Shane Bond - how good?

[Kent]

Richard's stats are interesting for a small sample, although Bond's certainly no disgrace for being less than 100% lethal. On that basis you could argue Shane Warne's only true test as a spin bowler in his generation was his record v India, and therefore is over-rated.

Unfortunately Bond's injury is now requiring a Warren Frost-led action change, so everyone try not to be devastated if he comes back bowling anatomically-efficient, mechanically-ideal pies!

 

[Richard]

Richard- I always enjoy the level-headedness of your comments but do you realise how unrealistically negative you are? To suggest that "anyone can bowl fast inswinging yorkers" or that "any sane batsman would lick their lips at the prospect of facing Bond and Butler" shows a complete lack of comprehension of 99% of the worlds population. As far as I'm concerned, no sane person would go within a million miles of a ball being propelled at them at 150 kph (and I've gone just far enough in my limited cricket career to have faced some reasonably brisk bowling). Perhaps you yourself achieved something in cricket and therefore are quite understandably unimpressed by what you see as mediocre players? I'm all for being realistic and having a proper perspective on things, but surely you have a healthy respect for anyone who has played first class cricket? In all seriousness, the ability required to even play county cricket (or, closer to home for me, for an NZ first class side) is something that me or most people could never dream of, but you seem convinced that an overwhelming majority of first class cricketers are just plain hopeless.

I have undiluted respect as far as playing is concerned for anyone playing Club Second XI cricket in England, because they're almost certainly better than I'll ever be.
As far as anaylsis is concerned, I am not someone who tries to see the best in everything - you might say I rate on high standards (some would say unrealistic in certain areas).
And yet again, I have phrased the Bond-Butler comment poorly; I should, of course, have said any good Test batsman possesing sanity, not any batsman.
And when I say "anyone can bowl in-swinging Yorkers" I'm serious - I've bowled one or two in my short career, and believe me, that says something! It is possible to learn - the skill comes in being able to bowl them with regularity. I can't even bowl in-swing to order, let alone hit the length I'm aiming at most balls!

 

[Richard]

OK - forget about the Aussie series. He was called on very late because he was a backup for three bowlers, Martin, O'Connor, Nash, all which were not expected to break down so dramatically. There was no mention of him in any form of media as a real prospect to be brought into that test series or international honours at all. That is why he had little success, he was hardly mentioned.

An average of 96 is poor - fine. Look what is now - 24. All those people that try and pull apart his very short test career are really trying to clutch at straws and are missing the point as i thought i emphasised clear enough earlier on: judge him after 30+ test matches!! (Its also fine to discuss how good he is at the one-day game..)

I am perfectly happy to judge him on 30 or so Tests (if he plays that many).
Because circumstances very, very rarely conspire in someone's favour over such a period. IMO they have so far - if you want to disagree, you rate Tests against Bangladesh rater higher in importance than I do.

 

[cbuts]

only 2 out of bonds 10 test hve been against bangladesh. thats not gonig to blow out the average by much

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

only 2 out of bonds 10 test hve been against bangladesh. thats not gonig to blow out the average by much

Not at all depreciating the value of Shane Bond (I definitely rate him) but he took 11 wickets at 13.63 in those 2 Tests and 32 at 27.96 against all others.

 

[Richard]

And if more of the series'(!) had been played in less seamer-friendly conditions (like the India one was) I'm confident it would be still higher.

 

[Neil Pickup]

series'

:!( :!(

 

[Richard]

:!( :!(

You're even worse than an Australian on the CricInfo ECF called Michael Gunter.

 

[Neil Pickup]

You're even worse than an Australian on the CricInfo ECF called Michael Gunter.

At least I can pluralise.

 

[Richard]

Yes, so could he, and he got incredibly p***ed off whenever someone who couldn't posted.

 

[Neil Pickup]

Yes, so could he, and he got incredibly p***ed off whenever someone who couldn't posted.

Gaiehytiu wyisa haurhe iuejjfs, sakfsad, oujd, iisjdga - uasdgh uerjh eiuiue!!

I'm just taking the ignoring of rules of English to their logical conclusion.

 

[Richard]

Obviously.
:rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: