Matthew Hoggard

[Lillian Thomson]

Michael Parkinson's brother is called Athelston. It's a Northern thing I think

Former footballer and broadcaster Bob Wilson's middle name is Primrose.

 

[zaremba]

Former footballer and broadcaster Bob Wilson's middle name is Primrose.

That's pretty special. And (famously, thanks to QOS) one of Emile Heskey's middle names is Ivanhoe.

 

[aussie]

Did it? Harmison bowled as ever in the ODIs he's played since retirement-reversal - the odd decent spell and a lot of nonsense.

Not in the ODI's vs SA. His bowling form in India along with the entire bowling attack came in for a lesson in ODI cricket. Even Big ol Fredd got some serious tap.

And as I've said several times now, he's done well whenever he's played for Durham since 2003 now, having done poorly for them beforehand (and thus never merited his Test call-up). What happened in 2008 was nothing new and it's no surprise that he bowled as he did in the Oval Test. How he bowled there was precious little different to how he's bowled most of the time since summer 2003. Yes, he was woeful in the 1 Test he played in NZ but the 2 before that, in SL, saw him bowl exactly as he normally does, in fact probably a bit better - hit good areas and bowled with a good economy-rate but just didn't do enough with the ball to threaten to take wickets.

I don't understand this. How much could Harmison have played for Durham since he became in England regular in 2002. Surely this year is probably the longest since about 2001??. He basically played the whole FC season.

Its also obvious since WI/NZ 04, other than the Oval 04 vs WI in the return series, Lords 05, odd spells in PAK & IND (which he may not have played much if Jones was playing). Old Trafford 06, probably Perth 06 as well. Its unanimous that Harmison has been extremely inconsistent & was basically carried on what was felt he could do. After looking really average in NZ early patience ran out will all concerned & was rightly dropped.

The Oval test & the ODI's in SA is the best Harmo has looked since 04. But as i said its still early days. Whats happened in India really doesn't matter TBH since these are conditions that Harmison will never be at his best in.

 

[Richard]

As I say, the Oval Test in 2008 really isn't the best Harmison has looked since early-2004. He bowled exactly in that game as he has on plenty of other occasions - reasonable areas for the most part, a couple of gifted wickets with short deliveries, but no real threat. Even despite those gifted wickets his figures were moderate.

He's played for Durham a decent few times between 2003 and 2007. He did well consistently, same way he did in 2008. It was just that in 2008 he was given the chance to keep doing it for longer - most of the season. But the same thing happened - either he bowled better in the Championship than he ever has in Tests (extremely unlikely) or the batsmen just weren't good enough to play him well, the way Test batsmen (with the exception of odd games like The Oval 2004 and Old Trafford 2006) have done.

 

[fredfertang]

........ It's a Northern thing I think

That comment is ******ist - just not quite sure what the initial syllable(s) is/are

 

[aussie]

As I say, the Oval Test in 2008 really isn't the best Harmison has looked since early-2004. He bowled exactly in that game as he has on plenty of other occasions - reasonable areas for the most part, a couple of gifted wickets with short deliveries, but no real threat. Even despite those gifted wickets his figures were moderate.

He's played for Durham a decent few times between 2003 and 2007. He did well consistently, same way he did in 2008. It was just that in 2008 he was given the chance to keep doing it for longer - most of the season. But the same thing happened - either he bowled better in the Championship than he ever has in Tests (extremely unlikely) or the batsmen just weren't good enough to play him well, the way Test batsmen (with the exception of odd games like The Oval 2004 and Old Trafford 2006) have done.

I see your points. But i don't agree with em. Very much willing to see what Harmison has up his sleeve in more helpful conditions in the coming months.

Either way he & Hoggard should not be battling for the same bowling spot as well.

 

[Uppercut]

As I say, the Oval Test in 2008 really isn't the best Harmison has looked since early-2004. He bowled exactly in that game as he has on plenty of other occasions - reasonable areas for the most part, a couple of gifted wickets with short deliveries, but no real threat. Even despite those gifted wickets his figures were moderate.

