twctopcat
International Regular
Are we talking about twenty20 "it's a six" ealham here???Richard said: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???Richard said:Giles and Ealham are about equal in batting ability as far as I'm concerned.
No, we're talking about proper cricket matches - one-day games and First-Class cricket.twctopcat said:Are we talking about twenty20 "it's a six" ealham here???
Who mentioned Test-cricket? I certainly haven't seen anyone.Tom Halsey said:Doesn't make him 'not very good in general' (which is what the original comment was) overall though. Especially as a Test batsman.
Where did I praise him?Richard said: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).
Well, if the cap fits.Richard said:Makes assumption he is right, insists that this is enough to dismiss something he doesn't like... etc.
He's not been a failure throughout though.tooextracool said:possibly because hes been nothing but a failure in his ODI career thus far?
Especially when we've already got Gough.tooextracool said: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.
Last time I checked, it's lower than your arbitrary 4.5 figure that pays no attention to conditions over the years.Richard said:Vettori? With that fantastic ER of 4.31 and that brilliant average of 34.02?
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.Richard said:I'd say it makes them go from not really useful to being possibly quite useful.
because clearly you have to be over 60mph for a batsmen to not be able to smash you all around the park.Richard said: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).
i doubt it, i would personally much rather have giles come in when england are in trouble than have ealham.Richard said:Giles and Ealham are about equal in batting ability as far as I'm concerned.
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.Richard said: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.
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 bowlerRichard said: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 on inning, fabulous, clearly we can assume that hes not a failure based on one inningmarc71178 said:He's not been a failure throughout though.
Less than 6 months ago, England played Australia - was his innings then a failure?.
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.marc71178 said:In the 1st and 2nd ODIs of the current series his innings were far from failures.
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.Tom Halsey said: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.
Gough has been very impressive in the field lately.marc71178 said:Especially when we've already got Gough.
Except in more recent times he hasn't been failing so much.tooextracool said: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.
Yep - because I don't see how he's any different to every other conventional fingerspinner in the modern ODI-game.marc71178 said: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.
And if you pick-out odd anomalaic innings you'll always get the picture you want in the end.marc71178 said: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.