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

[tooextracool]

i hope this is not based on you seeing him bowl in ONE Test, anyone picked for the No.1 team in the world is a class act.

nope, theres no way you can say that with a straight face when the same side has also had bracken and williams in the side at one point in time.

As for Ponting not doing well on a turner, I don't think you will find to many players ave. going up on turning pitches.

and ive said that they have to go up is it? i certainly dont expect their averages to fall to the mid 20s when they play on turners though.

Besides I have heard this all before with Martin supposedly being unable to handle spin bowling.

only one person said that, despite me contradicting him.and he obviously had no clue what he was talking abt

You will all so have to let me know how you decide on what constitute a turner? At the moment it seems to be, if Giles succeeds its a turner and if he fails its a flat track.

err any pitch that turns is a turner? and wicket that offers turn and bounce is a significant turner.

 

[chaminda_00]

dont being ridiculous. you seem to have a fascination for dismissing every subcontinental wicket as being spinner friendly. hes played on 13 turners in his career(not counting b'desh), and won 5 of those games. which is a significant number in itself.

And let me guess in those 13 games he averages is mid 20s or something, you seem to have this belief that the only wickets that are turners are the ones he takes wickets on. There have been more pitches that have offered extra assitants to spin then just 13.

Not every wicket in the sub-continential is a absolute turner, but majority provide addition support to spinners then found else where

 

[Scallywag]

dont being ridiculous. you seem to have a fascination for dismissing every subcontinental wicket as being spinner friendly. hes played on 13 turners in his career(not counting b'desh), and won 5 of those games. which is a significant number in itself.

45 tests / 13 turners = 28.8% of games that suit him.
He does well in 5 off those 13 games = 38%.

I would expect a better return from a spin bowler in the amount of games he bags lots of wickets on turners.

 

[chaminda_00]

yes and hes failed in several series in india. so overall hes only ever had 1 good series on turners.

One good series i see two:
SL (99) - 253 @ 84.33
Pak (02/03) - 342 @ 85.5

 

[tooextracool]

And let me guess in those 13 games he averages is mid 20s or something, you seem to have this belief that the only wickets that are turners are the ones he takes wickets on. There have been more pitches that have offered extra assitants to spin then just 13.

and perhaps you'd like to illustrate your point by stating the particular instance that was a turner?

Not every wicket in the sub-continential is a absolute turner, but majority provide addition support to spinners then found else where

bangalore offered 0 support to spinners, it was the closest thing you'd see to classic english conditions. the third test in SL was dead flat, as anyone who watched that game would realise, because giles and basically every other spinner bar murali got absolutely nothing out of the wicket

 

[tooextracool]

One good series i see two:
SL (99) - 253 @ 84.33
Pak (02/03) - 342 @ 85.5

because pakistan have such fabulous spin bowlers dont they?

 

[archie mac]

nope, theres no way you can say that with a straight face when the same side has also had bracken and williams in the side at one point in time.

I thought Bracken unlucky not to make the Ashes side bowled really well in the Pura Cup

 

[tooextracool]

45 tests / 13 turners = 28.8% of games that suit him.
He does well in 5 off those 13 games = 38%.

I would expect a better return from a spin bowler in the amount of games he bags lots of wickets on turners.

uh huh, except that if you took the time to read, i said that those 5 games were games that he was instrumental in winning for england. he was quite brilliant in most of the other games, but unfortunately the rest of the side was absolute crap.

 

[tooextracool]

I thought Bracken unlucky not to make the Ashes side bowled really well in the Pura Cup

as an england cricket supporter, id love to see bracken in any ashes side in the next 20 years.

 

[chaminda_00]

bangalore offered 0 support to spinners, it was the closest thing you'd see to classic english conditions. the third test in SL was dead flat, as anyone who watched that game would realise, because giles and basically every other spinner bar murali got absolutely nothing out of the wicket

Bangalore zero support, S Singh wickets clearly prove that the wicket provided some support to spinners, also Vaughan handled ball wicket did count to his wickets.

