Mr Mxyzptlk
Request Your Custom Title Now!
You must be thinking of a different Gillespie. He may be unlucky, but he goes for much.
-
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.
Gillespie gone?
- Thread starter shaka
- Start date
donaldduck
Cricket Spectator
IMO Gillespie will be a huge blow. He is able to bowl with good pace and that is massive for the make up of NZs line up. With him bowling first change there is no let up in pace after Bond finishes his first spell. Previously opening batsmen have been able to see of Bond as they knew dribbly medium pacers were around the corner. You must also take into account Gillespie is actually an aggressive opening bowler who attacks, so he has had to change his way of thinking to fill the first change seamer role.
I think with time he will become a very good performer for NZ, in no way am i saying he has made it already, i just think he has a very bright future.
Finally, i must question how much some of you actually know about cricket. Why go on about Gillespie's econ rate when he is a death bowler. He bowls at the most expensive time of the innings. Classic example is the match at Eden Park vs Sri Lanka when he had figures of 3-16 ish off 8 overs, bowled the last 2 overs in which Maharoof hit for a couple 6s on the small ground that it is, to go with the run a ball that is scored at that time of the innings and suddenly he ends with 3-40 odd.
I think with time he will become a very good performer for NZ, in no way am i saying he has made it already, i just think he has a very bright future.
Finally, i must question how much some of you actually know about cricket. Why go on about Gillespie's econ rate when he is a death bowler. He bowls at the most expensive time of the innings. Classic example is the match at Eden Park vs Sri Lanka when he had figures of 3-16 ish off 8 overs, bowled the last 2 overs in which Maharoof hit for a couple 6s on the small ground that it is, to go with the run a ball that is scored at that time of the innings and suddenly he ends with 3-40 odd.
thierry henry
International Coach
Gillespie IS expensive
He's also only fractionally quicker, if at all, than other pace options, and that really means nothing. Plus the pitches are going to favour slower bowlers anyway!
Richard
Cricket Web Staff Member
Because the whole point of "being a death bowler" is that such a term implies that you are good at it and are capable of stopping a run-riot at the death.
donaldduck
Cricket Spectator
At the end of the innings a side is happy to go for 1 run a ball. If a death bowler bowls 3 overs at the end - there is 18 runs just like that. Add that onto decent figures off 7 overs and you very easily have 10 overs completed for over 5 rpo.
And dont forget Gillespie has played in quite a few high scoring matches. All bowlers, including the Aussie bowlers have gone for plenty.
And dont forget Gillespie has played in quite a few high scoring matches. All bowlers, including the Aussie bowlers have gone for plenty.
Richard
Cricket Web Staff Member
Without mentioning the fact that good death-bowlers can usually manage to go for a couple less - 15 or 16, say - add such a thing to good 7-over figures (7-21-1 say) and it makes 10-39-1 - not poor at all.
