Selectors should pick Atapattu Over Tharanga

[Perm]

Originally Posted by Prince EWS

Tharanga has hardly had a great start to his international career. He scored some runs against useless England bowling on flat tracks, and had a good series against NZ. Aside from that, he's actually been pretty awful so far. One of the most over-rated players going around.

He's a minnow basher. He has slaughtered the weak bowling sides (England included) and has done almost nothing of note against a decent attack, apart from the one good series against New Zealand.

[SirBloody Idiot]

Originally Posted by Perm

He's a minnow basher. He has slaughtered the weak bowling sides (England included) and has done almost nothing of note against a decent attack, apart from the one good series against New Zealand.

Really wasn't any need for the last line, to be honest.

[Perm]

Originally Posted by SirBloody Idiot

Really wasn't any need for the last line, to be honest.

He made his century against an attack of Bond, Mills, Cairns, Oram, Styris and Vettori. Very good attack if you ask me.

[chaminda_00]

Originally Posted by Perm

He made his century against an attack of Bond, Mills, Cairns, Oram, Styris and Vettori. Very good attack if you ask me.

Any attack with Mills = minnow

[Perm]

Originally Posted by chaminda_00

Any attack with Mills = minnow

I hope your joking.

[chaminda_00]

Originally Posted by Perm

I hope your joking.

Maybe, maybe not his nothing special.

[Perm]

Originally Posted by chaminda_00

Maybe, maybe not his nothing special.

An average of 28 and economy rate of 4.6 suggests he is pretty good. Certainly not a weak link or anything.

[chaminda_00]

Originally Posted by Perm

An average of 28 and economy rate of 4.6 suggests he is pretty good. Certainly not a weak link or anything.

Never looked anything special to me and i know numbers are ok, but they don't always tell the story. Vettori is fair greater then Mills and his numbers are a lot worse. Maharoof got some pretty good numbers, but his really average. Looking at that bowling attack Carins was also past it. Stryris might be bowling well now, but overall his not that great. So really it leaves Bond, was like his first series back, Vettori and Oram. Not the greatest attack really, the current Bangladesh attack would be on par really.

[Perm]

Originally Posted by chaminda_00

Never looked anything special to me and i know numbers are ok, but they don't always tell the story. Vettori is fair greater then Mills and his numbers are a lot worse. Maharoof got some pretty good numbers, but his really average. Looking at that bowling attack Carins was also past it. Stryris might be bowling well now, but overall his not that great. So really it leaves Bond, was like his first series back, Vettori and Oram. Not the greatest attack really, the current Bangladesh attack would be on par really.

Bond is one of, if not the best ODI bowler in the world. Vettori is a very good spinner and also had Styris for support during the middle overs, they are both very effective at choking the opposition and tightening the screws. Cairns was "past it" as you say but he was still a good bowler, he had an excellent slower ball and generated good pace and swing. Mills doesn't look special, but his ability in the early overs to keep the line and length going, as well as swinging and seaming the ball is a perfect foil for Shane Bond.

I find it ludicrous that you are comparing us to the Bangladesh attack, if the same Sri Lankan batting lineup played against both bowling attacks then I'd be pretty confident we would restrict them to less than what Bangladesh would.

[chaminda_00]

Originally Posted by Perm

Bond is one of, if not the best ODI bowler in the world. Vettori is a very good spinner and also had Styris for support during the middle overs, they are both very effective at choking the opposition and tightening the screws. Cairns was "past it" as you say but he was still a good bowler, he had an excellent slower ball and generated good pace and swing. Mills doesn't look special, but his ability in the early overs to keep the line and length going, as well as swinging and seaming the ball is a perfect foil for Shane Bond.

I find it ludicrous that you are comparing us to the Bangladesh attack, if the same Sri Lankan batting lineup played against both bowling attacks then I'd be pretty confident we would restrict them to less than what Bangladesh would.

The Bangladesh bowling attack is not that bad really, its their batting that lets them down. More often then not the Kiwi bowling attack will restrict them to far lower total. But really when you consider Bond wasn't that fit in that series the gap isn't that significant. The Bangladesh bowlers have some pretty good records really, Razzaq (22 Ave), Mortaza (29), Rasel (26), Rafique (39), Hasan (30). Really its not a minnow bowling attack anymore.

