Andrew Flintoff

[KishanTeli]

Andrew Flintoff, is he improving? Often bowls without luck according to many commentators and critics. In your opinion is he the new Ian Botham? I think he has played enough tests to make a judgment on him, here is his record so far:

Mat Runs HS BatAv 100 50 W BB BowlAv 5w Ct St

29 1209 142 25.72 2 6 52 4/50 45.55 0 14 0

 

[Arjun]

To be honest, more often than not, Flintoff is not fit and when he isn't, he's not a good bowler. Not only that, he's not going to help himself by bowling so many short deliveries and giving so much width. He has to stick to the stumps and bowl further up. He has the power and he can be quite a handful, when he gets his line and length right. What I have seen of him against the Indians is quite good, so he needs to keep that form going. He bowled rather well against them in the World Cup match.

 

[Neil Pickup]

He was the pick of the pace bowlers by a country mile in Bangladesh, and is much more consistent than any of the rest of the pace attack.

He's not the new Botham, and I hate that tag. However, he's a brilliant guy to have in the side and I reckon he would be in every national side for matches away from the sub continent.

 

[Arjun]

He was the pick of the pace bowlers by a country mile in Bangladesh, and is much more consistent than any of the rest of the pace attack.

Don't they have better opposition? Anyway, he was more consistent than the rest of the bowling attack, but not the most consistent around, is he? He'll have to bowl to the stumps, if he has to get more wickets. What I really find a bit worrying is his Test bowling average of 45- You cannot win Test matches with that. He needs some specialist guidance, perhaps a former great can help him a little. But I doubt if anything will happen if he's always brought on as a second-change bowler, so using him earlier might help.

 

[Andre]

He was the pick of the pace bowlers by a country mile in Bangladesh, and is much more consistent than any of the rest of the pace attack.

That IS one hell of an effort - he didn't even play the Tests in Bangladesh.

 

[Adamc]

That IS one hell of an effort - he didn't even play the Tests in Bangladesh.

He did however play in the one-day series, where he did well with ball and bat.

 

[Jono]

Funnily enough I was watching the 2002 Natwest Trophy final earlier today and he bowled very poorly in that match, I always found he bowls too short too often, however I haven't seen him since the World Cup so I can't comment if he is improving.

What I can say is, calling him the next Ian Botham is ridiculous.

 

[Rik]

Flintoff is a good player to have bowling in the Subcontinent, since he keeps it tight, but unfortunately it's not a tactic that takes a lot of wickets out of OD cricket, and his batting is hopeless against quality spin. Whilst in ODIs you only have 10 overs to keep it tight in, in Tests Flintoff tries to keep it tight for 20odd overs and doesn't really try and take any wickets. The problem with this is that it's almost impossible to keep it dead tight for 20 overs, and when he starts to tire and bowl short and wide the batsmen take him to the cleaners. He will start well but rarely anything comes from his tight spells, and when he wavers all the pressure he just created, disappears.

 

[marc71178]

He was the pick of the pace bowlers by a country mile in Bangladesh, and is much more consistent than any of the rest of the pace attack.

Is this ODI's, not Tests!

 

[Neil Pickup]

I've made a great fool of myself here.

Pick of the seamers in Sri Lanka, I meant

 

[V Reddy]

I've made a great fool of myself here.

You already are :rolleyes: :saint:

His batting needs to improve now as he says he doesn't want to bowl more than 10 overs. He always makes me feel that he will succeed from now on but it rarely happens.

 

[KishanTeli]

What I can say is, calling him the next Ian Botham is ridiculous.

I would just like to say before anyone mentions it that I have by no means stated he is the next Ian Botham. Just wanted to know the opinions of everyone else. The reason i made this 'comparison' was because i have heard this is the media.

 

[marc71178]

I've made a great fool of myself here.

Pick of the seamers in Sri Lanka, I meant

Carrying on his recent trend from the summer series.

 

[Shane Warne]

he`s worthless

 

[marc71178]

he`s worthless

Constructive post that.

Care to tell us why?

 

[Rik]

Carrying on his recent trend from the summer series.

In the series with South Africa, the best bowler only played in 2 matches, took 13 wickets at 19.92 and bowled England to victory with 6-34 in the 2nd innings. James Kirtley was the only bowler who troubled the South Africans more than fleetingly during the series. Flintoff (10 at 59.20) bowled tidily but was in the main unthreatening. Injury (as usual) and flat pitches didn't help, but returns of 0-97 and 0-16, 1-115, 2-91 and 1-54, 2-55 and 2-63, 1-88 and 1-13 tell their own story.

 

[Richard]

But remember, he was the most unlucky bowler ever!
He really deserved all those wickets that he didn't get with poor or average deliveries!
Because a chance was created, he deserved a wicket with them, apparently.
Kirtley was the best bowler of the summer by a country mile and Johnson was second. OK, Kirtley was fortunate in that he bowled on the two piles of rubbish, but so did Flintoff, and he didn't exploit them like Kirtley did. Johnson was also fortunate in that he bowled against Zimbabwe, who played more than his fair share of poor strokes, but to call a bowler of 59.20 the best (and with better batting it would have been even higher, even if the catching had been perfect) is quite ludicrous.
Even Anderson and Harmison were better! Harmison bowled one really good ball in that series - the leg-cutter that dismissed Kirsten at The Oval.
Somehow I doubt he meant to bowl it, though.

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

Constructive post that.

Care to tell us why?

I wouldn't pay too much attention to Shane Warne's (forum member) brief posts. Apparently the only West Indian long version domestic competition is worthless. :rolleyes:

 

[Richard]

Andrew Flintoff, is he improving? Often bowls without luck according to many commentators and critics. In your opinion is he the new Ian Botham?

IMO he simply has to have improved before the 2003 summer - he averaged over 50 against South Africa, and scored 77 and 30 in a Test against Sri Lanka.
He would not have been capable of doing that before the 2003 summer.
There is no question that he will ever be even close to as good as Botham was.

 

[marc71178]

but returns of 0-97 and 0-16, 1-115, 2-91 and 1-54, 2-55 and 2-63, 1-88 and 1-13 tell their own story.

Except they don't because he bowled far better than those figures suggest.