West Indies Cricket Fans

mikesiva wrote:Now do you see how good a Test bowler Philander is, Afro?

Even on pitches that aren't supposed to assisted him, he took the vital wickets of Watson and Ponting. Four for Steyn, and three for spinner Peterson, and South Africa are large and in charge....

What the feck are you talking about "even on pitches that aren't supposed to assist him"? have you actually watched this match at all? it's been a fecking bowlers heaven you fool!! ,

No-one's saying he isn't a good bowler, but when someone goes to extremes with averages like you, using him as an example is too easy, he's not the best pacer (and the rankings prove it) but yet he's got the best average, which suggests averages EARLY in ones career don't always tell the full story .

So lets look at it another way: Philander or Sammy in your side?

howzdat wrote:So lets look at it another way: Philander or Sammy in your side?

An obvious question, with an obvious answer....

Afro's totally missing the point - Aussie pitches are not supposed to help medium-fast bowlers like Philander, but he's able to adapt.

Steyn is an outstanding bowler on pitches where he can blast out batsmen, but Philander is a totally different kettle of fish. There are pitches, especially in England and New Zealand, where Philander is a better bowler than Steyn, because he gets better movement in the air, and off the pitch. What makes Philander such a dangerous bowler is that he moves the ball just that little bit to get the edge - no huge swing or seam, but a little to make it unexpected.

Steyn and Philander are so different as bowlers - one's an out-and-out pace bowler, the other is a medium-fast bowler who seams and swings the ball, sort of like Glenn McGrath. Do you know him, Afro?

COmparing Steyn with Philander is almost as pointless as comparing SUnil Narine to Michael Holding....

As for rankings and averages, give me averages over rankings any day...rankings just look at current form, but averages determine a player's performance over his entire career. If Philander ends his career with a better bowling average than Steyn, then to me its indisputable - Philander would be the more successful bowler. But Philander's career is not over yet....

Amla is 99 not out at stumps....

mikesiva wrote:
Steyn and Philander are so different as bowlers - one's an out-and-out pace bowler, the other is a medium-fast bowler who seams and swings the ball, sort of like Glenn McGrath. Do you know him, Afro?

Yeah, i also know RAWL LEWIS old boy!!!.. it a pity you didn't and tried to LIE about his stats!!

COmparing Steyn with Philander is almost as pointless as comparing SUnil Narine to Michael Holding....

If thats the case why did you try and compare Darren Powell to Narine you idiot? if anything comparing Holding to Narine is perfectly acceptable considering BOTH DIDN'T PLAY HUGE AMOUNTS OF FC CRICKET BEFORE THEY WERE PICKED FOR THE TEST TEAM!!!, the only difference is Narine's record is actually BETTER than Michael's was after five tests, but i guess as he's JAMAICAN you don't wanna talk about it thats why you ran from the question i posed!!

As for rankings and averages, give me averages over rankings any day...rankings just look at current form, but averages determine a player's performance over his entire career. If Philander ends his career with a better bowling average than Steyn, then to me its indisputable - Philander would be the more successful bowler. But Philander's career is not over yet....

RUBBISH, if Philander ended his career today he'd pretty much have the best average of any pacer (unless someone else played two tests and averages 8 or something) , so with that in mind are you saying if he ended his career now he'd be BETTER THAN MACKO just because of his average?

I KNOW YOU'RE IN A DAZE AFTER I EXPOSED YOU AS A CONNIVING LIAR THE OTHER DAY BUT GET REAL MIKE!!

If Philander ended his career today, he would certainly be among the best...but not many great Test greats only play 12 Tests. I thought you knew that....

You don't seem to understand one big difference between Holding and Narine - one's a pace bowler, and the other is a spinner. Any sensible selector will try to pick a good pace bowler while he's still young and fast. That's because pace bowlers' bodies can't put up with the strain, and they usually call it a day earlier - Holding retired when he was 32.

