Shane Watson

[Zeke]

That is all.

 

[Craig]

What a waste.

 

[Zeke]

What a waste.

Waste of what, Craig? Bandwidth you used by posting a nonsense reply?

 

[Craig]

You mean the waste of bandwidth you used to create a thread that serves little purpose except shoff your banner.

 

[Zeke]

You mean the waste of bandwidth you used to create a thread that serves little purpose except shoff your banner.

The purpose this thread serves is to draw attention to a young cricketer who will (in my humble opinion) take the cricketing world by the scruff of the neck in the next couple of years.

 

[Richard]

That's as maybe, but Craig is quite right to describe this as a pointless act.
Incidentally, Watson the batsman (especially at the First-Class level, less so at the one-day) looks to me like a very good player, not quite so sure about Watson the bowler.

 

[Swervy]

That's as maybe, but Craig is quite right to describe this as a pointless act.
Incidentally, Watson the batsman (especially at the First-Class level, less so at the one-day) looks to me like a very good player, not quite so sure about Watson the bowler.

so what you mean is Watson's FIGURES and AVERAGES look good (especially at First Class level,less so the one day)etc etc...

There are a lot of judgements being made on players being based solely on statistics

 

[Mister Wright]

That's as maybe, but Craig is quite right to describe this as a pointless act.
Incidentally, Watson the batsman (especially at the First-Class level, less so at the one-day) looks to me like a very good player, not quite so sure about Watson the bowler.

Have you even seen this guy play?

How can you make that assumption after just looking at his statistics. Fair enough you may have seen him play a few ODIs. But then he was either injured or just making his way into the team. He is very young and has a lot of cricket behind him. Now he is back in Qld he will receive the proper coaching he needs and will blossom into one of the most destructive players ever to play international cricket. Time will tell.

 

[Richard]

so what you mean is Watson's FIGURES and AVERAGES look good (especially at First Class level,less so the one day)etc etc...

There are a lot of judgements being made on players being based solely on statistics

I've seen Watson bowl and believe me there's not much impressive about him.
However, he certainly has the consistency with the bat neccessary to suggest he's pretty good.
Nothing solely on stats, although I admit I've never seen him play First-Class-cricket, but my good friend Mr. Hoitink has and he has filled me in on plenty I have not seen.

 

[Richard]

Have you even seen this guy play?

How can you make that assumption after just looking at his statistics. Fair enough you may have seen him play a few ODIs. But then he was either injured or just making his way into the team. He is very young and has a lot of cricket behind him. Now he is back in Qld he will receive the proper coaching he needs and will blossom into one of the most destructive players ever to play international cricket. Time will tell.

A bold claim indeed.
Yes, I've seen him play and I've not seen much evidence that he's an especially good bowler.
Of course, things can change.

 

[Zeke]

I have had the pleasure of watching Watto bat numerous times last season in the 1st grade competition (just below Pura Cup) and was even there in person to see him demolish an attack for an unbeaten triple century.

He averages a tick under 50 with the bat and a fraction over 25 with the ball in first class cricket. In ODI he averages 38 with the bat.

Impressive.

 

[Craig]

The purpose this thread serves is to draw attention to a young cricketer who will (in my humble opinion) take the cricketing world by the scruff of the neck in the next couple of years.

I am not disputing that he isn't talented and doesn't have a big future in the game but a better job could have been done in doing so..

 

[anzac]

if he manages to keep on track then IMO Watson is one of the options for future AUS selections in the 'allrounder' category in the post Warne / McGrath era - particularly if AUS feel they need to look at a regular 5th bowling option..............(another being Symonds)..............

if you view it in that context then he does not have to be a world beater at either discipline - he's not required to be a 'strike' bowler nor to score the bulk of the runs - so long as he can contribute to both on a regular basis........

hell if you put it that way then AA would walk right into the role..........he would be ideally suited to the lineup moreso that the role he is asked / expected to play in the current IND side.............

 

[Jnr.]

It is too bad that Watson keeps getting injured.

 

[Nate]

I've seen Watson bowl and believe me there's not much impressive about him.
However, he certainly has the consistency with the bat neccessary to suggest he's pretty good.
Nothing solely on stats, although I admit I've never seen him play First-Class-cricket, but my good friend Mr. Hoitink has and he has filled me in on plenty I have not seen.

you say what now?

 

[Swervy]

I've seen Watson bowl and believe me there's not much impressive about him.
However, he certainly has the consistency with the bat neccessary to suggest he's pretty good.
Nothing solely on stats, although I admit I've never seen him play First-Class-cricket, but my good friend Mr. Hoitink has and he has filled me in on plenty I have not seen.

so I would say you have seen him bowl in those VB series games of about 20 months ago...and thats it.

how can you make judgements on players on what someone has told you. Most people would reserve judgement in this situation, instead of jumping to conclusions.

You may well be right of course, but that would be pure guess work as opposed to actual knowledge of the player himself.

I havent seen enough of him play (I probably have only seen as much as you have) so I certainly wont be writing off his bowling just yet (how old is he ...22???)

 

[Richard]

If you look you'll see I said "not so sure about Watson the bowler" - implying that I'm not at all sure about whether he is that good or not.
Not, at all, that I am implying I think he's rubbish.
Nonetheless, when I saw him he was rubbish so unless something has changed he still will be.
Is it wise to assume something will change, or to assume it won't?

 

[Waughney]

If you look you'll see I said "not so sure about Watson the bowler" - implying that I'm not at all sure about whether he is that good or not.
Not, at all, that I am implying I think he's rubbish.
Nonetheless, when I saw him he was rubbish so unless something has changed he still will be.
Is it wise to assume something will change, or to assume it won't?

He has had some recent back problems, the main reason for some of his poor bowling.

 

[Richard]

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

 

[Waughney]

Ah, well then inexperience. He was what, 20 then? Ricky Ponting said that he puts a lot of pressure on himself to do well and that affects his bowling, I'd imagine that that may've played a role in his crap bowling, especially in those early stages of his career, while he was really trying to establish himself. (PS. I don't think he's actually got full bowling confidence yet either)