Sorry, but who's ever said or even intimated this? Honestly never heard the theory, at least in the last 2-3 years that Boult is a poor-mans Southee, or lesser than him in any respect. My impression is all NZ fans rate Boult at least slightly above Southee.
Off cutters are what most outswing bowlers use but it's slightly easier to read if you're slower through the air like southee is, more effective for someone like steyn or mcgrath etc
I'd still bet most supporters think Southee has more talent but Boult is better.
That was my memory too. Was criticised relentlessly for James Franklin-esque head-dropping and shoulder-slumping iirc. Of course being petulant, losing confidence and sulking when you're not going well doesn't indicate a paucity of desire, which is (allegedly) Southee's problem. Though I do think Southee lacks a little confidence under the surface. Confidence and performance go hand in hand obviously.
.
It's a bit fruitless to argue about what other people think but all I can say is the prevailing attitude I have seen is that Southee is the top dog, the leader of the attack, the huge talent etc
Possibly only from Bahnz and Athers from my impression, with Howie obviously adoring both equally, but we'll see what Bahnz's thread on it throws up.
I think it's a massive asset. It allows you to interrogate all techniques, be they left handed or right handed. And if disguised right, and done late, it's absolutely lethal - even to those with good techniques. Look at Simon Jones in the 05 Ashes, he was absolutely incredible with his mastery of out and in swing to LHers and RHers. The one that sticks out is Michael Clarke looking to comfortably leave a ball on about 6/7th stump that came back to demolish his off pole. So good to watch.
Yeah, I'm with you, seems a little daft to suggest having the ability to move it both ways isn't an enormous asset.
I won't speak for others, but for me it's not necessarily that he isn't motivated, I just find he's mentally soft tbh. The classic down-hill slalom cricketer.
To be clear, I'm not saying that swinging the ball both ways isn't an asset, I meant that being able to deceive the batsman by bowling a well disguised in-swinger doesn't offer that much of an advantage over being able to deceive a batsman with a well disguised off-cutter.
I think it does & massively so. The in-swinger is much more likely to move late & hence be considerably harder to pick.
Isn't an off cutter, by definition, going to move later than an inswinger?
True but it's also generally not going to have as much pace on it.
Agree - being able to swing the ball both ways looks spectacular on the rare occasions that conditions are right for it and the bowler can get it going with control, so probably sticks in the memory more readily. However I don't think it offers any day-in day-out effectiveness advantage compared to another bowler who gets regulation swing, seam movement from rolling their fingers over the ball and preferably, a little reverse when conditions suit.
Not to be a dick, but remove the armchair opinions and what are we left with? INot sure what your expectation is.
Yeah, Anderson went through periods where he showed absolute mastery of swing and had the ball moving both ways at will (some spells vs. Sangakkara in the 2011 series, vs. India later that year, Ashes 2010-11, even in 2007 when India won). I don't think Southee has done that even when he stepped up a level between 2012-2015. Anderson also added reverse swing to his armory after 2010-11 or so.
Lol, especially when an armchair critic is critiquing other armchair critics about critiquing.
