SillyCowCorner1
Request Your Custom Title Now!
Keemo Paul has potential in this category.
-
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.
Current Big 4 test all rounders.
- Thread starter Slifer
- Start date
GoodAreasShane
Cricketer Of The Year
Except it wasn't
Last edited:
marc71178
Eyes not spreadsheets
I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again. If Holder’s batting is as good as you’re making out, why does he bat so low down the order? Coming in when a match was already won removes any pressure from an innings.
Also, if he were as good with the bat as you’re making out, how come he’s not racking up tons of runs?
Last edited:
GoodAreasShane
Cricketer Of The Year
You clearly neither know nor care at all about West Indies cricket. His batting record is not shoddy by any means, especially playing in a weak batting order in what are not typically very batting friendly conditions. I personally would prefer to see him a bit higher in the batting order but to claim his runs don't count just because he's batting lowish is a truly dreadful take. I am not claiming he is a better batsman than Stokes, but the gap between their batting is considerably less than you are claiming it is, and with Holder being the vastly superior bowler of the two I know who I would likely take.
Just have a spell champ
TheJediBrah
Request Your Custom Title Now!
Holder also at significantly lesser risk of being incarcerated for assault
Slifer
International Captain
Lol at the people saying Holder's 200 was overrated. Seriously, Wi were 120 odd for 6 with a lead a little over 300 (gettable) when he came in. Then him (along with Dowrich) batted English out of the match and set the tone for the rest of the series. I wouldn't exactly call it an atg innings but it certainly was solid, memorable and match winning
CricAddict
Cricketer Of The Year
Jadeja again undeservingly taken out of the Indian team just when this thread happens. He is clearly one of the top 4 all-rounders in the world which even the Indian team doesn't realize.
Bahnz
Hall of Fame Member
Holder's batting record is also pretty solid all around. Just a couple of weak spots against NZ and SA, and he mostly played against them in the first year of his career before his batting really blossomed.
For me it's Shakib, Stokes, Holder, Jadeja in that order. CdG also very good and only narrowly misses out.
For me it's Shakib, Stokes, Holder, Jadeja in that order. CdG also very good and only narrowly misses out.
Last edited:
TheJediBrah
Request Your Custom Title Now!
I had no opinion one way or the other, nor am I/was I particularly familiar with that innings, but the way you describe it here does sound a bit downhill ski-ish.
Lead of 300 already when he came in? I mean come on by the time he got to 50 the game would have been more or less over and he ended up with 200.
Like I said I'm judging that purely from your description
vcs
Request Your Custom Title Now!
That innings crushed England's resistance and consigned them to a thrashing which no doubt would have carried over to their performance in the next Test as well. In the context of the series, calling it downhill skiing is a bit harsh.
If WI had snuck an unconvincing 100 run win, England may have well come back to win the series (see recent SA tour). All speculation obviously.
If WI had snuck an unconvincing 100 run win, England may have well come back to win the series (see recent SA tour). All speculation obviously.
Last edited:
OverratedSanity
Request Your Custom Title Now!
So what you're saying is that west indies already had the match virtually sealed but what Holder did flattened England's morale badly.
That is quite literally downhill skiing. I doubt anyone would be disagreeing with me if it had been David Warner playing the innings. But people just don't like saying it when it's a cricketer they really like. Don't think he's a patch on stokes as a batsman despite their relative close averages.
Last edited:
honestbharani
Whatever it takes!!!
Just because Holder is not as good a batsman as Stokes does not mean he is not a good batsman. He is a brilliant bowler who can contribute the occasional great knock with the bat. Stokes is a brilliant batsman who can contribute the occasional great spell with the ball. Stokes has done it far more often than Holder and for longer and I do rate him better. And judging by however we can judge cricket skills from this far, I would say Stokes is much more talented than Holder possibly is. None of that means Holder is not a great all-rounder in today's game and neither does it mean he is not a good batsman.
TheJediBrah
Request Your Custom Title Now!
Did anyone say that?
honestbharani
Whatever it takes!!!
Not a patch on Stokes would suggest that, tbh. Given Stokes himself is only in the very good category as a batsman.
Pup Clarke
Cricketer Of The Year
Is Holder a 'vastly superior' bowler to Stokes? I mean I'd agree that he's better, but I don't think it's by that big a margain. Holder is more consistent, but Stokes has the ability to bowl parsimonious spells quite often - and is such a wicket-taking threat when the team needs it most. I feel that his inconsistency as a bowler is overplayed at times
MrPrez
International Debutant
Absolutely.
Holder is one of the best bowlers in the world at the moment, whereas Stokes is a solid fourth option.