Ashley Giles v Paul Harris v Johan Botha

[Richard]

Harris as he is the better batsmen..

There is absolutely no way Harris is anywhere near as good a batsman as either Giles or Botha.

 

[Goughy]

TBH, anyone defending Giles as a quality bowler needs some serious medication.

Did he bowl some useful overs? Yes. Was he the best available? Possibly. Was he useful with the bat at the number 8 position? Yes. However, he was a very limited role player and bowling was not much above part time standard.

He failed when it was expected, his record in the 4th innings of Tests is almost an embarassment for a spin bowler and is further evidence that he was a support player and seldom capable of carrying an attack when required.

Paul Harris is not the the 2nd coming of Bedi, but he asks more questions and has been a leading bowler in South African domestic cricket (leading wickettaker in a season etc). Something I dont think Giles could replicate in English FC cricket.

Harris is a bowler. Id struggle to term Giles the same.

EDIT- Id put Botha in the same bracket as Giles. Ordinary bowler, decent bat, tough character with decent cricket brain.

 

[TT Boy]

Harris pre-injury (prior to the Bangladeshi away series) was a very decent test bowler for South Africa. Tis a shame that since coming back his action has changed and he doesn't offer the control he once did.

In regard to batting and fielding, Botha is good enough to play domestically as a batsman and his fielding is light years ahead of Giles and Harris.

 

[Richard]

He failed when it was expected, his record in the 4th innings of Tests is almost an embarassment for a spin bowler and is further evidence that he was a support player and seldom capable of carrying an attack when required.

That's the wrong way to judge IMO. The notion of spinners being players whose time is always in the fourth-innings is outdated.

Spinners in this age can be expected to play a role throughout a game on the right pitch, and never at any stage in the game on the wrong pitch. Giles played a great many Tests on pitches on which he never had a hope in hell of putting in the figures.

However, on the relatively few occasions he got a pitch that he could make use of, he did. Out of Giles' 50 Tests against Test-standard teams, I'd say he played on 13 turning pitches, and his figures in those are as follows:
4-113
6-165
7-132
1-134
0-105
6-70
5-124
8-132
8-217
6-116
9-210
9-122
4-108

There is no occasion in the other 37 games of his Test career where a pitch started-out offering nothing to spinners then became spin-friendly later on (not that he all that often bowled last in these games anyway), because this just hardly ever happens any more. If anything it's more common for things to work the other way nowadays - a turning pitch will sometimes get slower and slower as a match goes on, and thus taking wickets will get more difficult, not less.

Expecting spinners to perform regularly in the fourth-innings (or third) regardless of what's gone before just isn't realistic any more. Pitches don't work that way now.

 

[Goughy]

That's the wrong way to judge IMO. The notion of spinners being players whose time is always in the fourth-innings is outdated.

No it isnt. It just conveniently fits your mould for Giles.

Show me a spin bowler that averages 40 in the 4th innings of a Test match like Giles and Ill show you a terrible bowler. Many times Ive sat there waiting for Giles to take a role in the 4th innings of Tests when he should have played a role and been disappointed.

Spinners still have a bigger role to play the more a game progresses. Whether they fall apart or not is debatable, but the tracks still wear and get footholes.

Expecting spinners to perform regularly in the fourth-innings (or third) regardless of what's gone before just isn't realistic any more. Pitches don't work that way now.

Then what is the point of them then? As they all do far worse in the first innings, they are basically passengers.

 

[Richard]

No it isnt. It just conveniently fits your mould for Giles.

It does absolutely nothing of the sort. I first noticed that people often talked about pitches going from non-turners to turners as a game progressed and that it virtually never actually happened many years ago, before I even gave the slightest thought to how good Giles was.

