Can Sunil Narine become an all time great?

[ohnoitsyou]

WI didn't last long enough for them to get much of a bowl iirc

Tbf Narine was getting a lot more turn than any of our guys.

 

[Hurricane]

Big revs/turning the ball both ways is not a necessity to be a good test spinner. Dan V had excellent control, allowing him to not only stagnate scoring and therefore frustrate batsmen, but it meant he could bowl effectively to his plans, his arm ball was only made useful by the fact that he could get a little bit of turn on occasions, subtle variation was another strength of his, he basically had a very good understanding of the mental side of spin bowling, the mind games between bowler and batsmen, something I've always felt the CW community easily looks past when assessing spinners.
.

I respectfully agree with all you have said but also DWTA. In my opinion peeps just gifted their wicket to him. Part of that yes was due to his stinginess forcing people into taking risks against him. The rest was a mind **** because people remembered how good he used to be. This is just my theory however and I have no proof or way of substantiating it. With regards to his arm ball. there was little difference between his arm ball and his normal delivery and most of the time he bowled straight breaks unless he fluked one that hit the seam. I preferred Dan's post where he conceded that Dan was ineffective towards the end despite having the same bag tricks that had been working for him for the previous 5 years.

 

[Flem274*]

@ ohno he's a big turner of the ball and that pitch was the most spin friendly NZ has produced in years - of course he would get big turn

WW was just using his dick to wave his flag around though with that comment so he didn't deserve much of a reply.

 

[WindieWeathers]

WI didn't last long enough for them to get much of a bowl iirc

Exactly...Narine was the only spinner who performed in that game so i don't know how that track could be called a "spinner's paradise".

EDIT: i was replying to the "Boult" comment before Flem changed it.

 

[Flem274*]

Exactly...Narine was the only spinner who performed in that game so i don't know how that track could be called a "spinner's paradise".

....did you watch a single ball?

 

[Spark]

I respectfully agree with all you have said but also DWTA. In my opinion peeps just gifted their wicket to him. Part of that yes was due to his stinginess forcing people into taking risks against him. The rest was a mind **** because people remembered how good he used to be. This is just my theory however and I have no proof or way of substantiating it. With regards to his arm ball. there was little difference between his arm ball and his normal delivery and most of the time he bowled straight breaks unless he fluked one that hit the seam. I preferred Dan's post where he conceded that Dan was ineffective towards the end despite having the same bag tricks that had been working for him for the previous 5 years.

When people seem to be regularly gifting wickets to a spinner that means he's beating them in flight.

 

[Prince EWS]

When people seem to be regularly gifting wickets to a spinner that means he's beating them in flight.

That's not what happened though.

 

[WindieWeathers]

....did you watch a single ball?

Yep...it did spin but it was no "raging turner" imo. But if the NZ players think that that track was actually a spinner's paradise then they'll be in for a huge surprise when they come to the caribbean next month...because our tracks turn much more than that one.

 

[Hurricane]

That's not what happened though.

I hope your agreeing with me. I think you are just not sure due to the brevity of your post.

The following posts date back to 2005 on Dan's ineffectiveness

*drags up old argument*

How in God's name has Vettori carried the NZ attack, when, with the exception of one series against Australia, and some games against Bangladesh and Zimbabwe (which don't count), he has been completely ineffective compared to almost every regularly picked medium pacer?

me too tbh

Tail-enders, minnows, generally dismissed with what I like to call "unintentional arm balls"

Let me start firstly by saying two things.

1. Vettori is without doubt one of the top five ODI bowlers of this generation and a guy who has the right mixture of speed, flight and variation to tie down batsmen.

2. Vettori is without doubt one of the top six batsmen currently available in the longer form of the game for NZ Cricket.


But....

His inability to turn the ball consistently in test cricket, combined with his mentality which seems to be tying down batsmen rather than attacking them is what kills the NZ side in the test environment.

Vettori bowls the most overs, takes the most wickets and goes for the lowest run rate of any NZ bowler, all good qualities - until you realise that he's taking each wicket at about 40-45 and that his strike rate is up near 100 per wicket.

This means for all that time Vettori is restricting someone to 2.5 to 3 an over, he's not really regularly taking wickets or threatening the batsmen, meaning pressure is on at the other end to do so.

My view is that because of this, NZ has regressed as a test playing nation because at least before the day of Vettori (or more importantly, with Vettori before his back problems that curtailed the spin he used to generate), we had more bowlers averaging sub 30 with the ball (Nash, Cairns, Doull, Tuffey in his pomp) than we do now, potentially because they had to bowl more overs because they didn't have Dan the workhorse clogging up an end with efficient yet unattacking bowling.

