Vaughan to score an ODI ton before his 100th ODI?

[twctopcat]

Giles and Ealham are about equal in batting ability as far as I'm concerned.

Are we talking about twenty20 "it's a six" ealham here???

 

[Tom Halsey]

Doesn't make him 'not very good in general' (which is what the original comment was) overall though. Especially as a Test batsman.

Aimed at Richard.

 

[Richard]

Are we talking about twenty20 "it's a six" ealham here???

No, we're talking about proper cricket matches - one-day games and First-Class cricket.

 

[Richard]

Doesn't make him 'not very good in general' (which is what the original comment was) overall though. Especially as a Test batsman.

Who mentioned Test-cricket? I certainly haven't seen anyone.
It's quite clear to anyone who's watching properly that an average of less than 24 in proper ODIs makes him "not very good" and some!
You can't look at "overall" things when Tests and ODIs are so clearly different.

 

[marc71178]

No, it's impossible that he's better than every other fingerspinner ever to play the one-day game in the modern era.
Interesting that you still feel Giles should be praised for economical bowling when he almost never takes many wickets (against the decent teams, that is).

Where did I praise him?

All I did was point out that he never seems to be hammered, yet you've decided that is just luck that he's escaped being hammered.

 

[marc71178]

Makes assumption he is right, insists that this is enough to dismiss something he doesn't like... etc.

Well, if the cap fits.

 

[marc71178]

possibly because hes been nothing but a failure in his ODI career thus far?

He's not been a failure throughout though.

Less than 6 months ago, England played Australia - was his innings then a failure?

In the 1st and 2nd ODIs of the current series his innings were far from failures.

 

[marc71178]

except that he wasnt a very good bowler in the first place. he was decent, and we dont need decent 35 year olds who cant bat or field in the side.

Especially when we've already got Gough.

 

[marc71178]

Vettori? With that fantastic ER of 4.31 and that brilliant average of 34.02?

Last time I checked, it's lower than your arbitrary 4.5 figure that pays no attention to conditions over the years.

 

[tooextracool]

I'd say it makes them go from not really useful to being possibly quite useful.

yes hence if hes good enough, hed be more than capable of scoring at 3. once he proves himself he can get the position he wants. thats the way the game of cricket works doesnt it? you're given a position which you're relatively comfortable in, once you start to make a name for yourself you tend to get the chance to choose the positions you want.
and personally i dont think hes going to have too many problems against facing the new ball.

 

[tooextracool]

I've said nothing of the sort - I've said standard fingerspinners can't (ie those who bowl in the early 50mphs or slower, and who don't bowl a Doosra).

because clearly you have to be over 60mph for a batsmen to not be able to smash you all around the park.

Giles and Ealham are about equal in batting ability as far as I'm concerned.

i doubt it, i would personally much rather have giles come in when england are in trouble than have ealham.

No, it's excellent. But when compared with his poor record in the other non-spin-friendly countries (not to mention in spin-friendly India) it's not really much of an achievement.

uh huh, and please go ahead and tell me how spinner friendly NZ has been and how hooper has an ER of 4.17 there.
and i can assure you a 4.50 ER against SA isnt exactly poor either.
and if you looked at bowlers such as mushtaq ahmed who has an equally poor record in australia, india and england, and then categorically deny that mushtaq was anything other than a good bowler. even saqlain mushtaq has a poor record in india,england and even in pakistan!

As I've said above, it's not as black-and-white as you seem to have taken it as. No excuses at all. If you bowl 60mph or so you can succeed; if you bowl Doosras you can succeed; if you bowl in spin-friendly conditions regularly of course you can succeed.
Just because I haven't got around to mentioning it before now doesn't mean I'm making it all up as I go along.

yes clearly if you bowl below 60 mph you have no chance of succeeding, because the batsman suddenly get bamboozled by that extra pace and have no chance against a 60 mph bowler

 

[tooextracool]

He's not been a failure throughout though.

Less than 6 months ago, England played Australia - was his innings then a failure?.

yes on inning, fabulous, clearly we can assume that hes not a failure based on one inning
by that count many rubbish players who have had the odd big score like ramprakash arent a failures.

In the 1st and 2nd ODIs of the current series his innings were far from failures.

yes so hes had 2 decent innings so far, well done to him, it doesnt change the fact that hes been failing, series after series after series after series before this.

 

[tooextracool]

As far as I can see, he was talking about Vettori. He hasn't got a brilliant ER (by what you said, and what Richard quoted) and he has a poor average.

no he doesnt by a pace bowlers standard, but by a spinners standard its still very good. and he provides more variety to the attack than ealham does.

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

Especially when we've already got Gough.

Gough has been very impressive in the field lately.

 

[tooextracool]

indeed he has, hes improved leaps and bounds in fitness terms since the last time we saw him, but the question is for how long can he maintain it?

 

[chaminda_00]

I can't beleive some of the things that people are saying in this thread.
Read is a better batsmen then Collingwood
Giles should be dropped from the ODI team to allow Elaham back in

Read has done nothing in ODIs or Test with the bat, he is a useless batsmen compared to Jones and Collingwood. The guy averages 21 with a highest score of 30* and S/R 71. Whereas Collingwood averages 32 with a S/R of 73 and a hundred and 7 50s. Also Jones has a far superior record and ability with the bat in Test and ODIs (Ave 29, SR 91 and 2 50s). Can't really see Read coming back into the England team and in front of these two any time soon.

As we all know Giles isn't the greatest bowler in the world, but he is by far the best spinner England have. When picking any team u need balance and balance side need spin bowling options. Vaughan and KP aren't good enough spinners to be considered as options. So until England find a better spinner then he is their best option. Elaham might be bowling well in county cricket but England already have two medium pace all round option in Collingwood and Flintoff, there no need for another one. As a bowler he could be a option but England are better off looking for a long term replacement of Gough, rather then a short term fix.

 

[marc71178]

yes so hes had 2 decent innings so far, well done to him, it doesnt change the fact that hes been failing, series after series after series after series before this.

Except in more recent times he hasn't been failing so much.

I do believe about 1 in 5 of his ODI innings are half centuries - that's hardly that bad.

 

[Richard]

Yeah - really impressive 8 in 52 (1 in 6.5)
It's terrible, and it's even worse when you remove substandard-team games.

 

[Richard]

Where did I praise him?

All I did was point out that he never seems to be hammered, yet you've decided that is just luck that he's escaped being hammered.

Yep - because I don't see how he's any different to every other conventional fingerspinner in the modern ODI-game.

 

[Richard]

He's not been a failure throughout though.

Less than 6 months ago, England played Australia - was his innings then a failure?

In the 1st and 2nd ODIs of the current series his innings were far from failures.

And if you pick-out odd anomalaic innings you'll always get the picture you want in the end.