I then looked back and saw that there was actually a time when it was genuine and did happen often enough. But it hasn't done so for a long time. These days, if a pitch doesn't help a spinner on the opening couple of days, it's damn unlikely to at any point. Turf and grass for cricket squares are more scientifically prepared these days and don't crumble anywhere near as quickly as they once did. You'd need to be playing on a surface for six or seven days at least for it to start as a non-turner and end as a turner nowadays.

Then what is the point of them then? As they all do far worse in the first innings, they are basically passengers.

Very often there is indeed no point to a spinner. A great many of the Test pitches of this era mean fingerspinners cannot perform first-innings, second-innings, third-innings or fourth-innings. And selectors make the error of picking one anyway very often, due to the "you must have variation" rubbish.

Giles suffered from this one hell of a lot, and it's earned him a rep as one of the worst bowlers to play X games which, well, he just isn't. But he's not the only one to suffer at all, most such fingerspinners simply don't last more than 15 or 20 games. They then get replaced with someone else whose career follows the exact same pattern.

And of course, wristspinners who can turn the ball almost regardless of the pitch almost never have the requistite control to bowl to any real standard.

 

[Richard]

Many times Ive sat there waiting for Giles to take a role in the 4th innings of Tests when he should have played a role and been disappointed.

Like when?

I can think of just 2 occasions in Giles' career where he's genuinely disappointed in the fourth-innings on a turning surface. The first was Ahmedabad 2001/02, where he made the mistake of bowling over-the-wicket when he should've been around. The second was Old Trafford 2005, where he'd gone OK in the first-innings (though Geraint Jones missing that stumping made his figures considerably worse) but didn't do much in the second. That didn't matter too much as the seamers worked their way through the innings anyway and England would have won had lost time been able to be made-up.

In one hell of a lot of Giles' Tests he didn't even bowl in a fourth-innings.

 

[Uppercut]

Show me a spin bowler that averages 40 in the 4th innings of a Test match like Giles and Ill show you a terrible bowler.

In complete support of your argument:

Panesar's bowling averages:
1st innings: 33
2nd: 38
3rd: 26
4th: 30

Saqlain Mushtaq:
1st: 32
2nd: 27
3rd: 28
4th: 29

Mushtaq Ahmed:
1st- 38
2nd- 42
3rd- 25
4th- 20

SK Warne:
1st: 27
2nd: 28
3rd: 22
4th: 23

Murali:
1st: 25
2nd: 20
3rd: 20
4th: 19

Harbhajan:
1st: 38
2nd: 32
3rd: 23
4th: 27

Kumble:
1st: 34
2nd: 29
3rd: 28
4th: 22

Boje:
1st: 60
2nd: 66
3rd: 32
4th: 26

Harris:
1st: 53
2nd: 32
3rd: 24
4th: 29

Giles:
1st: 45
2nd: 42
3rd: 34
4th: 40

Kaneria:
1st: 34
2nd: 39
3rd: 28
4th: 36

And the one exception i can think of, Vettori:
1st: 39
2nd: 28
3rd: 31
4th: 38

Overkill perhaps. Just shows

If anything it's more common for things to work the other way nowadays - a turning pitch will sometimes get slower and slower as a match goes on, and thus taking wickets will get more difficult, not less.

Expecting spinners to perform regularly in the fourth-innings (or third) regardless of what's gone before just isn't realistic any more. Pitches don't work that way now.

as a whole new level of bull**** from Dicko.

 

[Prince EWS]

Boje:
1st: 60
2nd: 66
3rd: 32
4th: 26

Particularly interesting, for mine. Boje was oft criticised but given those performances exactly match what seems to be expected of Harris's role in the team (tie up and end in the first innings while Kallis bowls most of his overs and then be a genuine threat - in theory - after the pitch breaks up a bit in the second) and the vast difference in their batting abilities, it's somewhat strange Boje was shown less perserverance by the selectors before he retired from international cricket than Harris seems to have since.

I knew he had a couple of effective tours of the subcontinent but I never knew his record in the second innings was actually so good.

 

[Richard]

In complete support of your argument:

Panesar's bowling averages:
1st innings: 33
2nd: 38
3rd: 26
4th: 30

Saqlain Mushtaq:
1st: 32
2nd: 27
3rd: 28
4th: 29

Mushtaq Ahmed:
1st- 38
2nd- 42
3rd- 25
4th- 20

SK Warne:
1st: 27
2nd: 28
3rd: 22
4th: 23

Murali:
1st: 25
2nd: 20
3rd: 20
4th: 19

Harbhajan:
1st: 38
2nd: 32
3rd: 23
4th: 27

Kumble:
1st: 34
2nd: 29
3rd: 28
4th: 22

Boje:
1st: 60
2nd: 66
3rd: 32
4th: 26

Harris:
1st: 53
2nd: 32
3rd: 24
4th: 29

Giles:
1st: 45
2nd: 42
3rd: 34
4th: 40

Kaneria:
1st: 34
2nd: 39
3rd: 28
4th: 36

And the one exception i can think of, Vettori:
1st: 39
2nd: 28
3rd: 31
4th: 38

Overkill perhaps. Just shows

If anything it's more common for things to work the other way nowadays - a turning pitch will sometimes get slower and slower as a match goes on, and thus taking wickets will get more difficult, not less.

Expecting spinners to perform regularly in the fourth-innings (or third) regardless of what's gone before just isn't realistic any more. Pitches don't work that way now.

as a whole new level of bull**** from Dicko.

No, it doesn't. The cases of wristspinners prove nothing as all the above bowlers (even Kaneria of times) can and did turn the ball throughout a game on near enough any surface. Mushtaq Ahmed as well his career will need to be split into the three-part thing that it fits into.

MSP and Harris have barely been in the game 5 minutes and I've already noted how their records have quite a bit of anomaly in several respects before now. Kumble's case is really irrelevant as his career dates back a long time and I'd also quite like to see a home-away split, as I doubt his second-innings record away from home will be remotely impressive. In fact, I've just taken a home-away split and away from home his first-innings record is extremely poor (average 42) and his record in the second-, third- and fourth-innings is virtually identical (averages between 32.7 and 34 in all cases). So clearly, Kumble's split applies to home games only, and early in his career the old-style Indian pitch was very much still around.

As for Saqlain and Harbhajan, I'll have a home-away look at them as well.

As for Boje, I can find a whole 3 instances in his career where he's been effective in the second-innings having not been in the first-. Out of 41 matches. That proves precisely nothing. There is no way on Earth his case supports the idea that any good fingerspinner can be effective in the fourth-innings.

 

[Uppercut]

Particularly interesting, for mine. Boje was oft criticised but given those performances exactly match what seems to be expected of Harris's role in the team (tie up and end in the first innings while Kallis bowls most of his overs and then be a genuine threat - in theory - after the pitch breaks up a bit in the second) and the vast difference in their batting abilities, it's somewhat strange Boje was shown less perserverance by the selectors before he retired from international cricket than Harris seems to have since.

I knew he had a couple of effective tours of the subcontinent but I never knew his record in the second innings was actually so good.

Harris has had enough first and second innings luck to cover up the fact that essentially he's much the same- useless first innings, occasionally good second. Tbh i'll have Imran Tahir in as soon as possible but as a Hampshire man i'm somewhat biased.

 

[Uppercut]

No, it doesn't. The cases of wristspinners prove nothing as all the above bowlers (even Kaneria of times) can and did turn the ball throughout a game on near enough any surface. Mushtaq Ahmed as well his career will need to be split into the three-part thing that it fits into.

MSP and Harris have barely been in the game 5 minutes and I've already noted how their records have quite a bit of anomaly in several respects before now. Kumble's case is really irrelevant as his career dates back a long time and I'd also quite like to see a home-away split, as I doubt his second-innings record away from home will be remotely impressive. In fact, I've just taken a home-away split and away from home his first-innings record is extremely poor (average 42) and his record in the second-, third- and fourth-innings is virtually identical (averages between 32.7 and 34 in all cases). So clearly, Kumble's split applies to home games only, and early in his career the old-style Indian pitch was very much still around.

As for Saqlain and Harbhajan, I'll have a home-away look at them as well.

As for Boje, I can find a whole 3 instances in his career where he's been effective in the second-innings having not been in the first-. Out of 41 matches. That proves precisely nothing. There is no way on Earth his case supports the idea that any good fingerspinner can be effective in the fourth-innings.

 

[Richard]

Particularly interesting, for mine. Boje was oft criticised but given those performances exactly match what seems to be expected of Harris's role in the team (tie up and end in the first innings while Kallis bowls most of his overs and then be a genuine threat - in theory - after the pitch breaks up a bit in the second) and the vast difference in their batting abilities, it's somewhat strange Boje was shown less perserverance by the selectors before he retired from international cricket than Harris seems to have since.

I knew he had a couple of effective tours of the subcontinent but I never knew his record in the second innings was actually so good.

FTR, there were 3 occasions in his career that Boje took 3 or 4 wickets in the second-innings for a decent number of runs. On 1 of these occasions he'd also taken a good haul first time around, and on 1 of the others I can assure you he bowled singularly unexceptionally, hardly turned the ball any more than he had earlier (I can recall about 1 ball all game, which Robert Key happened to pick the wrong time to go down the pitch), and simply benefited from the fact that wickets had to fall sometime as England were chasing a target they never had a hope of getting near.

Never once did he get more than 4 in a second-innings.

 

[Richard]

Even though that's a banned URL (by something or other) I can tell what the meaning is by the text. And I don't agree, at all. I've just shown why the stats you posted are not an accurate reflection, and all you can do is facepalm.

Once more, it's a case of an apparent overall not really showing anything much, and the individual cases being far more revelatory.

 

[Richard]

BTW, looking at Harbhajan's case - away from India, his fourth-innings record is the second-worst after his first-innings one. And overall away from India he averages 40. He, like Kumble, has a home\away split and not a first\second-innings one.

And I'm really not sure how Saqlain Mushtaq's case is supposed to support the argument as he's also got his second-worst record in the fourth-innings (after the first) with second- and third- both being better.

 

[Prince EWS]

Harris has had enough first and second innings luck to cover up the fact that essentially he's much the same- useless first innings, occasionally good second.

That's what seems to be expected of him though. Kallis bowls a lot of his first innings overs, particularly when South Africa bowl first. Even when he does bowl in the first innings, it's just in a holding role to give the other bowlers a rest.

What I'm confused about is why he seems be an automatic selection in this role when Boje wasn't despite the fact that he was a better bat and, if the stats are to be believed, absolutely perfect for it with the ball. Simple change of tactics I guess.

 

[Uppercut]

Even though that's a banned URL (by something or other) I can tell what the meaning is by the text. And I don't agree, at all. I've just shown why the stats you posted are not an accurate reflection, and all you can do is facepalm.

Once more, it's a case of an apparent overall not really showing anything much, and the individual cases being far more revelatory.

Damn right all i can do is facepalm. You came up with a theory that spin bowling is "just as difficult, if not harder as the game goes on in this age". Interesting idea, i thought, so i checked it out. I found a solitary spinner who's better in the first innings of matches. By one or two average points. That's it. ALL the other modern spinners i could think of were better in the second innings. All of them. Every Single One. I can't believe you even tried to pick up the pieces of that argument bowler-by-bowler. Shocking.

 

[Uppercut]

That's what seems to be expected of him though. Kallis bowls a lot of his first innings overs, particularly when South Africa bowl first. Even when he does bowl in the first innings, it's just in a holding role to give the other bowlers a rest.

What I'm confused about is why he seems be an automatic selection in this role when Boje wasn't despite the fact that he was a better bat and, if the stats are to be believed, absolutely perfect for it with the ball. Simple change of tactics I guess.

Yeah, it's fair enough. He's decent on tracks that offer a bit of turn, the dead rubber at Lord's sold me on that (even though he didn't get many wickets- he was really rather dangerous). Still, i don't really know if he's quite at the level where he can justify being a passenger for every bit of play beforehand.

 

[Richard]

Damn right all i can do is facepalm. You came up with a theory that spin bowling is "just as difficult, if not harder as the game goes on in this age". Interesting idea, i thought, so i checked it out. I found a solitary spinner who's better in the first innings of matches. By one or two average points. That's it. ALL the other modern spinners i could think of were better in the second innings. All of them. Every Single One. I can't believe you even tried to pick up the pieces of that argument bowler-by-bowler. Shocking.

They weren't better though. I showed that. In every single case (of the fingerspinners) the "they're better in the fourth-innings than elsewhere" statement is untrue. It might appear true if you look at simplistic overall stats, but it isn't.

There are 8 non-massive-spinning bowlers you named. Big spinners like Murali, Warne, Mushtaq Ahmed and (sometimes) Kaneria are completely irrelevant. Of these 8, 3 - nearly half! - (Giles, Vettori and Saqlain) have overall records which get worse as the game progresses so their simplistic overall averages on the face appear to support what I was saying. 2 (Harris, MSP) have been in the game no time at all so their cases prove nothing. 2 (Kumble, Harbhajan Singh) were more effective in the second\fourth-innings at home only, and there was no difference away. The remaining 1 (Boje), a quick look through the games rather than a presumption that they were all the same thing shows just how dangerous overall averages are. There are a fair few occasions where Boje hardly bowled in the second-innings of a Test, so hence the good times (which were just as frequent in first- as second-innings) make the average look good, unlike in the first-innings when there were also lots of bad times because he bowled far more in the first-innings.

 

[Prince EWS]

In complete support of your argument:

Panesar's bowling averages:
1st innings: 33
2nd: 38
3rd: 26
4th: 30

Saqlain Mushtaq:
1st: 32
2nd: 27
3rd: 28
4th: 29

Mushtaq Ahmed:
1st- 38
2nd- 42
3rd- 25
4th- 20

SK Warne:
1st: 27
2nd: 28
3rd: 22
4th: 23

Murali:
1st: 25
2nd: 20
3rd: 20
4th: 19

Harbhajan:
1st: 38
2nd: 32
3rd: 23
4th: 27

Kumble:
1st: 34
2nd: 29
3rd: 28
4th: 22

Boje:
1st: 60
2nd: 66
3rd: 32
4th: 26

Harris:
1st: 53
2nd: 32
3rd: 24
4th: 29

Giles:
1st: 45
2nd: 42
3rd: 34
4th: 40

Kaneria:
1st: 34
2nd: 39
3rd: 28
4th: 36

And the one exception i can think of, Vettori:
1st: 39
2nd: 28
3rd: 31
4th: 38

Overkill perhaps. Just shows

as a whole new level of bull**** from Dicko.

To add to this, some overall stats:

Spinners in the last 10 years
1st innings: 894 wickets @ 42.01(seamers: 2426 @ 34.49)
2nd innings: 1002 wickets @ 36.46 (seamers: 2311 @ 33.78)
3rd innings: 977 wickets @ 32.44 (seamers: 1791 @ 30.98)
4th innings: 535 wickets @ 31.45 (seamers: 983 @ 29.82)

NOTE: I've taken matches involving Bangladesh, Zimbabwe and the ICC World XI out of the analysis.

It may not be as exaggerated as it once was, but the phenomena is still there. As the match progresses, bowling becomes easier - comparatively more for spinners than for seamers.

You can individually go through all 365 matches if you like to pick the bones out of that, Richard, but I don't think such a large sample size can be discounted with a few isolated cases.

I suppose it might be interesting to see what would happen if we took the subcontinent out...