AA for Middlesex

[masterblaster]

AA not doing so well......

 

[Richard]

1)his overall average is still 38 in australia
2) he has consistently failed in seaming and swinging conditions in england and SA....

Well he certainly hasn't consistently failed - in his most recent series in England barely a ball moved off the seam outside the first session at Edgbaston and in the 2000\01 South Africa series there was hardly any seam-movement either.
His performance in Australia on a pitch that was more typical to Sri Lanka (Cairns) was poor, suggesting his customary follow-unplayable-with-anodyne pattern would continue, and his performance on a pitch typical to England or New Zealand (Darwin) was excellent.

 

[Richard]

AA not doing so well......

Shame.
Comeback King, though, remember...
Well, here's hoping anyway.

 

[tooextracool]

Well he certainly hasn't consistently failed - in his most recent series in England barely a ball moved off the seam outside the first session at Edgbaston and in the 2000\01 South Africa series there was hardly any seam-movement either..

total tripe, there was a bit of seam movement throughout that test at edgbaston which is why hoggard got a 5fer in the 2nd innings and caddick got 3, and there was also plenty of cloud cover in the first test at lords in englands first innings where perera and fernando took 6 wickets in between them. regardless id say that an average of over 100 is appalling in any conditions. amazing that when bond comes out with an average of 38 in SL you say that he cant bowl outside of seaming conditions yet when vaas averages 108 you support it by saying that there was no seam movement.....

His performance in Australia on a pitch that was more typical to Sri Lanka (Cairns) was poor, suggesting his customary follow-unplayable-with-anodyne pattern would continue, and his performance on a pitch typical to England or New Zealand (Darwin) was excellent.

err no the darwin wicket was up and down, not seaming with swing, so it was more like a SL wicket.

 

[Waughney]

err no the darwin wicket was up and down, not seaming with swing, so it was more like a SL wicket.

I would say that it was all of the above.

 

[biased indian]

Whats the current news about AA
i have seen some reports on Mongia but nothing so far about AA

 

[Richard]

total tripe, there was a bit of seam movement throughout that test at edgbaston which is why hoggard got a 5fer in the 2nd innings and caddick got 3, and there was also plenty of cloud cover in the first test at lords in englands first innings where perera and fernando took 6 wickets in between them. regardless id say that an average of over 100 is appalling in any conditions. amazing that when bond comes out with an average of 38 in SL you say that he cant bowl outside of seaming conditions yet when vaas averages 108 you support it by saying that there was no seam movement.....

No, I state a fact. There was no seam-movement outside the first session at Edgbaston. Hoggard picked-up 5 in the second-innings thanks to poor batting, not good seam-bowling.
The cloud-cover had no influence whatsoever on Perera and Fernando getting wickets - Perera's were a top-edged pull from Vaughan, a slower-ball to Thorpe that he played all around (not for the first or last time) and a ball which Caddick flashed at which he couldn't reach; Fernando's were an attempted force by Butcher which was too wide and which he played inside the line of, and Flintoff and Cork to balls which did indeed swing away, a little, just enough to catch the edge.
No seam-movement in sight.
Yet again, you have simply tried stating things happened in a way they did not. Sorry sonny, doesn't cut the mustard - I remember it all clear as day.

err no the darwin wicket was up and down, not seaming with swing, so it was more like a SL wicket.

No, it was seaming all over the place, and there was plenty of swing. It was also uneven.
A wicket most typical to Headingley.

 

[tooextracool]

No, I state a fact. There was no seam-movement outside the first session at Edgbaston. Hoggard picked-up 5 in the second-innings thanks to poor batting, not good seam-bowling.

err no you didnt watch that match either did you? there was seam movement, mind you not as much as what there was in the first session but enough nonetheless for a good fast bowler to pick up wickets. vaas along with the rest of the attack were incapable of doing so

The cloud-cover had no influence whatsoever on Perera and Fernando getting wickets - Perera's were a top-edged pull from Vaughan, a slower-ball to Thorpe that he played all around (not for the first or last time) and a ball which Caddick flashed at which he couldn't reach; Fernando's were an attempted force by Butcher which was too wide and which he played inside the line of, and Flintoff and Cork to balls which did indeed swing away, a little, just enough to catch the edge.
No seam-movement in sight.
Yet again, you have simply tried stating things happened in a way they did not. Sorry sonny, doesn't cut the mustard - I remember it all clear as day..

rubbish....there was plenty of cloud cover when england batted, i remember that clearly, along with the commentators on sky sports saying that it was unfortunate that england had to bat in these conditions. its typical of you to look at selective dismissals.... trescothick and hussain both got balls that seamed away from zoysa, tresco held out at slip while hussain was caught by the keeper.flintoff and cork too as you said were done in by the swing that fernando was getting. both perera and fernando bowled brilliantly in that innings indeed perera bowled well in the 2nd innings too. its interesting how all the poor shots came of bowlers other than vaas!

No, it was seaming all over the place, and there was plenty of swing. It was also uneven.
A wicket most typical to Headingley.

err no...the pitch was uneven yes, so there was plenty of uneven bounce. it was typical to the recent headingly wicket against NZ on the 3rd and 4th day which made batting difficult,but it was by no means similar to the usual headingly wicket.

 

[Richard]

err no you didnt watch that match either did you? there was seam movement, mind you not as much as what there was in the first session but enough nonetheless for a good fast bowler to pick up wickets. vaas along with the rest of the attack were incapable of doing so

I watched just about every ball of that match.
You really do have some nerve, stating things happened the way they didn't and trying to outdo me by saying "you didn't watch them because I say you couldn't have".
Like it or not, I clearly watch everything much closer than you do, while you rely much more heavily on generalisations.

rubbish....there was plenty of cloud cover when england batted, i remember that clearly, along with the commentators on sky sports saying that it was unfortunate that england had to bat in these conditions. its typical of you to look at selective dismissals.... trescothick and hussain both got balls that seamed away from zoysa, tresco held out at slip while hussain was caught by the keeper.flintoff and cork too as you said were done in by the swing that fernando was getting. both perera and fernando bowled brilliantly in that innings indeed perera bowled well in the 2nd innings too. its interesting how all the poor shots came of bowlers other than vaas!

Yes, it is indeed interesting - not as though it hasn't happened before, though! Vaas was easily the most economical bowler in that innings so it's yet another disprover of the "pressure due to economy" theorem.
Trescothick's ball didn't seam away, he just played inside it, as you might notice he's rather wont to do if you watched him closely; Hussain got one that kept going across him when some had been swinging back.
There was a bit more cloud early on the third day than there had been previously or for the rest of the match, but the only wicket that was caused - indirectly - by that cloud was Hussain's.
Likewise, if you had a decent memory you would remember that Fernando dismissed both Flintoff and Cork under bright sunshine!

err no...the pitch was uneven yes, so there was plenty of uneven bounce. it was typical to the recent headingly wicket against NZ on the 3rd and 4th day which made batting difficult,but it was by no means similar to the usual headingly wicket.

Yes, it was - there was seam-movement everywhere, even Malinga was moving some balls off the pitch.
I saw the pitch, I saw highlights of the match which included plenty of balls deviating from their line upon hitting the pitch.
David Hoitink, whose summaries are far more consistently correct than yours, also agreed that the pitch was very akin to Headingley.

 

[tooextracool]

I watched just about every ball of that match.
You really do have some nerve, stating things happened the way they didn't and trying to outdo me by saying "you didn't watch them because I say you couldn't have".
Like it or not, I clearly watch everything much closer than you do, while you rely much more heavily on generalisations..

actually it seems that you rely solely on match reports and scorecards rather than actually watching the cricket! even if you did your deluded opinions about harmison only goes to show how much of an expert you really are on cricket.....

