• 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.

Next Star

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
Barney Rubble said:
I'm going to take a huge punt and say that Stuart Broad will be an England player within two years, and a regular almost straightaway. He seems to be adapting well to first-class cricket, and at 19, has plenty of time to develop the pace and bounce that his 6ft 5in frame has given him. It's a big shot in the dark I know, but I've got a feeling about him.

I also think Jamie Hildreth is a dead cert to be an England player in the future - he seems to have a very organised technique, and is capable of scoring runs quickly, too. Not to mention his improving medium-pace bowling.
Hildreth scores a little too quickly for my liking at present. He hasn't adapted too well to the game at the top level yet.
As for Stuart Broad, he seems to have all the attributes of a pretty poor bowler - getting a few wickets despite being hammered in his 1st season.
Smacks of Richard Dawson and so many others.
 

Barney Rubble

International Coach
Richard said:
Hildreth scores a little too quickly for my liking at present. He hasn't adapted too well to the game at the top level yet.
As for Stuart Broad, he seems to have all the attributes of a pretty poor bowler - getting a few wickets despite being hammered in his 1st season.
Smacks of Richard Dawson and so many others.
Broad hasn't been hammered that much - he's conceding at 3.74 an over, which isn't the best economy rate in the world, but not the worst, either - and regardless of that, his average is a pretty respectable 27.05, considering he's only played 6 FC matches.

Anyway, I'm not really qualified to have an opinion on him, I'm basing it all on what I hear about him and have never actually seen him play.
 

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
Patterns in figures do tell something, y'know.
And 3.74 isn't bad? What planet are you on?!?!?! :blink:
 

Barney Rubble

International Coach
Richard said:
Patterns in figures do tell something, y'know.
And 3.74 isn't bad? What planet are you on?!?!?! :blink:
Never said it wasn't bad - just that it wasn't terrible. 5 an over would be terrible. And it's pretty much the average run rate in 4-day cricket these days, teams are scoring faster and faster all the time.
 

marc71178

Eyes not spreadsheets
Richard said:
Whether you intended to be sarcastic or not, you said something that wasn't a million miles from being true.
No, it is not.

Steve Harmison is never going to be fit to be compared favourably with McGrath.

Likewise just about any other bowler.
 

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
Barney Rubble said:
Never said it wasn't bad - just that it wasn't terrible. 5 an over would be terrible. And it's pretty much the average run rate in 4-day cricket these days, teams are scoring faster and faster all the time.
No, there are just lots of extremely poor bowlers knocking around, and the speed of scoring (well over 3.5-an-over in every season since 2001) goes some way to explaining the poor quality of English domestic cricket at present.
5-an-over, over any period of time (even a couple of games), is still almost totally unseen in the First-Class game these days.
 

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
marc71178 said:
No, it is not.

Steve Harmison is never going to be fit to be compared favourably with McGrath.

Likewise just about any other bowler.
And of course you mentioned him being compared to McGrath...
You said he was polarised - either sensational figures or absolute rubbish... and there's plenty of truth in that.
What is says with regards comparisons to McGrath is precisely nothing.
 

marc71178

Eyes not spreadsheets
No, I never said anything about him being polarised, all I did was point out that you could selectively take a few of his games and say he's better than McGrath, when it's clearly not the case.
 

luckyeddie

Cricket Web Staff Member
Richard said:
And of course you mentioned him being compared to McGrath...
You said he was polarised - either sensational figures or absolute rubbish... and there's plenty of truth in that.
What is says with regards comparisons to McGrath is precisely nothing.
Are you actually suggesting that Glenn McGrath is now worthy of being considered a half-decent bowler? I mean, not in the Chaminda Vaas, Craig White or Andy Caddick class of course but up there with Corky?
 

sledger

Spanish_Vicente
luckyeddie said:
Are you actually suggesting that Glenn McGrath is now worthy of being considered a half-decent bowler? I mean, not in the Chaminda Vaas, Craig White or Andy Caddick class of course but up there with Corky?
lets not go overboard, hes probably nearing the level of james kirtley or will do sometime in the near future.
 

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
luckyeddie said:
Are you actually suggesting that Glenn McGrath is now worthy of being considered a half-decent bowler? I mean, not in the Chaminda Vaas, Craig White or Andy Caddick class of course but up there with Corky?
Please... don't tell me you too were one of those people who haven't read properly and have believed I think McGrath is something other than a very, very fine Test-match bowler and one of the best ODI bowlers ever?
 

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
marc71178 said:
No, I never said anything about him being polarised, all I did was point out that you could selectively take a few of his games and say he's better than McGrath, when it's clearly not the case.
And you can do that with anyone, sslect a few (20-30% or so).
You can do it with a half-and-half with hardly anyone... except Chaminda Vaas.
 

tooextracool

International Coach
Richard said:
And you can do that with anyone, sslect a few (20-30% or so).
You can do it with a half-and-half with hardly anyone... except Chaminda Vaas.
how about steve 'cant bowl wicket taking balls' harmison?
 

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
Even when you do it with Harmison's figures, most of the good figures haven't come from bowling wicket-taking balls and from poor strokes, even if these supposedly have come from pressure.
 

Swervy

International Captain
Richard said:
Even when you do it with Harmison's figures, most of the good figures haven't come from bowling wicket-taking balls and from poor strokes, even if these supposedly have come from pressure.
but I doubt that you have actually watched that many games of Vaas abroad (ie not in England)..so how can you make the judgement that Vaas doesnt take wickets with 'lucky' balls
 

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
I've watched more of them than not in the last 5 years, against England and others, and when he's taken wickets he's always got some with wicket-taking balls.
 

marc71178

Eyes not spreadsheets
Richard said:
And you can do that with anyone, sslect a few (20-30% or so).
You can do it with a half-and-half with hardly anyone... except Chaminda Vaas.
I did exactly the same with Steve Harmison,

I expect there's a fair few it could be done with, but the fact is, none of them are anywhere near McGrath's level.
 

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
Nope, you didn't do it with Harmison - as I pointed-out, it's considerably less than a 50\50 split, and what's more over a comparatively short career.
 

tooextracool

International Coach
Richard said:
Even when you do it with Harmison's figures, most of the good figures haven't come from bowling wicket-taking balls and from poor strokes, even if these supposedly have come from pressure.
if harmison hasnt bowled wicket taking balls then neither has vaas.
 

Top