How good a pair are Harmison and Flintoff ?

[marc71178]

Rubbish, I simply try to point-out the flaws in the criticism.

The only flaws are in the system.

It is inconsistent and unfair.

 

[Richard]

As is the system taking-account of only scorebook scores.
And if you think the criticism is all flawless, you really need to think again.

 

[marc71178]

Where is the flaw in inconsistency of personal opinions?

 

[Zinzan]

Not as good a pair as Mcgrath and Gillespie

 

[twctopcat]

Not as good a pair as Mcgrath and Gillespie

I don't think anyone will dispute that, at least not for the too distant future.

 

[Richard]

Where is the flaw in inconsistency of personal opinions?

The fact that it very, very rarely comes down to personal opinion - far, far less than is seemingly assumed.

 

[tooextracool]

I've already answered SJS's post... quite a while ago, too, if you look at the dates.

so you dont take into account when a batsman is given wrongly out then? which is infact what you havent done whenever you've looked at players' first chance averages.

 

[SJS]

How good a pair are Harmison and Flintoff ? .......

.....As good as Harmison's last spell

 

[SpeedKing]

I reckon Flintoff is good and more consistent that Harmy but when Harmy is on fire, he is about 3-times as destructive as Freddie. So if both are on fire, they are only rivalled by the McGrath-Gillespie combination as far as i am concerned.

 

[Richard]

so you dont take into account when a batsman is given wrongly out then? which is infact what you havent done whenever you've looked at players' first chance averages.

Yes, I have, and I've said how several times.
By giving credit for an unfair dismissal as a not-out.
And that includes batting on with an injury (eg Hussain at Lord's, 2001 - should have retired hurt but batted on - pointlessly - and got out almost immidiately).

 

[Richard]

I reckon Flintoff is good and more consistent that Harmy but when Harmy is on fire, he is about 3-times as destructive as Freddie. So if both are on fire, they are only rivalled by the McGrath-Gillespie combination as far as i am concerned.

Yet Harmy has been on fire in 1 of his last 9 Tests... couldn't just have been a remarkable breakout in West Indies and at home to New Zealand, could it?
Flintoff, on the other hand, has been consistently getting excellent figures since Galle in 2003\04 - a year ago.
I think, presently, "how good a pair are Hoggard and Flintoff" would be a more appropriate question.

 

[SpeedKing]

Yet Harmy has been on fire in 1 of his last 9 Tests... couldn't just have been a remarkable breakout in West Indies and at home to New Zealand, could it?
Flintoff, on the other hand, has been consistently getting excellent figures since Galle in 2003\04 - a year ago.
I think, presently, "how good a pair are Hoggard and Flintoff" would be a more appropriate question.

Richard, wot is it with you and Harmison. He is tall, bowls 90mph and swings the ball. Can't you just appreciate the talent that your team has and realize the fact that if Harmison is not running on all cylinders, we cannot beat the Aussie in the Ashes. Yes Hoggard has been exceptional but when its not swinging he becomes a very limited bowler. In such a scenario, Harmison can still outdo the batsmen with the extra bounce he gets at 90mph.

Even before Harmison had that amazing run, even the most one-eyed spaectator could see that he had the fore-mentioned capabilitiels to be a destructive bowler.

 

[Richard]

If Harmison truly did swing the ball, and was a bit more accurate than he has been in his last 9 Test-matches (enough to outnumber the 7 matches in which he bowled accurately), he would be a good bowler.
And forgive me, I couldn't give a damn about being tall and bowling at 90mph if you haven't got either of the above - lots of pace and bounce are simply something that make sideways-movement and accuracy more useful, just bowling at 90mph from 6"7' doesn't make anyone a good bowler.
If Harmison is running on what appears to be all cylinders, I'm pretty confident the Australians will deal with him the way the South Africans and West Indians (except at The Oval) did - ie without the slightest difficulty and often with disdain. Even if he were to get figures such as he did in West Indies and at home to New Zealand, I still don't think it will make the slightest difference to the outcome of The Ashes.

 

[SpeedKing]

If Harmison truly did swing the ball, and was a bit more accurate than he has been in his last 9 Test-matches (enough to outnumber the 7 matches in which he bowled accurately), he would be a good bowler.
And forgive me, I couldn't give a damn about being tall and bowling at 90mph if you haven't got either of the above - lots of pace and bounce are simply something that make sideways-movement and accuracy more useful, just bowling at 90mph from 6"7' doesn't make anyone a good bowler.
If Harmison is running on what appears to be all cylinders, I'm pretty confident the Australians will deal with him the way the South Africans and West Indians (except at The Oval) did - ie without the slightest difficulty and often with disdain. Even if he were to get figures such as he did in West Indies and at home to New Zealand, I still don't think it will make the slightest difference to the outcome of The Ashes.

When Harmison is running on all cylinders, he is just about unplayable and is the most menacing bowler i have seen arund since Ambrose.

And wot do you mean ''if Harmison truly did swing the ball''. Remember this delivery

69.6 Harmison to Rudolph, OUT: forward defensive, on the toes, beats the
bat and just nipped the off stump

Harmison does move the ball and he moves it away from the left hander [into the right hander]. As he exibited in the this delivery, you do not beat a Test batsman bat playing straight through the line of the ball without sideways movement.

And If you think Harmison is so usless, how about you facing a big 6''7 bowler and you have about half a second to react.

Against the Aussies, i expect big Freddie to continue bowling as well as he has. Hoggy is going to be usefull and will be a handfull in seamer conditions. Harmison has to come to the party if england are going to have any chance in the Ashes. Simple as.

 

[Zinzan]

I'm struggling to understand how Harmison is struggling in recent times. I thought he was absolutely world-class in the tests against NZ last year, in fact the main difference between the 2 teams. I haven't seen him since expect on the scorecards. What has happened??

 

[Richard]

When Harmison is running on all cylinders, he is just about unplayable and is the most menacing bowler i have seen arund since Ambrose.

Rubbish, to compare Harmison to Ambrose is ludicrous.
Ambrose did a little bit more in his career than just get a stack of wickets in a 6 out of 7 Tests in a 5-month period, y'know. Not to mention that he was twice as accurate as Harmison will probably ever be.

And wot do you mean ''if Harmison truly did swing the ball''. Remember this delivery

69.6 Harmison to Rudolph, OUT: forward defensive, on the toes, beats the
bat and just nipped the off stump

Harmison does move the ball and he moves it away from the left hander [into the right hander]. As he exibited in the this delivery, you do not beat a Test batsman bat playing straight through the line of the ball without sideways movement.

Wow, one single delivery - I could quote this:

From CricInfo BBB, South Africa v England 2004\05, First Test
14.6 Steyn to Vaughan, OUT: ball goes between the bat and pads to
destroy the woodwork. Steyn is ecstatic and pumps the air a number
of times

and say that it means Dale Steyn is a good bowler.
That particular ball, incidentally, didn't swing at all, it moved off the pitch - a better example of a rare Harmison swinging ball would be this:

From CricInfo BBB, West Indies v England 2003\04, Third Test
3.6 Harmison to Gayle, OUT: the perfect reply. Harmison gives him one
to drive after all the short stuff, Gayle is back expecting
another short ball, drives over it, and back goes off stump

Though the commentary describes it badly, it came back into the left-hander a long way.
The point is, Harmison hardly ever pitches it full enough to swing - his action isn't bad (certainly not as bad as it used to be) and his seam-position is fine - it's just his length is usually wrong. So he hardly ever swings the ball.
Not to mention the fact that he's not very accurate so even if he got his length right he'd still get hammered plenty (like Hoggard).

And If you think Harmison is so usless, how about you facing a big 6''7 bowler and you have about half a second to react.

Err - how about not making stupid comparisons, given that no-one will ever take "useless" as to mean useless at the level I play at.

