• Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

Has Tim Southee "arrived"?

Top_Cat

Request Your Custom Title Now!
I reckon a lot of it is indignation from a vocal minority. He's a fat little medium quick with a h4x record, so everyone is waiting for him to fail/can't wait for him to fail as a kind of "see, he's **** really" petty revenge because he doesn't fit the archetype of the world class quick. I reckon if we had a forum in McGrath's early days we would have seen the same sort of thing once he established himself after a slow start (McGrath was a very different bowler, but also a guy who would have been prone to being underrated early on).
Don't think McGrath compares in a way favourable to Southee, tbh (although well never know the forum reaction, of course). Southee seems to have been more of a 'potential' pick whereas McG was already taking wickets in FC cricket and 'arrived' in the Test side a Test-quality bowler. I also don't agree at all he had a slow start; was one of the best Test quicks probably a year after he played his first Test.
 
Last edited:

Top_Cat

Request Your Custom Title Now!
Now I'm not sure whether you're referring to Philander or have just given me a quaint nickname. Happy either way.
 

Spark

Global Moderator
Why? Southee's record since he was dropped against South Africa two years ago stacks up against anyone in the world. Infact he has a very similar record to Steyn during that period.

Tim Southee - 70 wickets @ 22.25, Econ 2.85, SR 46, 3 5fers and 1 10fer.
Dale Steyn - 84 wickets @ 22, Econ 2.88, SR 45.8, 5 5fers and 1 10fer

With Steyn having played three more matches. Guys like Broad, Anderson etc average over 30 during this period, 30. And it's not like this is just some small time period here, it's nigh on two years. I'd take Southee over a Ryan Harris for example because he's done proper damage in the SC during this period.

Tim Southee has arrived (as he was always going to do) and I highly doubt he's going to regress to his 19 year old self like so many are waiting for him to do.
Because Harris has never bowled well in the SC and Vernon Philander doesn't exist, eh?
 

Flem274*

123/5
Don't think McGrath compares in a way favourable to Southee, tbh (although well never know the forum reaction, of course). Southee seems to have been more of a 'potential' pick whereas McG was already taking wickets in FC cricket and 'arrived' in the Test side a Test-quality bowler. I also don't agree at all he had a slow start; was one of the best Test quicks probably a year after he played his first Test.
I was talking about Philander in that post and why people seem so eager for him to come back to Earth.

Wasn't McGrath averaging about a billion after his first few tests or have I mixed him up with someone else? Anyway what I was trying to say was when McGrath first started gunning it I suspect there would have been a lot of "he doesn't bowl 150kph and swing it around corners? He'll come back to Earth!" from opposition fans on the net had we had a forum in those days. Bowlers are prone to being judged by how much they fit the fast bowler archetype early on rather than by how effective they are, and Philander and McGrath, in different ways except for the speed gun, don't really fit the mould. There would have been so many "just another tall fast medium bowler, will do ok but nothing special" posts about McGrath I reckon. Bit cynical of me, but there you go.
 

Top_Cat

Request Your Custom Title Now!
Well, y'know, serious speaking from one's rectum here but I dunno. There wasn't the same pace fetish around at that time and, if anything, the 'waiting for him to come crashing down' was probably aimed at the really quick guys. Quickest going around probably the W's and there were definitely some of that aimed at them (or flat out accusations of cheating). Guys never used to be able to bowl 140+ in their 30's so it was, to my recollection, considered wasteful to try to do what they did, guys who backed off and bowled line were favoured over out-and-out pace merchants.
 
Last edited:

Flem274*

123/5
Really? That's way different to today. I never would have guessed it considering every world class or great bowler from back in the day before speed guns is described as really quick by past players. I know old batsmen like to embellish their war stories a bit, but considering they do that I thought selectors and fans back then would have been all about the pace too.
 

Blocky

Banned
I was talking about Philander in that post and why people seem so eager for him to come back to Earth.