 

[chaminda_00]

because pakistan have such fabulous spin bowlers dont they?

So you don't rate Mashtaq or Saqlain, both have better records then Giles.

 

[archie mac]

err any pitch that turns is a turner? and wicket that offers turn and bounce is a significant turner.

Hardly any pitch fails to take turn at sometime in a Match, so there fore all pitches are turners? Or it has to take turn on the first day? Or it has to take turn in the second innings? You will have to explain it to me because at the moment it sounds like crap

 

[tooextracool]

Bangalore zero support, S Singh wickets clearly prove that the wicket provided some support to spinners, also Vaughan handled ball wicket did count to his wickets.

yes sarandeep singh because hes such a fabulous bowler isnt it?
absolute rubbish that, he took 3 wickets(1 of which was for obstructing the field so its not like it took some exceptional bowling either) and the other 2 were from poor strokes.
seriously did you watch even a ball of that game?
i watched every delivery at the ground, then came back and watched the game on tv, the sun didnt come out for a week, and it was the closest to classic english conditions you'll ever see.

 

[tooextracool]

So you don't rate Mashtaq or Saqlain, both have better records then Giles.

mushtaq ahmed was finished long before 02, infact he was finished by the mid 90s. how he got picked after that is a mystery. likewise for saqlain who was finished when people figured out how to read his doosra.

 

[tooextracool]

Hardly any pitch fails to take turn at sometime in a Match, so there fore all pitches are turners? Or it has to take turn on the first day? Or it has to take turn in the second innings? You will have to explain it to me because at the moment it sounds like crap

if it takes turn in the 2nd inning, and we're talking about significant turn, then it was a turner in the 2nd inning. and its not like we havent seen wickets like those.
if it takes turn from the first inning then its a turner throughout the test match.

 

[chaminda_00]

yes sarandeep singh because hes such a fabulous bowler isnt it?
absolute rubbish that, he took 3 wickets(1 of which was for obstructing the field so its not like it took some exceptional bowling either) and the other 2 were from poor strokes.
seriously did you watch even a ball of that game?
i watched every delivery at the ground, then came back and watched the game on tv, the sun didnt come out for a week, and it was the closest to classic english conditions you'll ever see.

The obstructing fielder didn't count to his wicket, did read my post, his three wickets were Ramprakash, Flintoff and Giles. What does the sun have to do with a pitch turning or not. There no doubt that it didn't turn as much as some pitches in the sub-continent, but it turned more then your average pitch outside the sub-continent.

 

[archie mac]

if it takes turn in the 2nd inning, and we're talking about significant turn, then it was a turner in the 2nd inning. and its not like we havent seen wickets like those.
if it takes turn from the first inning then its a turner throughout the test match.

Okay so basically this is just based on your opinion? I have seen games where one player can NOT turn the ball, where another player CAN, turner or not?
So again when Giles bowls well you are calling it a turner and when not its not a turner, I think it is all far to subjective.

 

[chaminda_00]

mushtaq ahmed was finished long before 02, infact he was finished by the mid 90s. how he got picked after that is a mystery. likewise for saqlain who was finished when people figured out how to read his doosra.

Saqlain may have not been as effective after people picked his doosra, but he was still more effective then Giles would ever be. Giles is a rubbish bowler outside turners and a ok bowler on turners, but Saqlain is a better bowler on turners and not on turners.

 

[Mister Wright]

If we take out his bad Tests we take out the anomalies.
If we take out MacGill's bad Tests we take out the normality.

Let me rephrase. You take out Giles' bad tests but take out MacGill's good tests, not a fair indication AFAIC. You have to judge players on what they have done during their careers, not what they have/haven't done 'here, here and here' and don't count what they have/haven't done 'there, there and there.

 

[marc71178]

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

No, his whole career is 300odd games of uselessness.