Spinners can bowl until they're close to 40, if their shoulders stand up the strain. You can pick a spinner when he's 25-28, and still get a good career out of him. Players like Narine still have time to learn their craft, and play a lot more FC cricket.

Philander is a medium-fast bowler, and so he will have a lot more cricket in him, and he will probably retire at a later age than Steyn. I can't see Steyn going beyond 35, but I can see Philander easily passing that age. Philander made his Test debut aged 26, while Steyn made his Test debut aged 21.

The best time to assess Philander's career amongst the all-time greats will be when he eventually called it a day. Very few pace and medium-fast bowlers can do what Malcolm Marshall did, and that was adapt and extend their careers when they get older.

Cricket fans make the mistake of comparing Philander to Bresnan and Sammy, but the difference is that while Bresnan and Sammy can't bowl on Aussie pitches, Philander can. That's why he's more like McGrath, and much better than Bresnan and Sammy....

mikesiva wrote: You don't seem to understand one big difference between Holding and Narine - one's a pace bowler, and the other is a spinner.

Oh really? then why did you say this then?...

mikesiva wrote:
6) Darren Powell - two against Bangladesh, one against New Zealand...now that's the level of competition faced by Narine! How did he do? Similar to Narine? Let's see...no, Powell averaged 30.73 after five Tests against this low-level competition. Sorry, Afro, even Darren Powell has outperformed Narine at this level....

AND

mikesiva wrote:
My comparison with Darren Powell is valid, to show that you can't just give a bowler a run, just because you're convinced that he will suddenly become Warne-like after five Tests. Instead, he could become like Darren Powell....

I think you've been STUMPED there old boy!! , furthermore your last quote was interesting, so we "can't just give a bowler a run" so let me ask you again, considering Holding's record after five tests was WORSER than Narine's WOULD YOU HAVE DROPPED HOLDING? simple question Mike, i hope you don't RUN from it again!!

Spinners can bowl until they're close to 40, if their shoulders stand up the strain. You can pick a spinner when he's 25-28, and still get a good career out of him. Players like Narine still have time to learn their craft, and play a lot more FC cricket.

Narine has already showed that he's too good for our FC competition, he took around 31 wickets in THREE MATCHES last year, he isn't gonna learn anything from that, where he will learn is at the heighest level, he's already proven he can deliver AT HOME, infact he's pretty much been unplayable in our conditions, and imo with more experience that form is bound to shine through overseas sooner rather than later, with the next two or three series being at home i believe the selectors will keep faith in Narine, if he doesn't deliver against Zim and Pak then the selectors will have a decision to make, but not now,

Cricket fans make the mistake of comparing Philander to Bresnan and Sammy, but the difference is that while Bresnan and Sammy can't bowl on Aussie pitches, Philander can. That's why he's more like McGrath, and much better than Bresnan and Sammy....

Well they must be dumb then because for a start Philander looks much quicker than them two!!, couple that with the movement he gets it's no wonder he's taking wickets, also he's well schooled in county cricket too, so he's not just some youngster who's come out of nowhere.

Australia have a huge task to prevent a loss.

Their "failure" to win the last test looks as if it will come back to haunt them.

And the enforced bowling changes make matters worse - a 3 day turnaround is crazy but the schedule was presumably decided by Australia.

looks like the powerhouse will have to wait fuh awhile

mapoui wrote:looks like the powerhouse will have to wait fuh awhile

I think they shot themselves in the foot with that quick turnaround between the 2nd and 3rd tests.

This pace attack in entirely NEW. I am not sure if there is any side that can produce the same results after a change like that. Imagine SA without say Steyn and Morkel.

Arnik wrote:

mapoui wrote:looks like the powerhouse will have to wait fuh awhile

I think they shot themselves in the foot with that quick turnaround between the 2nd and 3rd tests.

This pace attack in entirely NEW. I am not sure if there is any side that can produce the same results after a change like that. Imagine SA without say Steyn and Morkel.

very clear points armick

i shud have mentioned that above. you are in all likelihood, very right