Wasn't McGrath averaging about a billion after his first few tests or have I mixed him up with someone else? Anyway what I was trying to say was when McGrath first started gunning it I suspect there would have been a lot of "he doesn't bowl 150kph and swing it around corners? He'll come back to Earth!" from opposition fans on the net had we had a forum in those days. Bowlers are prone to being judged by how much they fit the fast bowler archetype early on rather than by how effective they are, and Philander and McGrath, in different ways except for the speed gun, don't really fit the mould. There would have been so many "just another tall fast medium bowler, will do ok but nothing special" posts about McGrath I reckon. Bit cynical of me, but there you go.
Except McGrath early in his career was considered rapid and had steepling bounce. You ask good batsman what they're most worried about - swing, seam or bounce - they'll all say bounce. McGrath with his whippy (some say illegal) high arm action and his height as a player meant he was always capable of extracting good bounce from fuller lengths. He was also capable of the 140kmh delivery for much of his career at a time where outside of Pakistan, not many players were hitting those speeds.

It took McGrath 15 tests to break under 30 as an average and about another 15 tests to get himself down to under 25 where he spent the rest of his career. He was a few years older than Southee on debut and more established as a first class cricketer at that stage (mostly due to how exceptional Australia was back then where you didn't hear of 18 year olds making their squad)

McGrath is heavily under-rated in my view and deserves to be thought of in the Marshall/Hadlee/Lillee discussions, as does Ambrose and Akram.

Southee is starting to show some performances over the last two years that are McGrath'esque in terms of amount of wickets and average per game - however, McGrath did that for a decade and got around 450 of his wickets while his average was 25 or less. Southee's first 13 tests weren't great at all, it's taken him to 31 tests to get his average to 30 and you'd imagine in the next couple of test series, he should probably bring that under 30

But interestingly, if you look at his last 18 games - he's averaged 25.31, taken his wickets at better than two per innings bowled at a world class strike rate of 51 (McGrath's career strike rate) - if he continues this line of progression, he'll easily be NZ's second best bowler ever.

Hadlee is out of this world in terms of wickets per innings though.
 

Bahnz

Hall of Fame Member
Except McGrath early in his career was considered rapid and had steepling bounce. You ask good batsman what they're most worried about - swing, seam or bounce - they'll all say bounce. McGrath with his whippy (some say illegal) high arm action and his height as a player meant he was always capable of extracting good bounce from fuller lengths. He was also capable of the 140kmh delivery for much of his career at a time where outside of Pakistan, not many players were hitting those speeds.

It took McGrath 15 tests to break under 30 as an average and about another 15 tests to get himself down to under 25 where he spent the rest of his career. He was a few years older than Southee on debut and more established as a first class cricketer at that stage (mostly due to how exceptional Australia was back then where you didn't hear of 18 year olds making their squad)

McGrath is heavily under-rated in my view and deserves to be thought of in the Marshall/Hadlee/Lillee discussions, as does Ambrose and Akram.

Southee is starting to show some performances over the last two years that are McGrath'esque in terms of amount of wickets and average per game - however, McGrath did that for a decade and got around 450 of his wickets while his average was 25 or less. Southee's first 13 tests weren't great at all, it's taken him to 31 tests to get his average to 30 and you'd imagine in the next couple of test series, he should probably bring that under 30

But interestingly, if you look at his last 18 games - he's averaged 25.31, taken his wickets at better than two per innings bowled at a world class strike rate of 51 (McGrath's career strike rate) - if he continues this line of progression, he'll easily be NZ's second best bowler ever.

Hadlee is out of this world in terms of wickets per innings though.
I'm not sure who would under-rate a guy who averaged 21 in one of the strongest batting periods in the history of test cricket.
 

Jono

Virat Kohli (c)
Except McGrath early in his career was considered rapid and had steepling bounce. You ask good batsman what they're most worried about - swing, seam or bounce - they'll all say bounce. McGrath with his whippy (some say illegal) high arm action and his height as a player meant he was always capable of extracting good bounce from fuller lengths. He was also capable of the 140kmh delivery for much of his career at a time where outside of Pakistan, not many players were hitting those speeds.

It took McGrath 15 tests to break under 30 as an average and about another 15 tests to get himself down to under 25 where he spent the rest of his career. He was a few years older than Southee on debut and more established as a first class cricketer at that stage (mostly due to how exceptional Australia was back then where you didn't hear of 18 year olds making their squad)

McGrath is heavily under-rated in my view and deserves to be thought of in the Marshall/Hadlee/Lillee discussions, as does Ambrose and Akram.

