tuffey vs harmison

[luckyeddie]

Of his 72 test wickets, Harmison has 41 against WIndies, Zimbabwe and BDesh in 7 tests at under 14 each. And Windies have one of the worst batting records in recent years.

His other 31 wickets cost him nearly 40 runs apiece. Suggest we see more of him against the top bowlers in the world before we proclaim him as world class.

One understands Englands paucity of bowling class and hence the desperation to blood heroes but still....

By statistics you are plainly driven
but new members are often forgiven
for their absence of class
and their head up their ass.
Who said world class? Just you, clearly given.

 

[a massive zebra]

By statistics you are plainly driven
but new members are often forgiven
for their absence of class
and their head up their ass.
Who said world class? Just you, clearly given.

Badgerhair said he was a great bowler and better than Larwood.

 

[luckyeddie]

I will concede that. He was not all over the place as one had seen earlier.

I do feel with his action as it is, he will find it difficult to last and will be highly prone to injuries.

'The action has been modified'
said his coach - but he maybe has lied.
SJS say's it's bad
and the Harmison lad
will be injury-prone - you decide.

 

[Neil Pickup]

Interesting - what makes you say that?

 

[SJS]

By statistics you are plainly driven
but new members are often forgiven
for their absence of class
and their head up their ass.
Who said world class? Just you, clearly given.

If you dont want to look at his statistics then pray what is it you are looking at to proclaim he has arrived ?

As far as asking the Kiwis is concerned as you have suggested elsewhere, well one test match against them and you think they are shedding bricks?

Come on Eddie. Give the guy a chance to grow up and when he does and performs amongst 'men' and does so regularly, then we will all agree that England has found a bowler to reckon with. Till then lets wait...and pray.

 

[SJS]

Interesting - what makes you say that?

I think he is still too open chested and lands his right foot too wide. From this action, trying to bring the ball to in line with off stump with an upright arm brushing past your right ear is a big strain on the right shoulder.

 

[superkingdave]

If you dont want to look at his statistics then pray what is it you are looking at to proclaim he has arrived ?

Originally Posted by SJS
Tuffey by a huge margin and stats have nothing to do with it.

Make up your mind.


You sayTuffey is better by miles, and yet outside of the seamer friendly pitches in New Zealand he has 18 wickest@49.94

I'll agree he is a better batsmen and fielder

 

[SJS]

Make up your mind.


You sayTuffey is better by miles, and yet outside of the seamer friendly pitches in New Zealand he has 18 wickest@49.94

I'll agree he is a better batsmen and fielder

You are right. I did say that. And I maintain that stats are not always the best way to compare unless they are strikingly different as say Bradman's and Barnes' from others. At best they can help put things in perspective if stats alone are being used to make a point.

I quoted Harmisons stats only because a debate was going on about his wickets in so many tests etc. I would still rate Tuffey better till I see evidence to the contrary and I am afraid I havent seen it yet. Again, I am not talking stats.

Its possible, we may see a different Harmison this summer and later against Australia but I reserve my judgement till then.

 

[luckyeddie]

If you dont want to look at his statistics then pray what is it you are looking at to proclaim he has arrived ?

As far as asking the Kiwis is concerned as you have suggested elsewhere, well one test match against them and you think they are shedding bricks?

Come on Eddie. Give the guy a chance to grow up and when he does and performs amongst 'men' and does so regularly, then we will all agree that England has found a bowler to reckon with. Till then lets wait...and pray.

Today, I'm responding in rhyme -
not something I do all the time.
So just cut me some slack
or I'll be on your back -
and the poems will be less than sublime.

You're new here - I won't call you barmy
that you think I'm a blind fan of Harmy.
Just like Nantie Hayward,
I christened him 'Wayward'
No sycophant, me. I'm not smarmy.

In conclusion, I'd just like to say
before SJS goes on his way,
that statistics don't lie,
but it's how you apply
them that counts at the end of the day.

 

[Loony BoB]

I dunno mate, even as an NZ'er, I'd say the Tuffey v. Harmison battle was thrown far in Harmy's favour when they both played at the same track with Harmy picking 8 and Tuffey picking 1.

 

[Albion]

Harmison has wickets against the Weak WI batting line up?

Is this the one that spanked the Saffies for 8 tons ?


His average against India is 28.00 and that was the first 2 tests of his career.

People dont seem to realise he is a different bowler now!

Ever since the Trent Bridge test vs SAF last year he has been magic

His 4 for 33 against SA at the oval levelled the series

 

[Neil Pickup]

I think he is still too open chested and lands his right foot too wide. From this action, trying to bring the ball to in line with off stump with an upright arm brushing past your right ear is a big strain on the right shoulder.

I'll have a close look during the second test

 

[anzac]

I don't really understand the basis for a comparison - as it's hardly as if they are the same sort of bowler is it?????