It's a harsh comment on Vettori, some might say he's shouldering the full burden of the fact that NZ don't have good bowlers at the moment but my view is that it's because he bowls so many thrifty overs that the pressure is put on at the other end and that's where they score runs.

 

[Prince EWS]

Yep...it did spin but it was no "raging turner" imo. But if the NZ players think that that track was actually a spinner's paradise then they'll be in for a huge surprise when they come to the caribbean next month...because our tracks turn much more than that one.

Yeah I agree. It turned a lot by NZ standards but by world standards it really wasn't a turner at all. Exactly how much that pitch favoured the spinners has been exaggerated a bit.

 

[Flem274*]

Yep...it did spin but it was no "raging turner" imo. But if the NZ players think that that track was actually a spinner's paradise then they'll be in for a huge surprise when they come to the caribbean next month...because our tracks turn much more than that one.

well yes, your pitches make nikita miller a 17 average bowler...

by normal standards that hamilton pitch was a turner, which means narine did not succeed in traditional new zealand conditions like you claim, and no amount of comparisons to part timers and blokes struggling to average less than 40-50 in NZ FC will change that.

 

[Prince EWS]

I hope your agreeing with me. I think you are just not sure due to the brevity of your post.

I'm going to be honest. I read Spark's reply but didn't check to see which post he was quoting and assumed he was talking about Narine's effort at Hamilton, and not replying to your Vettori post. So I was neither agreeing or disagreeing with you and in the end wasn't even disagreeing with Spark.

 

[Hurricane]

I'm going to be honest. I read Spark's reply but didn't check to see which post he was quoting and assumed he was talking about Narine's effort at Hamilton, and not replying to your Vettori post. So I was neither agreeing or disagreeing with you and in the end wasn't even disagreeing with Spark.

That's fine I'm probably changing the topic slightly anyway so will step back at this point.

 

[WindieWeathers]

well yes, your pitches make nikita miller a 17 average bowler...

by normal standards that hamilton pitch was a turner, which means narine did not succeed in traditional new zealand conditions like you claim, and no amount of comparisons to part timers and blokes struggling to average less than 40-50 in NZ FC will change that.

The bottom line Flem is he's performed in countries that are alien to what he's used to i.e NZ, SA, England and Australia...whether you think that track was a "turner" or not is neither here nore there because tbh as long as he's taking wickets i'll be happy .

Just thinking ahead to the NZ series it will be interesting to see how they try to combat him this time.

 

[Hurricane]

Just thinking ahead to the NZ series it will be interesting to see how they try to combat him this time.

Indeed.

 

[Flem274*]

The bottom line Flem is he's performed in countries that are alien to what he's used to i.e NZ, SA, England and Australia...whether you think that track was a "turner" or not is neither here nore there because tbh as long as he's taking wickets i'll be happy .

Just thinking ahead to the NZ series it will be interesting to see how they try to combat him this time.

Bottom line is tests =/= limited overs and you can't just say "oh he succeeded in that one game on that very un-NZ like pitch" as proof he is now a certified Good Bowler in New Zealand.

He has a lot of potential but until he varies his flights and landing spots he's a bit vulnerable because he only has the big turn and unreadableness and those can change.

 

[WindieWeathers]

Anyway fellas...all i was saying is if he was to have an Ajmal type impact on test cricket now i firmly believe he could put himself up there as an ATG....

 

[WindieWeathers]

Bottom line is tests =/= limited overs and you can't just say "oh he succeeded in that one game on that very un-NZ like pitch" as proof he is now a certified Good Bowler in New Zealand.

He has a lot of potential but until he varies his flights and landing spots he's a bit vulnerable because he only has the big turn and unreadableness and those can change.

He might not change the flight on every delivery Flem but he CAN flight the ball as we saw with at least three of the wickets he got in the 6fer...it's a work in progress but he has it in his locker and that's the encouraging thing for me...i mean he just done Kohli with flight HERE a few weeks ago..so he's getting better and better at it. We'll see if he continues that trend against the kiwis next month.

 

[Howsie]

Nope. He's a good limited overs bowler but that's about it. Will struggle to take regular wickets in test cricket, could easily see him being Ashwin like when the pitch isn't a raging turner. Might do well at home from time to time but that's about it.

 

[wellAlbidarned]

Nope. He's a good limited overs bowler but that's about it. Will struggle to take regular wickets in test cricket, could easily see him being Ashwin like when the pitch isn't a raging turner. Might do well at home from time to time but that's about it.

every single claim like this about a spinner needs a *except against NZ* disclaimer attached to it by default imo