tooextracool said:
perhaps, but he wasnt any more accurate than he was this summer.
Of course he was, it's not possible for someone to go for 2.74-an-over and then bowl with the same accuracy and go for 3.69-an-over, nearly a whole 1-an-over more, no matter how much more aggressive the batsmen (and it ain't like Fleming, Styris, Astle, McMillan, Oram, Cairns and McCullum are defensive players anyway).
warne batted no differently at Lords than he did elsewhere.
No, of course not, that's why he looked completely all-at-sea most of the time and managed the odd shot off the middle of the bat, whereas at other times in the series he actually - amazingly - batted with a decent head on his shoulders (except of course Edgbaston first-innings).
and gayle getting out to poor strokes is a hallmark of his career. and im sure there were at least a few seaming deliveries that got him out such as the one from the 2nd innings of the first test as well as the one from the first inning of the 2nd test.
Even if they were, and I'm not totally sure (can't exactly say I remember the second-innings of the First Test moving much), most of Gayle's dismissals were poor strokes and not good deliveries.
oh what rubbish, you can come up with an excuse for the dismissal of every player. fact is england bowled the right lines and lengths to lara for a sustained period of time and eventually that got him out. and jones ball in the first test was quite a delivery considering that its the sort of delivery that lara has got out to many many times in his career. and im not sure why you removed the 3rd test, unless you now agree that england actually bowled well at him in the 3rd test?
It was fairly obvious to anyone watching that Lara was back in touch in the Third Test, even if I wouldn't quite have expected what followed.
In the First and Second Tests he was clearly out-of-touch and that as far as I'm concerned is why he failed in those, not because of any magnificence in the bowling.