[Perm]

Originally Posted by chaminda_00

The Bangladesh bowling attack is not that bad really, its their batting that lets them down. More often then not the Kiwi bowling attack will restrict them to far lower total. But really when you consider Bond wasn't that fit in that series the gap isn't that significant. The Bangladesh bowlers have some pretty good records really, Razzaq (22 Ave), Mortaza (29), Rasel (26), Rafique (39), Hasan (30). Really its not a minnow bowling attack anymore.

No but it's turned into a bit of a minnow bashing bowling attack. Razzaq and Mortaza were two of the leading ODI wicket takers last year, primarily due to the number of games played against Kenya and Zimbabwe, opponents that are quite clearly inferior to Bangladesh. I'm not trying to say that the Bangladesh attack is bad, I just don't think it is up to the level that the Black Caps attack was, especially in terms of depth.

[Prince EWS]

This is a ridiculous argument. Kyle Mills is a very good ODI bowler and has improved significantly throughout his career. He was fairly average for a lot of his career, granted, but he had improved astronomically just before getting injured. That NZ attack was infinitely better than anything Bangladesh have ever put out - there's no comparison.

[chaminda_00]

Originally Posted by Perm

No but it's turned into a bit of a minnow bashing bowling attack. Razzaq and Mortaza were two of the leading ODI wicket takers last year, primarily due to the number of games played against Kenya and Zimbabwe, opponents that are quite clearly inferior to Bangladesh. I'm not trying to say that the Bangladesh attack is bad, I just don't think it is up to the level that the Black Caps attack was, especially in terms of depth.

If your going to downgrade Razzaq and Mortaza bowling perforamces due to the fact they played a fair few games against lower sides, then would one have to do the same for Mills. His average of 13 against Bangladesh and 19 against Zimbabwe would have a fairly significant effect.

There no doubt that the Black Caps bowling attack is better, but what really annoys me is when people downgrade someone performance as it was against someone like Bangladesh and they don't look at the team itself. Most of the Bangladesh bowlers have got far better records in ODIs then a lot of bowlers around the world and its not just cus they played a lot of matches against lower sides. Just cus the bowling attack was Bangladesh doesn't mean it worse then any other bowling attack. IMO Tharanga century against Bangladesh was of higher quality then ones against Engand, cus it was against better bowlers.

[Perm]

Originally Posted by chaminda_00

If your going to downgrade Razzaq and Mortaza bowling perforamces due to the fact they played a fair few games against lower sides, then would one have to do the same for Mills. His average of 13 against Bangladesh and 19 against Zimbabwe would have a fairly significant effect.

His average after removing games against Bangladesh and Zimbabwe stands at 30, which is mediocre, I agree, but you can tell he was definately on the path to improvement before his knee injury. He took 16 wickets at an average of 15 and an economy rate of 4.2 in 2006, which is a fine effort considering he was playing some of the better ODI sides (Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Australia) and didn't play a single game against a minnow.

Originally Posted by chaminda_00

There no doubt that the Black Caps bowling attack is better, but what really annoys me is when people downgrade someone performance as it was against someone like Bangladesh and they don't look at the team itself. Most of the Bangladesh bowlers have got far better records in ODIs then a lot of bowlers around the world and its not just cus they played a lot of matches against lower sides. Just cus the bowling attack was Bangladesh doesn't mean it worse then any other bowling attack. IMO Tharanga century against Bangladesh was of higher quality then ones against Engand, cus it was against better bowlers.

I try not to downgrade people's acheivements against Bangladesh but the fact of the matter is, they are a minnow side and their bowing attack is weaker than an ODI standard team. Tharanga's second century against Bangladesh was certainly better, made against a pretty good bowling attack. His first one was made against a rubbish lineup, just like his two against England. That is why people say he has never really stood up against the big teams, apart from the one good series of New Zealand. He scored two centuries against England, and not many people rate them highly which is fair enough considering the bowling attack he was faced with.

[Evermind]

Originally Posted by chaminda_00

Never looked anything special to me and i know numbers are ok, but they don't always tell the story. Vettori is fair greater then Mills and his numbers are a lot worse. Maharoof got some pretty good numbers, but his really average. Looking at that bowling attack Carins was also past it. Stryris might be bowling well now, but overall his not that great. So really it leaves Bond, was like his first series back, Vettori and Oram. Not the greatest attack really, the current Bangladesh attack would be on par really.

Yeah, cause everyone knows Mortaza is on par with Bond, and Rafique with Vettori.