Southee is starting to show some performances over the last two years that are McGrath'esque in terms of amount of wickets and average per game - however, McGrath did that for a decade and got around 450 of his wickets while his average was 25 or less. Southee's first 13 tests weren't great at all, it's taken him to 31 tests to get his average to 30 and you'd imagine in the next couple of test series, he should probably bring that under 30

But interestingly, if you look at his last 18 games - he's averaged 25.31, taken his wickets at better than two per innings bowled at a world class strike rate of 51 (McGrath's career strike rate) - if he continues this line of progression, he'll easily be NZ's second best bowler ever.

Hadlee is out of this world in terms of wickets per innings though.
Is it me, or was Flem not comparing McGrath and Southee at all? Was stating that he was speculating that the haters of Philander would have probably been haters of McGrath back in the day if there was a message board around when he first came on the scene.
 

SteveNZ

Cricketer Of The Year
Is it me, or was Flem not comparing McGrath and Southee at all? Was stating that he was speculating that the haters of Philander would have probably been haters of McGrath back in the day if there was a message board around when he first came on the scene.
Fairly certain he was, yep.

And how McGrath falls into a heavily under-rated category is beyond me, I've never met a soul who's offered that opinion.
 

Blocky

Banned
I'm not sure who would under-rate a guy who averaged 21 in one of the strongest batting periods in the history of test cricket.
I think people would see him in the Top 20 and "one of" the best pace bowlers of his era. I see him in the Top 5 of the modern era and the dominant pace bowler of his era.
 

Blocky

Banned
Is it me, or was Flem not comparing McGrath and Southee at all? Was stating that he was speculating that the haters of Philander would have probably been haters of McGrath back in the day if there was a message board around when he first came on the scene.
Philander, McGrath and Southee are an easier comparison set than most though - Philander aside, who has been brilliant from ball 1, McGrath and Southee both took their first 15 or so tests to get used to what they were doing in the side before starting to put in consistent performances; all three also rely on skill and control rather than pace.
 

Furball

Evil Scotsman
Fairly certain he was, yep.

And how McGrath falls into a heavily under-rated category is beyond me, I've never met a soul who's offered that opinion.
Frankly anyone who doesn't think McGrath's the greatest fast bowler of all time is under-rating him in my opinion.
 

Prince EWS

Global Moderator
So everyone here rates Southee ahead of Boult then?

Serious question as I rate Boult higher of the two.
Southee's closer to the finished article now, for mine. I think Boult relies more on having a decent attack around him to hide his off days whereas Southee is more the genuine attack leader. It's close though as Boult's more destructive at his best; I think he'll probably be regarded as the better of the two in a couple of years.
 

Prince EWS

Global Moderator
Yeah that's true. Still, Broad would walk into every attack in the world (including NZ's) except SA's (unless some brave soul wanted to pick him over Morkel) and maybe ours (I probably would).
I'd definitely pick Broad over Morkel and Siddle. While I think Southee is a very similar quality to Broad I don't think I could say the same thing for him as he'd be far less effective as a first change bowler. I suppose you could open with Harris and Southee and have Johnson come on first change, but it'd be a brave man to change anything with Johnson at the moment.
 

hendrix

Hall of Fame Member
Southee's closer to the finished article now, for mine. I think Boult relies more on having a decent attack around him to hide his off days whereas Southee is more the genuine attack leader. It's close though as Boult's more destructive at his best; I think he'll probably be regarded as the better of the two in a couple of years.
Nah. Southee just naturally gets bounce from a good length, whereas Boult just sorta skids through unless he bowls really full or really short. I think Boult could end with a tidy career average of around 28 or so, while Southee could be around the 25 mark.
 

Hurricane

Hall of Fame Member
the stereotype NZ inferiority complex in stronk in this thread.
"OMG, WE'VE GOT A DECENT PLAYER. THE WHOLE WORLD MUST ADMIT HE'S AWESOME"
Nah even if it is OTT - ie I wouldn't compare him to Steyn - I think it is good the NZ fans are fiercely proud of our good players. It has been commented on various times on CW that the NZ fans tend to stick by their good players to the hilt.
 

Top