***Official*** Australia in England (The Ashes)

[marc71178]

he got 2 turners in zimbabwe, 2 in NZ, 1 in the WI, and 3 in SL, and 1 in england on debut. which adds up to 9 out of 21 games, a whole 43% of his career. and it would have been more, had the selectors been smart enough to realise that he shouldnt have been picked to play in england outside the oval.

I meant his whole career.

 

[marc71178]

95%?
What does that figure come from?
How the hell has Croft played 95% of his games on turners?
I'd say it was nearer 30%

So he's played about 90 games on turners has he?

Don't think so.

 

[Scallywag]

Absolute rubbish, countless spinners have bowled poorly on turners.

What makes a spinner exceptional is when he does not have to rely on a turner - only a tiny handful of spinners can bowl well on non-turning pitches.
A good fingerspinner is one who bowls well on turners; a poor one is one who bowls poorly on any pitch (eg Gareth Batty, Richard Dawson, Nathan Hauritz).

Nathan Hauritz has played one test against India and taken 5 wickets @ 20.

Can you explain how that makes him a poor bowler.

Giles has played 5 tests against India for 11 wickets @ 50
2 tests in India for 6 wickets @ 33.

Richard its you who speaks absolute rubbish.

 

[Jnr.]

Nathan Hauritz has played one test against India and taken 5 wickets @ 20.

Can you explain how that makes him a poor bowler.

Maybe you would like to note that Michael Clarke took 6/9 (6.2) on the same pitch that Hauritz took 3/16 (5) and 2/89 (22)?

And the Indian bowlers: Kartik 4/44, 3/32; Harhbajan 0/53, 5/29; Kumble 5/90, 1/5.

 

[Scallywag]

Maybe you would like to note that Michael Clarke took 6/9 (6.2) on the same pitch that Hauritz took 3/16 (5) and 2/89 (22)?

And the Indian bowlers: Kartik 4/44, 3/32; Harhbajan 0/53, 5/29; Kumble 5/90, 1/5.

Jnr this was posted by Richard "A good fingerspinner is one who bowls well on turners; a poor one is one who bowls poorly on any pitch (eg Gareth Batty, Richard Dawson, Nathan Hauritz)." Are you agreeing with Richard that Haurtz is a poor bowler based on this one performance at test level where he took 5 wickets @ 20.

Other than that I dont know what you are trying to imply so you may need to spell it out for me. Maybe you are like Richard and think Giles with a average of 37 is a much better bowler than MaGill who has more wickets at an average of 27.

 

[Jnr.]

Jnr this was posted by Richard "A good fingerspinner is one who bowls well on turners; a poor one is one who bowls poorly on any pitch (eg Gareth Batty, Richard Dawson, Nathan Hauritz)." Are you agreeing with Richard that Haurtz is a poor bowler based on this one performance at test level where he took 5 wickets @ 20.

I'm agreeing with Richard that Hauritz is a poor bowler, but not on the basis of one performance at Test level, even if all the other finger spinners (Clarke, Kartik, Harbhajan) outperformed him by some distance.

 

[Scallywag]

I'm agreeing with Richard that Hauritz is a poor bowler, but not on the basis of one performance at Test level, even if all the other finger spinners (Clarke, Kartik, Harbhajan) outperformed him by some distance.

OK then explain why Hauritz is a poor bowler.

 

[Jnr.]

OK then explain why Hauritz is a poor bowler.

Just an opinion formed after seeing Hauritz bowl.

Besides, if you think that getting 5 wickets at 20 on such a poor pitch is good, then...

 

[Scallywag]

Just an opinion formed after seeing Hauritz bowl.

Besides, if you think that getting 5 wickets at 20 on such a poor pitch is good, then...

An opinion formed on what?

Is his action wrong, cant he spin the ball, does he put it in the wrong place, cant he get any flight, is his length wrong.

 

[tooextracool]

An opinion formed on what?

Is his action wrong, cant he spin the ball, does he put it in the wrong place, cant he get any flight, is his length wrong.

can he spin the ball significantly? no
does he have any variety? no
is he accurate? no.

im sorry, anybody who thinks that hauritz is anything other than the worst spinner ever picked by australia, is seriously out of their mind.

 

[tooextracool]

Jnr this was posted by Richard "A good fingerspinner is one who bowls well on turners; a poor one is one who bowls poorly on any pitch (eg Gareth Batty, Richard Dawson, Nathan Hauritz)." Are you agreeing with Richard that Haurtz is a poor bowler based on this one performance at test level where he took 5 wickets @ 20.

just analyse this further, he took 3/16 in the first inning and basically just cleaned up the tail on a minefield of a pitch. then got absolutely crapped on when he bowled to the quality top order batsmen and pretty much cost australia that game single handedly in the 2nd when he went at 4 runs an over on a wicket where clarke took 6/9.

 

[tooextracool]

I meant his whole career.

what are you talking about? the 21 tests was all that he played in his entire career.

 

[Scallywag]

can he spin the ball significantly? no
does he have any variety? no
is he accurate? no.

im sorry, anybody who thinks that hauritz is anything other than the worst spinner ever picked by australia, is seriously out of their mind.

But you must agree that he is in the same class as Giles, not up there with Warne, Murali, Kumble, Harbhajan, Vettori but down in the not good class with Giles.

 

[age_master]

i think that Hauritz, if given the oportunity could be a better Test spinner than Giles.






ofcourse he wont get that oportunity cause they are both rubbish

 

[tooextracool]

But you must agree that he is in the same class as Giles, not up there with Warne, Murali, Kumble, Harbhajan, Vettori but down in the not good class with Giles.

did you even read my last post? giles isnt brilliant but he isnt poor. there are 4 categories of spin bowlers. theres the great, the ordinary, the poor and the absolute trash, and hauritz ranks with batty and dawson in the 'absolute trash' category

 

[Scallywag]

just analyse this further, he took 3/16 in the first inning and basically just cleaned up the tail on a minefield of a pitch. then got absolutely crapped on when he bowled to the quality top order batsmen and pretty much cost australia that game single handedly in the 2nd when he went at 4 runs an over on a wicket where clarke took 6/9.

Hauritz also picked up Laxman and Tendulkar.

Thats the same game where Harbhajan returned 0/53 in the first innings.

 

[Scallywag]

did you even read my last post? giles isnt brilliant but he isnt poor. there are 4 categories of spin bowlers. theres the great, the ordinary, the poor and the absolute trash, and hauritz ranks with batty and dawson in the 'absolute trash' category

Didnt you read my posts, Giles is also in the ' absolute trash ' category.

 

[tooextracool]

Hauritz also picked up Laxman and Tendulkar..

yes after they absolutely smashed him all over the park. odds are that if your a spinner, no matter how poor you are, and you bowl 22 overs on a minefield of a wicket, you're bound to get a batsman out eventually.

Thats the same game where Harbhajan returned 0/53 in the first innings.

and took 5/29 in the 2nd and won the game for india. hauritz lost the game for australia.

 

[tooextracool]

Didnt you read my posts, Giles is also in the ' absolute trash ' category.

oh yes, despite the fact that hes been winning games for england on turners. yes absolutely.

 

[Scallywag]

oh yes, despite the fact that hes been winning games for england on turners. yes absolutely.

Dont fool yourself TEC, Giles ave in winning games is still 32 and of the 25 tests won he has only 2 yes two 5 wicket hauls.