tooextracool said:
i disagree. pollock and ntini arent exactly known for bowling full lengths, and while im sure pollock tried it occasionally, ntini probably never did. however the best way to get strauss out is to bowl a barrage of full straight(or swinging) deliveries at him, and try to block out his favorite scoring areas square of the wicket. none of that was carried out during that series.
Of course Steyn never tried either? Inaccurate as he is, he's still a bowler who bowls far more full than short. Of course Langeveldt never tried either? Yes, I'm aware that his best performances came in the matches where both Nel and Langeveldt were absent and of course that's almost certainly not coincidence (can say the same of Trescothick, even though neither of them IIRR got him out).
Even if SA didn't carry the tactic out too well, is it really likely that NZ didn't? Weak as their seam-attack is, they're still pretty much all pitch-it-up bowlers. Equally, did Aus not do so sometimes?
I find it hard to conceive that India's and Pakistan's seam-attack is likely to do something well that Australia's and South Africa's is not.
playing at wide,swinging balls outside the offstump(ones that he could barely even reach) is a temperamental weakness and defeats the purpose of being an opener really. as an opener you want to leave as many balls as possible early on in your innings, not try to smack them. the problem with strauss is that if, as most bowlers have done recently, pitch the ball up to him consistently, he struggles to score freely. Then as soon as you bowl a wide/short/half volley, he throws his bat at it in a desperate attempt to get runs without realising that hes not settled in.
I'd say Strauss is generally pretty adept at hitting bad balls at whatever stage of his innings. Not like he hasn't got himself set several times this winter, either.
The "purpose" of being an opener has, though, kind of changed in the last 4 years. Not something which is to the credit of opening batsmen or coaches, but undeniably something that is perceived. Name a single (succesful) opening batsman in Test cricket today aside from Atapattu (who's inexplicably not opening ATM) who can be broadly classified as not a strokeplayer? Langer, Hayden; Smith, de Villiers; Trescothick, Strauss; Sehwag, whoever; Jayasuriya; Gayle, whoever. Neither New Zealand nor Pakistan have 1, never mind 2, settled openers.
whether or not he was lucky in 2002, you cannot change the fact that vaughan ATM is not good enough in any form of the game. if duncan fletcher wants england to be the best in both forms of the game by 2007, then england should not be satisfied with mediocrity. Vaughan has had his fair share of unplayable deliveries, but has he cashed in on other occasions?
I'm not trying to suggest Vaughan ATM isn't good enough in Test-cricket - he played terribly in The Ashes (only big innings needed 2 let-offs in 2 balls, and played some embarrasing shots such as missing straight, nothing balls from Brett Lee - TWICE - and top-edging the woefully out-of-touch Gillespie) and terribly in his 1 Test in Pakistan.
I'm still prepared to give him some more time (if his knees don't end his career now), but another bad season in 2006 and we've got to ask serious questions.
throughout the ashes when IMO every batsman bar flintoff should be chided for playing so miserably englands batsmen were lauded because of the fact that their bowlers kept bowling them out of trouble. not surprisingly both in pakistan and india when simon jones wasnt there to bowl them out, they failed miserably. the question i ask is how long will England be satisfied with the mediocrity of Vaughan, Geraint, Strauss and Pietersen?
Judging by how long they've been satisfied with the mediocrity of Harmison (and how long they were satisfied with the mediocrity of Flinotff before he became good), probably quite a long time. How long they will it be before they pay for being satisfied? Only a question we'll be able to answer when it happens. It cost quite a bit in Pakistan, certainly, though I'd have backed India to beat us whatever. In Pakistan it can be written-off as "a blip" as it has by ITB and others. The same will not be true if either we lose at home to Pakistan next summer or we get hammered in Australia. I, for one, though, was frustrated beyond belief by the loss in Pakistan, because the series was there for the taking, and I fail to see how we can be called the best side in The World next year even if we do beat Australia having lost that series.