• 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.

*Official** New Zealand in England

thierry henry

International Coach
A few points on various things I have read in this thread.

1) Shane Bond bowls big in-swingers (NOT out-swingers, as some people seem to think) with the new red and white balls. This also makes him very effective at nicking out left-handers.

2) Early on Rik said he would love to see a 100 mph ball hit for 6. If you go back and watch the Aussie Vs SL game at the World Cup, you will see a very hostile spell from Brett Lee where he was consistently in the 155-160 kph range bowling to Sanath Jayasuriya. Eventually he bowled a leg-stump half-volley, and Jayasuriya hit it for 6 over square leg. From memory the ball was probably between 96-98mph. The shot will always stick in my memory because I am not exaggerating when I say that all Jayasuriya did was get his bat down in an attempt to avoid being bowled. There was little or no attacking intent in the stroke, it was just a defense mechanism to jam the bat down, and the ball fair flew for six.

3) I disagree that Daryl Tuffey's predictability makes him too hittable. Line and length bowling will never go out of fashion. Are McGrath and Pollock too hittable? Their records suggest no.

I also believe that Tuffey has improved vastly on flat pitches. His excellent seam and wrist position enables him to extract leg-cut on the flattest of pitches. Watch his bowling effort in the second test in India for proof. The way he nicked out the likes of Dravid on a featherbed was tremendous.
 

PY

International Coach
Didn't Sherwin Campbell hit Akhtar for 6 from his first ball in World Cup '99? Around 100mph (160kph) and he top-edged (?) it and it went bout 5 yards over the boundary. :O.

Found it. :) West Indies v Pakistan, Bristol 1999 Ball-by-Ball

1.1 Shoaib Akhtar to Campbell, SIX, runs from a mile away, pitched short, goes for a hook, top edges over thirdman for a SIX!
 
Last edited:

anzac

International Debutant
thierry henry said:
A few points on various things I have read in this thread.

3) I disagree that Daryl Tuffey's predictability makes him too hittable. Line and length bowling will never go out of fashion. Are McGrath and Pollock too hittable? Their records suggest no.

I also believe that Tuffey has improved vastly on flat pitches. His excellent seam and wrist position enables him to extract leg-cut on the flattest of pitches. Watch his bowling effort in the second test in India for proof. The way he nicked out the likes of Dravid on a featherbed was tremendous.

agreed on most things - although I'd say that consistant line & length bowling of it's own is imanently getable to an aggresive batsman who wants to go at it...........Ewan Chatfield was almost metronome like with his consistant line & length - but when a batsman wanted to go after him he was getable because they knew where the ball was going to be.........eg Miandad in ODI series in OZ........

IMO the thing that differentiates Tuffey & McGrath from Chatfield is that they bowl into the wicket & extract bounce as well - which can vary depending upon the effort they put into the delivery, as well as from variable bounce in the pitch.........

it's also IMO one of the reasons that Lee can be getable when he bowls back of a length as I've heard him described as bowling along the wicket and not into it - if the bounce from the pitch is a touch low or slow then he will come onto the bat at a hittable height - if he's a touch wide as well then it's easy pickings to the fence...........

8D
 
Last edited:

marc71178

Eyes not spreadsheets
BlackCap_Fan said:
I didn't know oram had such a low average.Amazing..
It's very early in his career and he had the massive advantage of those pitches for the India series...

If he can maintain that average it would be a superb effort, but I very much doubt he can.
 

Neil Pickup

Cricket Web Moderator
Craig said:
:rolleyes:

What relevance does that have to what I have said? He is saying Thorpe isnt back and I'm saying Have you been in Colombia lately refering to that fact I'm surprised he didnt to know that for whatever reason.

I dont know why you seem to have got some ego.

It really had nothing to do with you. Shut up Neil.
Everything has something to do with James, Andre, Rich, Corey and Me.

And as for the conclusion that asking you to lay off a new member shows an ego, I have to question your logic.
 

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
Mingster said:
The conditions suited Murali and he bowled well. But Fleming just found a way of nullifing him. you can basically pad him if you are a leftie because you wont get LBW because his balls are usually turning too much.