So far as I'm aware Harmison is a good deal quicker than Tuffey & bowls more at the batsman - perhaps a better comparison is Harmison & Butler, but Butler isn't in the current NZL squad??????

Likewise the comparison / debate of Flintoff V Oram - different bowlers & roles.....more direct comparisson would be Flintoff & the Cairns of prior his 2001 injuries..........

 

[marc71178]

Tuffey by a huge margin and stats have nothing to do with it.

Well if you rate Tuffey higher then they can't.

Pray tell why then.

 

[marc71178]

Come on Eddie. Give the guy a chance to grow up and when he does and performs amongst 'men' and does so regularly,

Clearly the batsmen he's dismissed so far aren't "men" then?

And as always the average should be taken in context...

 

[luckyeddie]

I don't really understand the basis for a comparison

I do - it's all about waiting for Harmison to blow up.

As far as I'm concerned, he's bowling better than any paceman to have got into the England team for some time - and that's as far as I will be drawn.

Even when Harmison wasn't on the top of his game, he still bowled enough wicket-taking deliveries to take 8 NZ wickets last weekend and play a significant part in a good England win. At least no-one said that they were flukes, his figures flattered him - perhaps they didn't think of that one at the time.

I'm not going overboard - I've seen it so many times with other bowlers in the past 35 or 40 years, but many people on these boards have closed minds. For them, the glass is definitely half-empty at best, and no matter how long you run it under the tap, will remain so to the point of getting wet fingers.

At one time, Harmison was written off as a joke - and it was always a case of the early figures being used as brickbats to beat him with. 'Come back when he's played in the Caribbean' they said, rapidly followed by 'The West Indies are rubbish - that doesn't count, New Zealand will have no trouble.'

Well, 'oops' is as good a word as any. Now, it's 'one test against New Zealand is not enough'. Well, he can only bowl to who's put in front of him, and if New Zealand just weren't good enough in the first test, then judgement has to be postponed again, and again, and again until he either flops or comes up against Australia.

No, the idea of comparing Steve Harmison against any overseas bowler is nonsense, because there are too many closed minds - and they won't even recognise the possibility of improvement.

 

[anzac]

Personally I'm encouraged by Harmison's improvement as a bowler........it gives me hope for the likes of Butler & Franklin to be able to do something similar.........after all they will only turn 23 & 24 respectively towards the end of the year........still way too early IMO to be writing them off.............Anderson is about a year younger than Butler so we are talking about some very young men still learning their crafts.............

 

[Craig]

Really James Anderson was picked too soon in Tests.

I would have given him the whole of 2003 to build up on his experience and improve as a bowler.

 

[luckyeddie]

Really James Anderson was picked too soon in Tests.

I would have given him the whole of 2003 to build up on his experience and improve as a bowler.

And so, in an ideal world, would England.

He was thrust in because of injuries and had such a dramatic impact that it was almost inevitable he would end up being over-used.

Now, as just one of a fairly decent England seam attack (and with Corky doing much of the donkey work for Lancashire) there's scope for him to learn his craft without having to bear the brunt of being used as a spearhead/strike bowler.

 

[SJS]

I do - it's all about waiting for Harmison to blow up.

As far as I'm concerned, he's bowling better than any paceman to have got into the England team for some time - and that's as far as I will be drawn.

Even when Harmison wasn't on the top of his game, he still bowled enough wicket-taking deliveries to take 8 NZ wickets last weekend and play a significant part in a good England win. At least no-one said that they were flukes, his figures flattered him - perhaps they didn't think of that one at the time.

I'm not going overboard - I've seen it so many times with other bowlers in the past 35 or 40 years, but many people on these boards have closed minds. For them, the glass is definitely half-empty at best, and no matter how long you run it under the tap, will remain so to the point of getting wet fingers.

At one time, Harmison was written off as a joke - and it was always a case of the early figures being used as brickbats to beat him with. 'Come back when he's played in the Caribbean' they said, rapidly followed by 'The West Indies are rubbish - that doesn't count, New Zealand will have no trouble.'

Well, 'oops' is as good a word as any. Now, it's 'one test against New Zealand is not enough'. Well, he can only bowl to who's put in front of him, and if New Zealand just weren't good enough in the first test, then judgement has to be postponed again, and again, and again until he either flops or comes up against Australia.

No, the idea of comparing Steve Harmison against any overseas bowler is nonsense, because there are too many closed minds - and they won't even recognise the possibility of improvement.

Well. I must admit this has become a bit of a scrap. I have nothing against Harmison or England in general. I rated Tuffey higher based on what I has seen of him in matches I had watched as against those I watched of Harmison. Its possible Harmison may have bowled much better at other times and Tuffey may have bowled worse.

This doesnt mean that any of us who express an opinion are necessarily biased or will just never change their opinions because they are 'fixed'.

And being a newcomer or part of the old gang at this board has, and should have, absolutely nothing to do with what one says or how it should be percieved.

I rest my case.