Cricket Betting Site Betway
Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 58

Thread: Shane Bond

  1. #16
    Hall of Fame Member Sanz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    16,230
    Originally posted by Richard
    Given that I assume you aren't saying he's better than McGrath, Pollock, Gillespie etc. I think you need to consider the fact that there's no significant difference between fast and fast-medium.
    Bond has not proven that much in a Test career to date. In 4 serious Test-series, he's had 2 successes and 2 failures and 1 of the successes was in incredibly seam-friendly conditions.
    When he gets fit we'll see how good he really is, hopefully.
    Mcgrath, Pollock aren't really Express fast bowlers like BOND, Lee, Akhtar, Sami etc. The difference between Fast and medium fast is only 20 KMPH. Gillespie isn't the force he used to be. Based on what I have seen of Bond, Yes he is better than Jason Gillespie roght now.

  2. #17
    International Captain thierry henry's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Auckland, New Zealand
    Posts
    6,691
    Originally posted by anzac
    If he was then it must have been for a shortish time very early in his career......

    I do remember both him and Nash as being touted as the best new ball / 'quick' prospects since Brendon Bracewell...but I must admit that while I can remember Cairns bowling in the 140 ks, I can not remember him averaging above 145 ks consistantly, let alone bowling above the 150 kph mark......

    IMO this does not make him a genuine 'quick', as opposed to having been a good FMED & able to generate some good quicker deliveries......

    even b4 the Tour to England his speed was in the mid - higher 130 ks......I don't recall him being a mid 140 k average in the VB series when Wilson partnered him back in the early '90s, & unfortunately 1999 in England was the last time he was fully fit b4 his subsequent injuries on the ZIM & RSA Tours - since then his best that I can recall has been in the 130s...........& he is definately more of a Medium than Fast bowler these days so far as his average speed goes, with the occaisional quicker delivery.....much as Nash did after his injuries.....

    Well, you said he was never a "quick", I'd say that a 140+ bowler is very much a "quick". Certainly Cairns was regarded as NZ's potential next big thing-whether or not he would have been a 150 kph+ bowler is not clear, although considering he hit 146 in England in 1999 despite the accumulation of injuries over the years stunting his progress, it seems possible.

    Anyway, what I was really getting at was that while Cairns has played much of his career as a batting all-rounder and a 130-135 kph medium-fast bowler, and often only a third or fourth seamer, as a youngster all the potential was in his bowling. His big hitting was supposed to be a bonus but the real excitement was that he was a genuine replacement for Hadlee. Of course, his first serious injury came in his very first test and they never let up from there, so nobody will ever know how good (or fast) a bowler he could have been.

  3. #18
    Cricket Web Staff Member Richard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    2005
    Posts
    80,401
    Originally posted by Sanz
    Mcgrath, Pollock aren't really Express fast bowlers like BOND, Lee, Akhtar, Sami etc. The difference between Fast and medium fast is only 20 KMPH. Gillespie isn't the force he used to be. Based on what I have seen of Bond, Yes he is better than Jason Gillespie roght now.
    Possibly.
    But I wouldn't say "Gillespie isn't the force he used to be".
    He was played well for one series. Let's wait and see in Sri Lanka before thinking he's been worked-out. It still hasn't happened with McGrath yet.
    I don't think the difference between medium and fast matters - seam is seam, and generally that's what all bowlers like that attempt. Naming of pace is just an extra.
    RD
    Appreciating cricket's greatest legend ever - HD Bird...............Funniest post (intentionally) ever.....Runner-up.....Third.....Fourth
    (Accidental) founder of Twenty20 Is Boring Society. Click and post to sign-up.
    chris.hinton: h
    FRAZ: Arshad's are a long gone stories
    RIP Fardin Qayyumi (AKA "cricket player"; "Bob"), 1/11/1990-15/4/2006

  4. #19
    Hall of Fame Member Sanz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    16,230
    Richard - Gillespie is a great bowler but I have to admit he isn't as good as he was in 2000-2001. I saw him bowl on the flat tracks in India, he was deadly, Yesterday I saw him at Perth and sad to say I was not impressed. Even during the test series, he was good but hardly as good as 2000/01. I also think he has lost couple of yards in speed.

