    chris.hinton: h
    FRAZ: Arshad's are a long gone stories
    RIP Fardin Qayyumi (AKA "cricket player"; "Bob"), 1/11/1990-15/4/2006

  2. #2
    Request Your Custom Title Now! Mr Mxyzptlk's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    Trinidad and Tobago (Trinidad)
    Posts
    36,797
    Whether you (not you in partincular Richard... it's general) like it or not, Harmison is currently playing for England and is actually doing well. Whether he's a Test class bowler or not, or even if he never will be, the fact is that he's getting it done now and there's no reason to drop him as a result.
    Sreesanth said, "Next ball he was beaten and I said, 'is this the King Charles Lara? Who is this impostor, moving around nervously? I should have kept my mouth shut for the next ball - mind you, it was a length ball - Lara just pulled it over the church beyond the boundary! He is a true legend."

    The...er...Twitter[/SIZE][/CENTER]

  3. #3
    Cricket Web Staff Member Richard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    2005
    Posts
    80,401
    Originally posted by Marc71178
    I find it hard to believe that you persist in this line. Of 37 wickets, 6 caught behind, 8 bowled and 3 LBW can't all be bad batting.
    Oh, yes, they can. The description of the dismissals is nothing to judge on - you simply have to have watched them or have had them accurately described to you to have a chance of assessing whether or not they were through good bowling.
    Originally posted by luckyeddie
    Sorry, Richard.

    Your argument, although well constructed and thorough, is clearly nonsense for one reason - most batsmen 'get themselves out' every time they bat.

    I'm presuming that you never watched any of today's play. After Michael Vaughan scored his first single, he could easily have been dismissed no less than EIGHT occasions before he made another run - and that against Bangladesh. None of them were 'unplayable' balls, all were down to errors brought about by circumstances (on 1 for half an hour, out of nick, not getting forward positively etc etc etc).

    One of the most salient points made in this fast-becoming-farcical discussion is the fact that if Harmison is bad, so are the rest of the England bowlers, if not worse.

    Harmison is in the side, for better or for worse. He is clearly a popular player amongst the rest of the side, everyone speaks up for him and he tries his guts out every time he plays. Sure, he's a bit like Nantie on occasion, but he looks to me as though he would gladly die for the team unlike others I could mention.

    That's good enough for me.
    Yes, you are right that most batsmen are more at fault than the bowler is at credit for more of their dismssals than not (though I wouldnít go as far as almost every time they bat Ė 65 to 70% is my estimate)
    However, what has Vaughanís poor start got to do with anything? A nick past the leg-stump (for instance) is just part of cricket Ė not especially lucky, nowhere near as lucky as a let-off, but the bowlers didnít deserve any credit and they didnít get anything that allowed anyone to give them some.
    I agree that Harmison tries hard Ė letís just see what happens. What we say isnít going to make any difference. But unless he gets good figures, effort and popularity counts for nothing.
    The argument that the rest of Englandís attack is poor is indeed a farcical one Ė yes, most of Englandís attack in the last 2 years has been rubbish. Fact.
    Fred Tetanus likes this.

  4. #4
    Cricket Web Staff Member Richard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    2005
    Posts
    80,401
    Originally posted by Mr Mxyzptlk
    Whether you (not you in partincular Richard... it's general) like it or not, Harmison is currently playing for England and is actually doing well. Whether he's a Test class bowler or not, or even if he never will be, the fact is that he's getting it done now and there's no reason to drop him as a result.
    What you mean, Mr. M, is that he is currently getting good figures (statistics!), and as long as he continues to do so his place is guranteed!
    That is, as I have recently said, something which goes without saying.
    Fred Tetanus likes this.


  5. #5
    U19 12th Man JohnnyA's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Belfast NI
    Posts
    241
    I don't know what the debate has been. BUT Harmison IS is atest class bowler. His ceiling is very high IMHO. He's tall, quick, getting more and more acurate with every test match. He has an economical action, which should stand him well as far as injuries are concerned.

    I think he's possibly the best of Englands current battery of young fast bowlers. My ranking would be:

    Harmison
    Anderson
    Flintoff (if he can learn to move the ball the other way)
    Jones (if he recovers fully)
    Hoggard (if he ever learns to bowl when the ball doesn't swing ...)

    I think it's time to let the likes of Caddick go. He's been an excellent bowler for England over the years (when managed correct). But these young guys have to learn that it's up to them now, and then we'll see if they're up to it. As long as they can rely on the experienced guy to carry the load, then they will never have the impetus to step up to the plate.

    Jon
    Fred Tetanus likes this.

  6. #6
    Cricket Web Staff Member luckyeddie's Avatar
    Target Champion! Stuarts Xtreme Skateboarding Champion!
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    Derby, England
    Posts
    17,755
    JohnnyA

    Hullo dere. Jaysus, how der devil are yers? Oh, sorry, that's Dublin.

    Very good points - who knows? Marc (or the duck) might start the SWHAS (Steve Wayward-Harmison Appreciation Society). I'm beginning to love the guy - but don't trust me (or Richard) - we like Corky.

    When I looked up his economy rate a few days ago, I was simply staggered at just how economical he is (insert derisory joke here <quack> really?).