To be fair to Harmy, he had Smith dropped first ball and the one that got Amla was an absolute beast. Inch-perfect yorker timed at 95mph IIRC. What do you think of Morkel, incidentally? Do you see him becoming much the same as Harmison was?

 

[Richard]

I see your points. But i don't agree with em. Very much willing to see what Harmison has up his sleeve in more helpful conditions in the coming months.

Either way he & Hoggard should not be battling for the same bowling spot as well.

No, every bowler should be batting for four (well, ideally three if you consider Flintoff's batting makes him an absolute certainty) spots. There should be no spots designated to a certain perceived "type" of bowler. You should aim for the best four bowlers available - if they're all similar, so be it.

 

[Richard]

To be fair to Harmy, he had Smith dropped first ball and the one that got Amla was an absolute beast. Inch-perfect yorker timed at 95mph IIRC. What do you think of Morkel, incidentally? Do you see him becoming much the same as Harmison was?

No knowing. Morkel's got a much better bowling-action than Harmison but he's 24 years old now and doesn't seem to have gotten much better in the time he's been playing, which must be 4-5 years now. So I'm beginning to wonder.

IIRR the ball that Smith was dropped off was a wide Long-Hop.

 

[Manee]

Hint of away swing, IIRC

 

[Rebecca]

So the selectors have really finished with him. Not included on the WI tour.

 

[morgieb]

Yeah, rather unfortunetly.

 

[FBU]

So the selectors have really finished with him. Not included on the WI tour.

Well the best thing would have been to pick him to go on the Lions tour and see if he did better than Mahmood, Davies, Plunkett and Khan. As it is he is down the pecking order. He ran in for year after year and was the most injury free, dependable bowler but then the injuries started and a change of coach. There was talk that both Harmison and Hoggard weren't listening to Gibson's advice in New Zealand and when Hoggard arrived back in England he said he was going to change his attitude.

I think KP wants Harmison, Sidebottom, Flintoff and Jones as his Ashes fast bowlers. All four are injury prone. It seems that Sidebottom has taken Hoggard's place when once upon a time Hoggard kept Sidebottom out of the Yorks side.

Hoggard's last 24 Tests .....

12 Tests 53 wickets at 26.32
12 Tests 31 wickets at 41.35

Sidebottom
Harmison
Jones
Anderson
Broad
Khan
Mahmood
Davies
Plunkett
Joseph
Tremlett
Hoggard
Richardson
Kirby
Shreck
Pattinson
Onions
Ali
Finn
Harris

 

[Pothas]

Very unfair on Hoggard, I find it amazing the way the selectors have abandoned Hoggard when they welcomed Harmison back very quickly. He is clearly beter than the rest of England's backup bowlers and it is more than reasonable to say that he is a better bowler than Harmison, Anderson and Broad.

 

[Manee]

Very unfair on Hoggard, I find it amazing the way the selectors have abandoned Hoggard when they welcomed Harmison back very quickly. He is clearly beter than the rest of England's backup bowlers and it is more than reasonable to say that he is a better bowler than Harmison, Anderson and Broad.

Harmison did top the Division 1 wicket takers list for a large portion of the season whereas Hoggard seemed to meander in mediocrity. Harmison has most of the time, with only a few exceptions, been a strong bowler in England, it is away from England that he has often floundered.

 

[GIMH]

I'd rather have the Anderson of 08 than the Hoggard we saw in 07 itbt

 

[Lillian Thomson]

I'd rather have the Anderson of 08 than the Hoggard we saw in 07 itbt

Who wouldn't?

 

[Richard]

I'd rather have the Anderson of 08 than the Hoggard we saw in 07 itbt

The Hoggard of '07 that we saw for all of 1 Test?

Said it at the time that I was worried his absence may have cost a fair bit in the series against India and I still think it might well have done.

 

[Richard]

So the selectors have really finished with him. Not included on the WI tour.

Nah, he was never going to be. As I say, been obvious for some time now that someone somewhere has decided for whatever reason that he's never playing for England again.

 

[GIMH]

The Hoggard of '07 that we saw for all of 1 Test?

Said it at the time that I was worried his absence may have cost a fair bit in the series against India and I still think it might well have done.

Played in Sri Lanka as well itbt