It's a bloody disgrace for you to name Vaas as the same class as McGrath, etc.

You seem to always say statistics mean everything, then why is his average over 27?
I have never said anything of the sort.
Murali can befuddle the best left-handers - if he bowls as he can.
See Thorpe in the recent series.
It is not a disgrace for me to name Vaas along with McGrath and Pollock, because it is just my opinion.
If I said it as if I thought it was fact that would be a disgrace.
Because better is always a MOO.
Opinions don't have to be based on stats.
 

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
Neil Pickup said:
JN Gillespie - 189 @ 25.24
DS Lehmann - 7 @ 25.71
GD McGrath - 430 @ 21.71
SK Warne - 491 @ 25.71
R Clarke - 4 @ 15.00
RL Johnson - 16 @ 17.18
A McGrath - 4 @ 14.00
MJ Saggers - 3 @ 20.66
SE Bond - 43 @ 24.30
JDP Oram - 22 @ 23.18
MH Richardson - 1 @ 17.00
Shabbir Ahmed - 33 @ 21.78
Shoaib Akhtar - 118 @ 23.41
Waqar Younis - 373 @ 23.56
AC Dawson - 5 @ 23.40
SM Pollock - 326 @ 21.14
DJ Terbrugge - 20 @ 21.20
MS Atapattu - 1 @ 24.00
WRS de Silva - 7 @ 20.85
KHRK Fernando - 4 @ 27.00
M Muralitharan - 485 @ 22.94
JJC Lawson - 29 @ 24.51

Shoaib is the only other that wasn't named to have >100 at <27.
For some reason forgot Shoaib.:rolleyes:
All of the others I fully expect their averages to rise. If they get the chance.
 

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
Neil Pickup said:
Everything has something to do with James, Andre, Rich, Corey and Me.

And as for the conclusion that asking you to lay off a new member shows an ego, I have to question your logic.
Surely you don't think there was any genuine menace in Craig's original comment?
If so it would be totally out of character.
Still, maybe it would be best for Craig to be excrubiably careful with his words to new members who do not have the benefit of this foresight.
 
Last edited:

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
thierry henry said:
I also believe that Tuffey has improved vastly on flat pitches. His excellent seam and wrist position enables him to extract leg-cut on the flattest of pitches. Watch his bowling effort in the second test in India for proof. The way he nicked out the likes of Dravid on a featherbed was tremendous.
Will be watching for this with interest in 4 months.:)
Always knew of his ability on green wickets, and if what you say is true then he'll become a fantastic bowler.
 

Neil Pickup

Cricket Web Moderator
Richard said:
Surely you don't think there was any genuine menace in Craig's original comment?
If so it would be totally out of character.
Still, maybe it would be best for Craig to be excruviably careful with his words to new members who do not have the benefit of this foresight.
Excruciably? ;)

I've never said it had any menace, I just thought it was a little inappropriately harsh on a new member who hadn't totally acclimatised into the CW climate of, er, don't think there's a word that fits..
 

thierry henry

International Coach
Richard said:
Will be watching for this with interest in 4 months.:)
Always knew of his ability on green wickets, and if what you say is true then he'll become a fantastic bowler.
Well, I'm not getting over-excited about Tuffey. If he can keep going for a few more years averaging in the high 20s and showing some ability to take wickets on flat pitches I'll be happy. Another example was in the recent tests against Pakistan, although he didn't exactly rip through their batting, he always looked NZs most likely bowler against the top-order batsman.
 

Mingster

State Regular
thierry henry said:
AI also believe that Tuffey has improved vastly on flat pitches. His excellent seam and wrist position enables him to extract leg-cut on the flattest of pitches.
Tuffey's seam position is not great at all.

That's why he does't swing the ball, its scrambled too much. One thing he really needs to work on.
 

Anil

Hall of Fame Member
Richard said:
No, it's not.
Only outstanding bowlers are effective in all conditions. Warne, yes, but McGrath and Pollock - IMO no. Vaas, yes, though.
Warne was not effective in or against India, so your definition doesn't apply to him.....
 

Top