    That said, I think he still is a world class bowler and I would pick him above Akhtar,Lee etc. But If it came to a fully fit Bond and Fully fit Gillespie - I will pick Bond any day.


  5. #20
    Eyes not spreadsheets marc71178's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    England
    Posts
    63,251
    Originally posted by Richard
    Let's wait and see in Sri Lanka before thinking he's been worked-out. It still hasn't happened with McGrath yet.
    Do you think that could be because McGrath is actually a phenomenal bowler?
    marc71178 - President and founding member of AAAS - we don't only appreciate when he does well, but also when he's not quite so good!

    Anyone want to join the Society?

    Beware the evils of Kit-Kats - they're immoral apparently.

  6. #21
    World Traveller Craig's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Super Happy Fun Sugar Lollipop Land!
    Posts
    34,127
    Originally posted by Sanz
    Mcgrath, Pollock aren't really Express fast bowlers like BOND, Lee, Akhtar, Sami etc. The difference between Fast and medium fast is only 20 KMPH. Gillespie isn't the force he used to be. Based on what I have seen of Bond, Yes he is better than Jason Gillespie roght now.
    I disagree.

    Gillespie was the pick of the Australian fast bowlers against India.
    Beware the lollipop of mediocrity. Lick once and you suck forever...

    RIP Fardin Qayyumi, a true legend of CW

    Quote Originally Posted by Boobidy View Post
    Bradman never had to face quicks like Sharma and Irfan Pathan. He wouldn't of lasted a ball against those 2, not to mention a spinner like Sehwag.

  7. #22
    State Regular
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    Tamil Nadu
    Posts
    964

    Re: Shane Bond

    Originally posted by Sanz
    When Fit, I rate him the best Fast bowler in the World right now. When is he going to be fit again ??

    Let him get fit again and see what he really does, Bond haven't done wonders to be praised soooooooo highly!:rolleyes:
    ------------------------------------

  8. #23
    State Vice-Captain BlackCap_Fan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Auckland,N.Z
    Posts
    1,392

    Re: Re: Shane Bond

    Originally posted by Choora
    Let him get fit again and see what he really does, Bond haven't done wonders to be praised soooooooo highly!:rolleyes:
    except bowl some of the best dilveries ever.

    Totally destroying the aussies,who were supposedly the best.
    Batsman for Cricketweb Blue
    Stats:
    --------M-----I----N.O---Runs---Average---50's--100's--HS
    OD: -62---56----15-----1342----32.73-----10------0-------99 (seriously)
    FC: --40---77-----8------2067----29.96-----12------2-----120


    RIP Fardin 1990-2006

  9. #24
    International Debutant
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    Canberra, ACT
    Posts
    2,585
    Originally posted by thierry henry
    Well, you said he was never a "quick", I'd say that a 140+ bowler is very much a "quick". Certainly Cairns was regarded as NZ's potential next big thing-whether or not he would have been a 150 kph+ bowler is not clear, although considering he hit 146 in England in 1999 despite the accumulation of injuries over the years stunting his progress, it seems possible.

    Anyway, what I was really getting at was that while Cairns has played much of his career as a batting all-rounder and a 130-135 kph medium-fast bowler, and often only a third or fourth seamer, as a youngster all the potential was in his bowling. His big hitting was supposed to be a bonus but the real excitement was that he was a genuine replacement for Hadlee. Of course, his first serious injury came in his very first test and they never let up from there, so nobody will ever know how good (or fast) a bowler he could have been.
    ok so I use the term quick = fast etc - hence my original post etc....

    from memory Cairns was not just seen as the next best newball bowler of some potential / pace, but his batting was also a factor in the 'Hadlee replacement' theory as genuine allrounder..........

    another thing about his bowling that made everyone sit up & take notice was his height, and the fact that he banged it into the deck - an 'Australian' type seamer - most of NZ's seam options at that stage were 'along the wicket' types.........Cairns was different - the start of the new breed with a more aggresive delivery at the crease.........


