Can anyone tell me when...

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

With players like Harmison you start to think that maybe when the selectors say 'they see something in a player' that player really does have something special, regardless of how crap he may look. For another, Ian Butler has really been quite impressive of late.

 

[Langeveldt]

Like the guys action... (Ian Butler)

 

[tooextracool]

And still, I might remind you, they've come mostly through poor strokes.
How long have people been saying "the wickets will come" with regards Flintoff?

yes richard, chew your only point as hard as you can.
harmison couldnt take wickets....no wait that happened.
mark richardson wouldnt score any runs in england....no wait that happened too
oram couldnt bowl on non seaming wickets in ODIs? no wait i distincly remember him having an economy OF 4.09 in pakistan...yes on those blasted seaming wickets there.
anomalies?i think not.

 

[tooextracool]

How was Stephen Harmison considered "talented"?

I dont call a guy who sprays it round very talented, but credit to him for turning things around..

he showed it in bits.....well steve waugh thought so.

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

oram couldnt bowl on non seaming wickets in ODIs? no wait i distincly remember him having an economy OF 4.09 in pakistan...yes on those blasted seaming wickets there.

The Pakistan wickets do seam. Hence Wasim/Waqar/Imran/Shoaib.

 

[tooextracool]

not in ODIs......

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

Very few wickets seam significantly in ODIs anywhere in the world. The true Test of whether a bowler can bowl in such conditions is in a Test IMO because so many more wickets in ODIs are manufactured rather than earned.

 

[wpdavid]

Whom would you pick in an England bowling attack against the Australians? This may be a good one-

Harmison (lead bowler)
Hoggard/Anderson (both with new ball)
Flintoff (lead bowler)
Saggers (stock bowler)/Jones (if fully fit)
Giles (stock bowler)

Hoggard's form against NZ doesn't suggest he'll be any more successful against Aus next year than he was 18 months ago. The words "cannon" and "fodder" spring immediately to mind, I'm afraid. And I think someone's already pointed out that it would be unspeakable cruelty to let Saggers near Hayden & co.

 

[Richard]

Saggers would have Hayden for breakfast if there was any swing.

 

[Richard]

yes richard, chew your only point as hard as you can.
harmison couldnt take wickets....no wait that happened.
mark richardson wouldnt score any runs in england....no wait that happened too
oram couldnt bowl on non seaming wickets in ODIs? no wait i distincly remember him having an economy OF 4.09 in pakistan...yes on those blasted seaming wickets there.
anomalies?i think not.

Mark Richardson wouldn't score any runs in England. Where did I say that then? C'mon, let's have a thread address?
I never say something "will" or "will not" happen, because that just puts you in a position of everything to lose and nothing to gain.

 

[Richard]

he showed it in bits.....well steve waugh thought so.

Showed it in bits - you mean in between the times where he averaged 100 and 72, he took 6 for 156 and 4 for 33?
And usually just bowling with a bit of fire "impresses" Stephen Waugh. Even though Craig White bowled far better than Harmison at any point in the series, Harmison was the one who supposedly "impressed" the Australians.

 

[Richard]

No, we weren't.

What we were saying was that we were prepared to back Fletcher and selector's judgement on him, seeing as they obviously kept picking him for a reason.

The fact still remains that even when he wasn't as successful, he was still performing better than the team as a whole, so there were other's in more need of the chop than him.

Well, you were saying that, and it wasn't true at all, he was just taking advantage of bowling at Zimbabwe and Bangladesh better than the others.
They obviously kept picking him for the same reason they kept picking a number of other underperformers - mostly who've been proven substandard.

 

[Richard]

Erm, nobody actually did that - what we said was we could see why he'd been selected, and also pointed out that he was still performing better than the rest of the attack.

There is a massive difference.

Maybe you weren't, but the fact is there were lots who were.

 

[Richard]

A long time - and they're quite clearly beginning to be proven right.

I don't see how you can say that most of Harmison's wicket's have been poor strokes - I assume you still say he bowled well.

Quite clearly, eh? You mean his average dropping from an abysmal 50 to a very, very poor 40?
And yes, Harmison's wickets have been poor strokes, mostly. But yes, of course he's bowled better than he did prior to Trent Bridge 2003.

 

[Richard]

Flintoff Himself says

"It's only since then (2001) that I've been able to practise my bowling as I would like to practise," says Flintoff, who has felt his body becoming stronger as he gets older. "In some ways I'm quite an inexperienced bowler, because even though I'm 26 I've been bowling for only two-and-a-half years."

And for the first 5 series his average went up non-stop.
For some reason that trend was reversed in the winter of 2003\04.

 

[Dick Rockett]

Perhaps because he's bowling better?

You seem to have the unshakeable view that an ordinary player cannot improve into a good one. That's a shame because it's obvious to most people that both Harmison and Flintoff have improved out of sight. That doesn't mean they're the greatest ever, but they certainly deserve their places in the England team - and deserve to be amongst the first picked.

 

[wpdavid]

Saggers would have Hayden for breakfast if there was any swing.

Lol !!!

 

[marc71178]

Even though Craig White bowled far better than Harmison at any point in the series, Harmison was the one who supposedly "impressed" the Australians.

Yes, and look who's the international cricketer who's now picking up shedloads of wickets?

Even if White were fit to bowl, he wouldn't come anywhere near that number - perhaps the Australians were right?

 

[marc71178]

Well, you were saying that, and it wasn't true at all, he was just taking advantage of bowling at Zimbabwe and Bangladesh better than the others.

Except this is talking about before he started getting the wickets...

 

[tooextracool]

Very few wickets seam significantly in ODIs anywhere in the world. The true Test of whether a bowler can bowl in such conditions is in a Test IMO because so many more wickets in ODIs are manufactured rather than earned.

yes i know that was my point in the first place....except that some bloke believed that the only reason oram's ODI record was as good as it is was because he bowled well on seaming wickets