ImpatientLime
International Regular
no injuries (or as close to that as you can get as a top class sportsman), who would have been the better test match bowler?
-
Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.
You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.
chris tremlett v simon jones
- Thread starter ImpatientLime
- Start date
vcs
Request Your Custom Title Now!
Didn't they randomly bring back Tremlett out of nowhere for one match in the 2013-14 hammering, just because he'd done well in the previous tour? Looked completely innocuous. Was great in the 2010 tour and bowled well against India also before he got injured after a match or two.
Starfighter
Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Pretty much. He had taken a 8-for in County but averaged 33 and simply looked well down from his already unspectacular pace (he was mostly low 130s down here in 2010-11). Still not as much of a shambles as Finn, who didn't even play a match, and Rankin.
Pretty sure he was just dropped. Him attempting to bowl 126 km/h bouncers was one of the less edifying sights, debatable if he was any worse than the others who played in that series though.
Last edited:
vcs
Request Your Custom Title Now!
Yeah but his pace was down and a few of those were declaration slogs IIRC
flibbertyjibber
Request Your Custom Title Now!
This, Jones was brilliant at reversing it and his injuries were a real shame.
GIMH
Norwood's on Fire
I think had Jones been able to play on, he could have given us what our fast bowlers have generally struggled with - the ability to succeed away without having to change things up. Straight away I think of the Pakistan tour that followed the Ashes, there were some long and painful sessions in that series and he might have been a difference maker.
Coulda shoulda woulda, I could be wrong. But goddamn it's cruel we got him for so short a time. Albeit that's probably preferable to what you had with Tremlett where he played on but was never the same.
Edit - preferable not really the word. I'm sure Jones would have been happy to have had a long career even if it hadn't involved any more Test Cricket.
Coulda shoulda woulda, I could be wrong. But goddamn it's cruel we got him for so short a time. Albeit that's probably preferable to what you had with Tremlett where he played on but was never the same.
Edit - preferable not really the word. I'm sure Jones would have been happy to have had a long career even if it hadn't involved any more Test Cricket.
Uppercut
Request Your Custom Title Now!
I think Jones was just a bit better than Tremlett, or at least had a higher ceiling. Tremlett was great to watch and very effective but his best spells weren't on the same level as 2005 Jones.
It was a much better era for Jones's style of bowling too. Lots of batsmen about that could cut for days but struggled with lateral movement.
It was a much better era for Jones's style of bowling too. Lots of batsmen about that could cut for days but struggled with lateral movement.
BoyBrumby
Englishman
It's a tough call because they were both such different bowlers; Jones the skiddier, wicket-to-wicket swing bowler and Tremmers the big, tall, back of a length line bowler.
Jonah was quicker, but Tremmers was one of those bowlers who seemed to bowl the near-mythical heavy ball. It was probably connected to his height and the climb he got because of it, but he appeared to hurry batsman all the time and very rarely cracked the 140kmh barrier.
Ironically, because I agree with Coz about Jonah's potential as an overseas beast, it was Tremlett who spearheaded an away win in Oz so, like Lol, the Typhoon and Snowy before him, I have a massive soft spot for the big lump.
Jonah was quicker, but Tremmers was one of those bowlers who seemed to bowl the near-mythical heavy ball. It was probably connected to his height and the climb he got because of it, but he appeared to hurry batsman all the time and very rarely cracked the 140kmh barrier.
Ironically, because I agree with Coz about Jonah's potential as an overseas beast, it was Tremlett who spearheaded an away win in Oz so, like Lol, the Typhoon and Snowy before him, I have a massive soft spot for the big lump.
Howe_zat
Audio File
I'm guessing you mean Larwood but I think the only sportsman I've heard referred to as Lol is Lawrence Dallaglio. Who is also known for a notable achievement in Australia tbf.
BoyBrumby
Englishman
Ha, quite so.
Ironic Larwood was nicknamed "Lol" really though as I can't imagine too much laughter coming from yer crims in 32/33.
Magrat Garlick
Global Moderator
Should have been Lmaowood clearly
(although, maybe lol for fun was a word in the fens before Standard Pronunciation came along and salted the dialect?)
Burgey
Request Your Custom Title Now!
I voted for Jones in this but tbh I always hated his action because he did so little with his front arm. I always thought he could have been a yard faster had he yanked the chain harder.
Enjoyed Tremlett as a bowler a lot, but think Jones’ contribution in 05 against a far better side was slightly more worthy than in 10-11 when Australia’s batting was pretty ****, to the point even Anderson had decent returns. And I say that nws England’s blatant cheating in 05
Enjoyed Tremlett as a bowler a lot, but think Jones’ contribution in 05 against a far better side was slightly more worthy than in 10-11 when Australia’s batting was pretty ****, to the point even Anderson had decent returns. And I say that nws England’s blatant cheating in 05