  10. #25
    Cricket Web Staff Member Richard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    2005
    Posts
    80,401
    Originally posted by BlackCap_Fan
    except bowl some of the best dilveries ever.

    Totally destroying the aussies,who were supposedly the best.
    Interesting that he totally destroyed someone whom he averaged 96 in a series against.

  11. #26
    Cricket Web Staff Member Richard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    2005
    Posts
    80,401
    Originally posted by marc71178
    Do you think that could be because McGrath is actually a phenomenal bowler?
    No, I think it is because he benefits from poor batting quite a bit.
    How many times?:rolleyes:

  12. #27
    Cricket Web Staff Member Richard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    2005
    Posts
    80,401
    Originally posted by Sanz
    Richard - Gillespie is a great bowler but I have to admit he isn't as good as he was in 2000-2001. I saw him bowl on the flat tracks in India, he was deadly, Yesterday I saw him at Perth and sad to say I was not impressed. Even during the test series, he was good but hardly as good as 2000/01. I also think he has lost couple of yards in speed.

    That said, I think he still is a world class bowler and I would pick him above Akhtar,Lee etc. But If it came to a fully fit Bond and Fully fit Gillespie - I will pick Bond any day.
    I'm rather surprised at that.
    Gillespie hasn't bowled especially well in this VB Series, but he's still been easily the second-best (after :O Williams) of the Australians (Hogg doesn't really count). OK, Bond has been phenominal in ODIs most of his career but I'd still say they're about equally matched.
    Gillespie's ODI record has been consistently superb since the 1999 Aiwa Cup. 4.03(?)-an-over and an average of just over 21. Bond's exploits aren't quite as good nor quite as extensive.
    As for Test-matches, Bond has had one series of note (in West Indies) and Gillespie has had many. All right, he's been a little flattered in recent months (England, West Indies and Bangladesh, who didn't exactly have well-performing batting-line-ups) but he is a fantastic seam and swing bowler. Bond may be so too, but as of yet we don't know that he is.
    As for the Test-series, Gillespie may have been perceived to have bowled very well in 2000\01 but the fact is he averaged a nothing-special 30 for the series. In the recent series in Australia he didn't do very well either, but was still comfortably his team's best.
    He has probably lost 1 or 2 mph in pace (about a third of a "yard") in the last year or two. No more. He was always up and around close to 145 kph, and is now more like 135-40.

  13. #28
    State Regular
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    Tamil Nadu
    Posts
    964

    Re: Re: Re: Shane Bond

    Originally posted by BlackCap_Fan
    except bowl some of the best dilveries ever.

    Totally destroying the aussies,who were supposedly the best.
    I thought the best spell was by Akhter against Australia in which he took 5 wkts in just 15 balls.

    And if performance against Aus is all that matters then India should be regarded as the number one team in the world:O

  14. #29
    State Regular
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    Tamil Nadu
    Posts
    964
    The so called BEST bowler of the world has an impressive average of 96.33 against Australia in test matches.If his performance in ODI against Aus makes him the best OD player, then his performance against them in test matches makes him the worst possible bowler currently:P

  15. #30
    Eyes not spreadsheets marc71178's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    England
    Posts
    63,251
    Originally posted by Richard
    No, I think it is because he benefits from poor batting quite a bit.
    How many times?:rolleyes:
    Keep going, and one day you may find a second person to join you in this crazy theory, but I very much doubt it.

    Glenn McGrath is one of the all time greats, and who knows how many wicket's he's created for his team-mates?

Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast


Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •