Shane Watson

Richard · Sep 3, 2004

So that would explain why his domestic-one-day-bowling-record is so poor then?
Jeez, if you keep doing all these things that are apparently valid excuses for bowling poorly you'll never become a good bowler.

Waughney · Sep 3, 2004

Richard said:
So that would explain why his domestic-one-day-bowling-record is so poor then?
Jeez, if you keep doing all these things that are apparently valid excuses for bowling poorly you'll never become a good bowler.

I never said he was a good bowler, but yes, his back troubles and inexperience/mindset are main reasons for his poor average, but more importantly, as you said, he hasn't matured into a good bowler.

Mister Wright · Sep 3, 2004

Richard said:
So that would explain why his domestic-one-day-bowling-record is so poor then?
Jeez, if you keep doing all these things that are apparently valid excuses for bowling poorly you'll never become a good bowler.

He wasn't exactly being trained under the greatest of coaches. Now he is back in his rightful state of Qld he will be better for it. He will get proper bowling coaching and become one of the greatest allrounders Qld & Australia have ever seen.

Please don't dismiss him on what you saw previously, he was under misguided management in Tasmania, he will be all the much better for his exposure to the Qld coaching team.

age_master · Sep 3, 2004

Watson's SR of 46 in first class cricket would suggest that he is quite a reasonable bowler - seems to have been bowling quite reasonably since his comeback to bowling too, though i haven't actually seen him bowl yet.

as for his batting, i can see him taking his average for FC above 50 this season comfortably

Eclipse · Sep 4, 2004

Richard said:
This was before the back-problems.
The main stuff I saw was in the South Africa series in 2001\02.

I will just add he has a compleatly!! diffrent bowling action now than he did back then and there is no doubt it's a much much better action as well. He can swing the ball now and looks very good in his bowling aproch.

My guess is given he has hardly had the chance to bowl a great deal since injury it will take him time to get some form under his belt but IMO with his new action he can at least avrage about 28-30 in test and One day Cricket as a bowler. Given he is primarly a batting allrounder that would be more than acceptable.

Plus his one day form last season was vastly improved. not as good as his FC form but he is a good OD batsman now.

Andre · Sep 4, 2004

Having seen just about all of Watson's cricket, I don't rate him too highly as a bowler. Very good batsman, solid fielder - but his bowling isn't much more than handy at the moment, even aince he re-did his action. In the years to come, however, I can see him becoming a genuine all-rounder rather than a batting one.

kasra · Sep 4, 2004

When SW made his first appearance in International cricket, I was curious about him as a lot of people were talking about him. But sorry to say that, from what I saw he is over-rated. He can bowl a little but has struggled with his batting at the ODI level. Then again he may prove me wrong. Good luck to him!

Richard · Sep 4, 2004

Eclipse said:
I will just add he has a compleatly!! diffrent bowling action now than he did back then and there is no doubt it's a much much better action as well. He can swing the ball now and looks very good in his bowling aproch.

Well hopefully I might see that later on today.

marc71178 · Sep 4, 2004

Richard said:
Is it wise to assume something will change, or to assume it won't?

I don't think it's wise to assume things can't possibly change.

marc71178 · Sep 4, 2004

Richard said:
Well hopefully I might see that later on today.

Assuming Pakistan last that long

Richard · Sep 4, 2004

marc71178 said:
I don't think it's wise to assume things can't possibly change.

And I wouldn't dream of doing so - we've seen things change so many times that would clearly be wholly unwise!

Richard · Sep 4, 2004

marc71178 said:
Assuming Pakistan last that long

Well, they did - and typically by the time he comes on I have to go to work and there are no highlights.

Craig · Sep 7, 2004

Eclipse said:
I will just add he has a compleatly!! diffrent bowling action now than he did back then and there is no doubt it's a much much better action as well. He can swing the ball now and looks very good in his bowling aproch.

My guess is given he has hardly had the chance to bowl a great deal since injury it will take him time to get some form under his belt but IMO with his new action he can at least avrage about 28-30 in test and One day Cricket as a bowler. Given he is primarly a batting allrounder that would be more than acceptable.

Plus his one day form last season was vastly improved. not as good as his FC form but he is a good OD batsman now.

Ddidn't he drop a couple of km/hs in pace since his new and improved bowling action.

Zeke · Sep 7, 2004

Craig said:
Ddidn't he drop a couple of km/hs in pace since his new and improved bowling action.

Before he hurt his back he was potentially the quickest bowler in the country, up with Brett Lee. These days he is bowling around the 135 - 140km/h mark, and will reportedly gain more pace as his back strengthens and he regains rythm through his new action.

Red · May 2, 2013

Pretty amazing that this thread was from nearly ten years ago, and there are still plenty of unanswered questions about Watson.

harsh.ag · May 2, 2013

Monk said:
Pretty amazing that this thread was from nearly ten years ago, and there are still plenty of unanswered questions about Watson.

A thought struck my head that, back in the day, the same sentence might have been uttered with regards to the man in your avatar (although of course, with much greater reverence).

Red · May 3, 2013

harsh.skm said:
A thought struck my head that, back in the day, the same sentence might have been uttered with regards to the man in your avatar (although of course, with much greater reverence).

In what way?

Jono · May 3, 2013

Craig

harsh.ag · May 3, 2013

Monk said:
In what way?

In 1946, they would have been saying he was going to be a great bat, and useful with the ball. In 1956, they would have said that he had been a great bowler, and useful with the bat

LongHopCassidy · May 3, 2013

harsh.skm said:
In 1946, they would have been saying he was going to be a great bat, and useful with the ball. In 1956, they would have said that he had been a great bowler, and useful with the bat

Miller actually considered himself a batting rival to Bradman on the 1948 Ashes tour. Says so in Malcolm Knox's Bradman's War.

Shane Watson

Cricket Web Staff Member

International Debutant

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend

Hall of Fame Member

International Debutant

International Regular

Cricket Spectator

Cricket Web Staff Member

Eyes not spreadsheets

Eyes not spreadsheets

Cricket Web Staff Member

Cricket Web Staff Member

World Traveller

School Boy/Girl Cricketer

The normal awards that everyone else has

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend

The normal awards that everyone else has

Virat Kohli (c)

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend

International Captain