Against the Aussies, i expect big Freddie to continue bowling as well as he has. Hoggy is going to be usefull and will be a handfull in seamer conditions. Harmison has to come to the party if england are going to have any chance in the Ashes. Simple as.

Even if he does, there is little chance of us gaining victory. Simple as. Because anything they can do, McGrath, Gillespie and Kasprowicz can do better. And if they don't there's always Warne.

 

[SpeedKing]

Wow, one single delivery - I could quote this:

and say that it means Dale Steyn is a good bowler.
That particular ball, incidentally, didn't swing at all, it moved off the pitch - a better example of a rare Harmison swinging ball would be this:

Though the commentary describes it badly, it came back into the left-hander a long way.
The point is, Harmison hardly ever pitches it full enough to swing - his action isn't bad (certainly not as bad as it used to be) and his seam-position is fine - it's just his length is usually wrong. So he hardly ever swings the ball.
Not to mention the fact that he's not very accurate so even if he got his length right he'd still get hammered plenty (like Hoggard).

Err - how about not making stupid comparisons, given that no-one will ever take "useless" as to mean useless at the level I play at.

Even if he does, there is little chance of us gaining victory. Simple as. Because anything they can do, McGrath, Gillespie and Kasprowicz can do better. And if they don't there's always Warne.

Granted i shouldn't be compaing Harmison to Ambrose at this stage in his career but
if you analyse wot i said a little closer you will realize that i was talking about Harmison IN FULL FLOW. you have to admit that IN FULL FLOW, Harmison can destroy any batting line up like Ambrose did for most of his career.

If i was a self repecting test batsman, i would dig a grave and burry myself in it if a bowler who bowls the ''wrong'' length and ''hardly ever swings the ball'' takes 7-12 against my team.

i said the statement about you facing him because you seem to be the only person i have met who genuinely doesn't realize the talent and ability that Harmison has. And, you did not even answer the question and tried getting round it by saying the level he plays is different from your. i will answer the question and say if i was a batsman and the opposition captain threw the ball to this 6''7 giant who bowls 90mph, i would not be one of the more comfortable men in this world, because i realize this man's potential.

i don't know about us getting trounced in the series even if harmison gets back to his old form but i thing i am sure about is that England are going to need him to be on top form if we are going to pinch back the Ashes.

 

[Richard]

Granted i shouldn't be compaing Harmison to Ambrose at this stage in his career but
if you analyse wot i said a little closer you will realize that i was talking about Harmison IN FULL FLOW. you have to admit that IN FULL FLOW, Harmison can destroy any batting line up like Ambrose did for most of his career.

No, he could destroy some batting-line-ups that played as abysmally as West Indies in West Indies and New Zealand in England did in March-June 2004.
As has been demonstrated by most of the rest of his career, he couldn't destroy a decent batting-line-up for love nor money.

If i was a self repecting test batsman, i would dig a grave and burry myself in it if a bowler who bowls the ''wrong'' length and ''hardly ever swings the ball'' takes 7-12 against my team.

And I don't doubt the West Indies top-order would have felt like that - unless, of course, they really don't care.

i said the statement about you facing him because you seem to be the only person i have met who genuinely doesn't realize the talent and ability that Harmison has. And, you did not even answer the question and tried getting round it by saying the level he plays is different from your. i will answer the question and say if i was a batsman and the opposition captain threw the ball to this 6''7 giant who bowls 90mph, i would not be one of the more comfortable men in this world, because i realize this man's potential.

Yet the ease with which most top-class batsmen have played him outside the first 7 Tests of 2004 (he's played 18 Tests and taken 49 wickets at nearly 44 when you get rid of them - and the Zimbabwe and Bangladesh Tests) really does suggest otherwise.
If I was a Test-class batsman (and I'm not anything remotely close - I'm one of the worst batsmen you'll see at Club-Third-XI level), no, I'd not be worried at all.

i don't know about us getting trounced in the series even if harmison gets back to his old form but i thing i am sure about is that England are going to need him to be on top form if we are going to pinch back the Ashes.

