Fidel Edwards VS Andrew Flintoff as test bowlers

[Jono]

Originally Posted by smalishah84

It was a perfectly valid observation. Just pointing out an odd facet of our sport.

[smalishah84]

on further thought yeah, I think he was right....my bad

[centurymaker]

imagine if there were stats on edges, play & misses for each batsman and corresponding stats for bowlers.
for example, avg no. of deliveries faced per play & a miss.. or maybe avg no. of deliveries played at per play & a miss (to exclude leaves)

[weldone]

A fully committed play-and-miss might be a bigger mistake than a nick, but not one where you go on to make a stroke, realise at the last fraction of a moment that you might nick it and then decide to lessen your commitment slightly to make sure you miss it, just. (I'm not talking aout withdrawing from the shot completely at the last moment, I'm talking about those cases where you don't even have the time to withdraw from the shot - you just slow down your hand movement slightly, slow down your bat speed slightly at the last moment to miss it - if you understand what I mean).

And from personal experience, I would say it's very difficult to distinguish between the two from a spectators PoV. I would say more than half the play-and-miss that we see are of the 2nd type.

[Spark]

Well yeah, but that's the kind of nuances that stats don't see, which is the original point

[benchmark00]

I defs see it as a bowler has erred by moving it further than required/not pitching it full enough, not that the batsman has made a bigger error and resulted in a play and a miss.

Batsman will play at the ball regardless, up to the bowler to pitch it full enough/make it move just enough so the batsman nicks it.

[uvelocity]

nah ****, bowler just far too good for batsman, politely can offer to put a bell in it of course

[benchmark00]

Nah, pitch the ball up an extra little bit and the play and miss becomes an edge.

Ofcourse pitch it up too much and it becomes a half volley.

[centurymaker]

Originally Posted by weldone

A fully committed play-and-miss might be a bigger mistake than a nick, but not one where you go on to make a stroke, realise at the last fraction of a moment that you might nick it and then decide to lessen your commitment slightly to make sure you miss it, just. (I'm not talking aout withdrawing from the shot completely at the last moment, I'm talking about those cases where you don't even have the time to withdraw from the shot - you just slow down your hand movement slightly, slow down your bat speed slightly at the last moment to miss it - if you understand what I mean).

And from personal experience, I would say it's very difficult to distinguish between the two from a spectators PoV. I would say more than half the play-and-miss that we see are of the 2nd type.

never fully thought about it. good point.
like a batsman may be uncertain at the very last sec about his ability to make proper contact to a given delivery and therfore mayslightly withdraw from its initial intended shot, which turns out to be enough to miss the ball..

it happens more when the bowler is on top of you or early on in a batsman's innings i think?
coz now that it's come to my realization, it's how Hussey kept getting beaten by miles by Morkel in the 2nd innings of the 1st test. . It seems like it's a uncertain state of mind that brings about that instinctive action.

on the contrary, if you are confident, then you're perhaps unlikely to make such slight withdrawals. you'd probably have more faith in your intended shot..

[Spark]

Well I think re: Hussey vs Morkel in the Test, benchy's point about Morkel pitching way too short is pretty spot-on. He was never going to nick those on that length.

[centurymaker]

Originally Posted by benchmark00

I defs see it as a bowler has erred by moving it further than required/not pitching it full enough, not that the batsman has made a bigger error and resulted in a play and a miss.

Batsman will play at the ball regardless, up to the bowler to pitch it full enough/make it move just enough so the batsman nicks it.

i see it as batsman not being good enough to adjust to the swing/seam despite the ball having been pitched further back.

[benchmark00]

Originally Posted by centurymaker

i see it as batsman not being good enough to adjust to the swing/seam despite the ball having been pitched further back.

Nah that's silly. The art of good seam bowling is to pitch it on a length that the batsman considers driveable, but by the time it reaches the bat it has deviated just enough to take the edge.

[Daemon]

Someone like Ishant Sharma beats the bat pretty often for someone with such a poor average, which also backs up the point about it being the bowlers mistake as well pitching it too short. But to say the batsmen has not erred is wrong imo. If the batsmen's intention was to make contact with the ball (unless the situation is the one that weldone described) and he's missed it, the batsmen has definitely made a bigger mistake there than if he'd nicked it.

[benchmark00]

Originally Posted by Daemon

Someone like Ishant Sharma beats the bat pretty often for someone with such a poor average, which also backs up the point about it being the bowlers mistake as well pitching it too short. But to say the batsmen has not erred is wrong imo. If the batsmen's intention was to make contact with the ball (unless the situation is the one that weldone described) and he's missed it, the batsmen has definitely made a bigger mistake there than if he'd nicked it.

Yes but in both instances the batsman has erred exactly the same, it's just one length is fuller than the other, getting the edge.

[Daemon]

Originally Posted by benchmark00

Yes but in both instances the batsman has erred exactly the same, it's just one length is fuller than the other, getting the edge.

I get your point, but I was referring to a batsmen edging a delivery vs playing and missing the exact same delivery, in which case it's pretty obvious who's erred more.