Indians can't bowl - Where has the rumour come from as I myself and many indian friends arwe competent fast bowlers ?
With the English bid I said: Let us be brief. If you give back the Falkland Islands, which belong to us, you will get my vote. They then became sad and left
~ Cribbertarian ~
Rejecting 'analysis by checklist' and 'skill absolutism' since Dec '09
Originally Posted by John Singleton
I think the difference between Proctor and Tayfield is smaller than the difference between Holding and Gibbs though.
RIP Craig Walsh (Craig) 1985-2012
Proudly supporting the #2 cricketer of all time.
Steyn: Matches = 11 Ave = 27.28 SR = 46.0
S.Pollock: Matches = 13 Ave = 36.85 SR = 80.8
Adcock: Matches = 5 Ave = 29.28 SR = 74.8
P.Pollock: Matches = 14 Ave = 27.65 SR = 57.0
Procter: Matches = 7 Ave = 15.02 SR = 36.9
Actually you're right Satan, Donald's figures aren't flash. But they still significantly better than Shaun Pollock who is rank last.
The surprise package is Peter Pollock. On those numbers he deserves more votes than he is getting!
And we also can draw a reasonable conclusion from those 7 Test matches of Mike Procter. That is, he must have been one hell of a fast bowler.
Last edited by watson; 14-12-2012 at 02:53 AM.
“I'm writing a book on magic”, I explain, and I'm asked, “Real magic?” By real magic people mean miracles, thaumaturgical acts, and supernatural powers. “No”, I answer: “Conjuring tricks, not real magic”. Real magic, in other words, refers to the magic that is not real, while the magic that is real, that can actually be done, is not real magic.”
― Lee Siegel, 'Net of Magic: Wonders and Deceptions in India'
Both Pollock and Procter should make it but I'm trying not to over-think it and just pick who I think are the best two pacers.
I want Procter in the side too, and I will have him ahead of Shaun Pollock as first change.
~ Do you think I care for you so little that betraying me would make a difference ~
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)