    You've picked my ideal seam attack 100% - and it's definitely time to let jug-ears go, great servant though he has been. Welcome to the boards.
    Nigel Clough's Black and White Army, beating Forest away with 10 men

  7. #7
    Request Your Custom Title Now! Mr Mxyzptlk's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    Trinidad and Tobago (Trinidad)
    Posts
    36,797
    Originally posted by Richard
    What you mean, Mr. M, is that he is currently getting good figures (statistics!), and as long as he continues to do so his place is guranteed!
    That is, as I have recently said, something which goes without saying.
    What I mean is that he is getting batsmen out, not statistics. You should seriously consider legally changing your name to something stat related.

  8. #8
    U19 12th Man JohnnyA's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Belfast NI
    Posts
    241
    Can someone find Steve a shirt that fits, and perhaps a razor? He looks like a hobo out there!
    Fred Tetanus likes this.

  9. #9
    Cricket Web Staff Member luckyeddie's Avatar
    Target Champion! Stuarts Xtreme Skateboarding Champion!
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    Derby, England
    Posts
    17,755
    Originally posted by JohnnyA
    Can someone find Steve a shirt that fits, and perhaps a razor? He looks like a hobo out there!
    That thought struck me when the team were having a drink. The rest were on water, SW-H was on Tennents Super or Carlsberg Special, I reckon.

    <quack> you git. That was my idea for next week's column

  10. #10
    U19 12th Man JohnnyA's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Belfast NI
    Posts
    241
    Originally posted by luckyeddie
    That thought struck me when the team were having a drink. The rest were on water, SW-H was on Tennents Super or Carlsberg Special, I reckon.

    <quack> you git. That was my idea for next week's column
    what does <quack> mean
    Fred Tetanus likes this.

  11. #11
    rather mad Norwegian Magrat Garlick's Avatar
    Defend Your Castle Champion! Monkey Diving Champion!
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    East Holland
    Posts
    26,679
    It's a standing joke round here. luckyeddie writes a column when he feels like it, called Devil Ducky's Column, so the <quack> is for any opinion this duck has.
    A follower of the schools of Machiavelli, Bentham, Locke, Hobbes, Sutcliffe, Bradman, Lindwall, Miller, Hassett, Benaud and Thunberg

    I had a glimpse of Eureka
    Chewing me up, chewing me up and spitting me out

    -jected, I was rejected
    I wasn't good enough to be elected
    Lava, it was like lava
    Moving through my body like fire

  12. #12
    Cricket Web Staff Member Richard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    2005
    Posts
    80,401
    Originally posted by Mr Mxyzptlk
    What I mean is that he is getting batsmen out, not statistics. You should seriously consider legally changing your name to something stat related.
    Yes, and the fact that he has wickets to his name is reflected in statistics - nothing more! "Wickets in Test-cricket" is a statistic. Averages and strike-rates are made out of this statistic.
    However, I would dispute that he is "getting batsmen out" through his own skill. As eddie points out, more wickets than not are mostly the batsman's fault, but the small number of pitch-off-move-away-hit-the-edge balls Harmison bowls is simply staggering. He unquestionably is swinging the ball more this match than he has ever done in his Test career, but he's still not bowling the RUDs in that form. He has managed a couple of snorters that again fall into the RUD category, but you can't bowl them without an inconsistent pitch, and this is certainly one of those.
    Fred Tetanus likes this.

  13. #13
    Eyes not spreadsheets marc71178's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    England
    Posts
    63,204
    Originally posted by Richard
    Oh, yes, they can. The description of the dismissals is nothing to judge on
    Yet you just judge that they are bad batting?



    Originally posted by Richard
    The argument that the rest of Englandís attack is poor is indeed a farcical one Ė yes, most of Englandís attack in the last 2 years has been rubbish. Fact.
    If he's outperforming the rest, why do people call for his head?

    It is farcical to suggest dropping the one who's performing ahead of others who aren't.
    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.

  14. #14
    Cricket Web Staff Member Richard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    2005
    Posts
    80,401
    Originally posted by marc71178
    Yet you just judge that they are bad batting?
    Yes, by looking at the dismissals.
    If he's outperforming the rest, why do people call for his head?

    It is farcical to suggest dropping the one who's performing ahead of others who aren't.
    No - it's farcical to suggest dropping someone who's performing to Test standard. If someone isn't performing, it's farcical to suggest they warrant keeping their place in the side.
    If your suggestion was true, someone averaging 70 when the rest were averaging 100 would merit their continued selection.
    There are certain standards that should be expected of a player, and if he's not achieving them he shouldn't keep his place.
    That's like that bull about "never change a winning team" - if someone isn't playing much of a part in the winning, by playing to the standards, they don't deserve to keep their place.
    Last edited by Richard; 28-10-2003 at 07:06 AM.
    Fred Tetanus likes this.

  15. #15
    Cricket Web Moderator Neil Pickup's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Oxford, England
    Posts
    27,203
    Originally posted by Richard
    If your suggestion was true, someone averaging 70 when the rest were averaging 100 would merit their continued selection.
    I'm not seeing the argument.
    MSN Messenger: minardineil2000 at hotmail dot com | AAAS Chairman
    CricketWeb Black | CricketWeb XI Captain
    ClarkeWatch: We're Watching Rikki - Are You?

    Up The Grecians - Exeter City FC

    Completing the Square: My Cricket Web Blog

Page 1 of 13 12311 ... 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
  •