Yes, it is indeed interesting - not as though it hasn't happened before, though! Vaas was easily the most economical bowler in that innings so it's yet another disprover of the "pressure due to economy" theorem.

there are exceptions to every rule richard.....

Trescothick's ball didn't seam away, he just played inside it, as you might notice he's rather wont to do if you watched him closely

here is the quote on the dismissal from cricinfo....
"After a starting with a flourish (and two off-side boundaries) off Nuwan Zoysa, Trescothick was undone by a ball that left him down the slope, edging a catch to Sanath Jayasuriya at first slip."
clearly there was some amount of movement there...although it was only marginal which was expected because it happened on the 2nd day when there was no cloud cover....

Hussain got one that kept going across him when some had been swinging back
There was a bit more cloud early on the third day than there had been previously or for the rest of the match, but the only wicket that was caused - indirectly - by that cloud was Hussain's
Likewise, if you had a decent memory you would remember that Fernando dismissed both Flintoff and Cork under bright sunshine!.

yes but the damage had already been done with the wickets of tresco,hussain and even butcher who slashed at one wide yes,but it move further away so he was really undone by the movement. vaas failed to use these conditions effectively

Yes, it was - there was seam-movement everywhere, even Malinga was moving some balls off the pitch.
I saw the pitch, I saw highlights of the match which included plenty of balls deviating from their line upon hitting the pitch.
David Hoitink, whose summaries are far more consistently correct than yours, also agreed that the pitch was very akin to Headingley.

well then i guess you didnt watch that game closely enough....and as i said earlier, it was characteristic to the conditions to the recent headingly test match rather than the usual headingly conditions, which we saw in 2003 against SA.

 

[Richard]

actually it seems that you rely solely on match reports and scorecards rather than actually watching the cricket! even if you did your deluded opinions about harmison only goes to show how much of an expert you really are on cricket.....

The theorem that you rely on so heavily that I use scorecards only is very clearly wrong to anyone who can see the detail in which I talk about games. And to anyone who isn't determined to show me wrong in every instance.
And Harmison has sure proved me wrong these last couple of games, hasn't he? I've continued to say that he's taking wickets mostly through poor strokes and, surprise surprise, that has been shown by the fact that the poor strokes haven't occurred these last three innings.
Of course, as we all know that can change back again very quickly...

there are exceptions to every rule richard.....

Yes, there are - and you admit Vaas cannot take wickets purely due to bowling accurately while others supposedly can?

here is the quote on the dismissal from cricinfo....
"After a starting with a flourish (and two off-side boundaries) off Nuwan Zoysa, Trescothick was undone by a ball that left him down the slope, edging a catch to Sanath Jayasuriya at first slip."
clearly there was some amount of movement there...although it was only marginal which was expected because it happened on the 2nd day when there was no cloud cover....

And had you recalled correctly you would remember that the second-day closed early due to bad-light because some reasonably heavy cloud-cover had rolled in. However, that won't affect whether or not a slope causes the ball to move.
Which, in this case, it didn't - as I say, Trescothick just played inside the line, as he has so many times. We all know how often CricInfo reporters get it wrong. Plenty of newspaper journalists got it right.

yes but the damage had already been done with the wickets of tresco,hussain and even butcher who slashed at one wide yes,but it move further away so he was really undone by the movement. vaas failed to use these conditions effectively

No, there was no extended period of conditions to use effectively. None of the bowlers used any bowler-friendly conditions to take wickets, some benefited from poor strokes and occasionally the ball swung when it mightn't be expected to.

well then i guess you didnt watch that game closely enough....and as i said earlier, it was characteristic to the conditions to the recent headingly test match rather than the usual headingly conditions, which we saw in 2003 against SA.

I did, and so did my friend Mr. Hoitink, and we both concurred that the pitch was very similar to a typical Headingley one.

 

[marc71178]

there are exceptions to every rule richard.....

Anomalies surely?

 

[Richard]

Exceptions, anomalies - those two terms basically mean the same thing.