I don't, personally, think it'll make the slightest difference - and I also think that if Harmison bowls as well as he ever has, the Aussies still won't have any trouble with him.

 

[SpeedKing]

No, he could destroy some batting-line-ups that played as abysmally as West Indies in West Indies and New Zealand in England did in March-June 2004.
As has been demonstrated by most of the rest of his career, he couldn't destroy a decent batting-line-up for love nor money.

Earlier, you said

I'm pretty confident the Australians will deal with him the way the South Africans and West Indians (except at The Oval) did

So now you are contradicting yourself . And wot do you mean WI don't have a decent batting line-up with the likes of Gayle, Sarwan, Lara and Chanderpaul. Gayle and Chanderpaul were in exceptional form, Lara was alright, only Sarwan was having a nightmare time of it.

And I don't doubt the West Indies top-order would have felt like that - unless, of course, they really don't care

Well for a bowler who bowls the wrong length and doesn't move the ball must have been a hell lot lucky to take 40 wickets in 2 series against them. If he was so easy to handle could the WI batmen have figured him out after a full seies of headache from him.

Yet the ease with which most top-class batsmen have played him outside the first 7 Tests of 2004 (he's played 18 Tests and taken 49 wickets at nearly 44 when you get rid of them - and the Zimbabwe and Bangladesh Tests) really does suggest otherwise.
If I was a Test-class batsman (and I'm not anything remotely close - I'm one of the worst batsmen you'll see at Club-Third-XI level), no, I'd not be worried at all.

i personally don't give 10 damns about Harmy fogures. only thing i am going to judge him by is wot i have actually seen him do on the pitch. Yes he was poor against the Saffies but then again, he was majestic against WI and NZ. I am not one of those people with short memories and i am not going to start rubbishing Harmison just yet. As i said earlier, he is the most menacing bowler i have seen since Ambrose [IMHO] and i assure you, even the much vaunted Aussie line-up are not going to keep a lid on him if he bowls like he did last year [IMHO]

Before last year, people were not talking of the ashes being as tight as they think it will be this time. but after seing Harmison's exploits last year, he has given some of us some hope this Ashes.

 

[SpeedKing]

I'm struggling to understand how Harmison is struggling in recent times. I thought he was absolutely world-class in the tests against NZ last year, in fact the main difference between the 2 teams. I haven't seen him since expect on the scorecards. What has happened??

i cannot really put my finger on wot went wrong in SA [ hopefully it was homesickness, but then again how about the tour of WI last year].

1.This could be it although it is a pretty lame excuse [and a horrible weakness to have.]
Remember the way De Villiers tucked into him on the first morining of the series, i feel that could have shattered a good part of his confidence. It's abit of a stab in the dark but never know.

2.also, there was the niggle that he had that continued into the start of the ODI series.

3.Micheal Atherton kept saying that the problem was that he was trying to slow himself down in order to put the ball on a spot but that tactic just made things worse.

i thought he had bowled the over that could get him back to 2004 standards
90.1 Harmison to Kallis, no run, bounces on him and takes the bottom
hand off the bat as it gloves him, calling for the magic spray
The English Captain Michael Vaughan is currently off the field
after being hit on the finger in the nets this morning
He has gone off to hospital for a precautionary xray
90.2 Harmison to Kallis, no run, vicious bouncer keeps his eye as long
as he could and then whips it away ending up on his rear end
90.3 Harmison to Kallis, no run, outside off, fuller and leaves this
alone quite thankfully
90.4 Harmison to Kallis, no run, another great bouncer good stuff first
up from the premium English bowler rips the head away as he is
worked over
90.5 Harmison to Kallis, no run, rising one outside off and the
unsettled batsmen is beaten
90.6 Harmison to Kallis, legbye: two runs, down legside and goes away
fine Harmison gets substantial applause and justly so great over

Unfortunately, it was not to be.