 

[Tom Halsey]

actually it seems that you rely solely on match reports and scorecards rather than actually watching the cricket!

Pretty rich comment for someone who relies so much on CricInfo, as he has already prooved today.

 

[Tom Halsey]

here is the quote on the dismissal from cricinfo....
"After a starting with a flourish (and two off-side boundaries) off Nuwan Zoysa, Trescothick was undone by a ball that left him down the slope, edging a catch to Sanath Jayasuriya at first slip."
clearly there was some amount of movement there...although it was only marginal which was expected because it happened on the 2nd day when there was no cloud cover....

Here is:

a) Proof of my previous statement.

b) If you haven't even watched the match, there is doubt as to how you can comment.

 

[V Reddy]

Well Mongia is piling on centuries while AA just can't pickup a wicket. Would Dinesh Mongia make it to the Indian team for the CT?

 

[tooextracool]

a) Proof of my previous statement.

b) If you haven't even watched the match, there is doubt as to how you can comment.

this is rubbish....you've been going around in every thread making stupid claims and trying to disprove something that you know nothing about.
i happened to watch most of that match yes, and i dont happen to remember every little detail that happened, as im sure most other people dont remember things that happened 2 years ago either. if you could read, you would realise that that point barely made a difference to my argument, and for a fool like you who im certain doesnt watch half the cricket that i do to come out here and rubbish me by telling me that i only follow cricinfo match reports is just plain stupid. and incase you dont realise, the sole reason i even looked up those match reports was to prove to richard things that he claimed happened, but actually didnt, a second opinion thing, because quite frankly half our arguments have been going on with one of us saying yes it did and the other saying no it didnt without any proof.now i recommend that you dont butt in into arguments that you have no clue about(in every thread)

 

[tooextracool]

And Harmison has sure proved me wrong these last couple of games, hasn't he? I've continued to say that he's taking wickets mostly through poor strokes and, surprise surprise, that has been shown by the fact that the poor strokes haven't occurred these last three innings.
Of course, as we all know that can change back again very quickly....

im sure that looking at his performances on 2 placid wickets says a lot about how good a bowler he really is. yes perhaps hes been off colour in the last couple of tests, but for those who've seen him bowl for the last 6 months know that he definetly is a world class bowler and has bowled several wicket taking balls.

Yes, there are - and you admit Vaas cannot take wickets purely due to bowling accurately while others supposedly can?

no its not purely being accurate, otherwise there would be plenty of accurate 70 mph bowlers like ealham running wild in the test arena. its accuracy+penetration that counts and quite frankly vaas lacks that outside the sub continent.

No, there was no extended period of conditions to use effectively. None of the bowlers used any bowler-friendly conditions to take wickets, some benefited from poor strokes and occasionally the ball swung when it mightn't be expected to.

there was movement i can assure you. both perera and fernando beat the bat on several occasions in that inning under the cloud cover. vaas looked innocuous in those same conditions against the same batting lineup while the rest of them picked up wickets. there will never be a case where all the wickets fall because of a good ball, as ive said on countless occasions before, most of the times good balls end up beating the bat rather than taking wickets. eventually the decent or semi decent ones are the ones that take the wickets due to a poor stroke.

I did, and so did my friend Mr. Hoitink, and we both concurred that the pitch was very similar to a typical Headingley one.

well IMO it was not, and mr hoitink can say whatever he wants but it doesnt mean that hes right.

 

[viktor]

Well Mongia is piling on centuries while AA just can't pickup a wicket. Would Dinesh Mongia make it to the Indian team for the CT?

IMO he has a decent chance. esp given kaif's performances recently...though it would be tough on badani.

 

[Tom Halsey]

im sure that looking at his performances on 2 placid wickets says a lot about how good a bowler he really is. yes perhaps hes been off colour in the last couple of tests, but for those who've seen him bowl for the last 6 months know that he definetly is a world class bowler and has bowled several wicket taking balls.

I agree on that one - where were these poor strokes then, Richard?