Cricket 24/7

Cricket 24/7 (http://www.cricket247.org/community/index.php)
-   England (http://www.cricket247.org/community/forumdisplay.php?f=10)
-   -   Rashid Thread (http://www.cricket247.org/community/showthread.php?t=2324)

Vaughansashes2009 6th June 2007 14:22

Rashid Thread
 
I think we should have a thread for this exciting player.

Currently 19yo with the following record:

FC 12 matches, 366 runs, HS 86, average 26.14, 49 wickets, average 30.48, best 6-67

List A 5 matches, 48 runs, average 12, 5 wickets, average 47.8, Econ 5.69

Cricinfo:

Young spinners in England will always make headlines if they take wickets - when it's a young legspinner the hype is magnified. Adil Rashid, a product of the spin programme Terry Jenner put in place, burst onto the scene with six wickets against Warwickshire during his first-class debut in 2006 and he finished the summer with 25 wickets in six Championship appearances. His performances for England Under-19s also caught the eye with a century and an eight-wicket haul during the second Test against India. But he suffered a stress fracture in his back in the close season which forced him to remodel his action, which is now more side-on.

So what do we think the future holds?

Rosbif 6th June 2007 14:46

Well if he keeps performing the way he does now he'll definitely be a test player. He hasn't taken wickets particularly cheaply but as a leggy he can bowl far more overs and take far more wickets per game. That means you can definitely have a 4 man bowling attack. Not only that, he can bat reasonably well which again is just another plus point. Someone like him brings a lot to a team. Watch out Monty I'd say :)

Slater 6th June 2007 14:52

He looks a very talented batsman and I'm sure he'll get his average up from where it is now. It's his bowling that has caught the eye the most obviously. He looks the real deal to me, turns it, has the variatians & for one so young seems pretty accurate.

Of course the art of leg spin can take a good few years to fully develop (Warne had his first Test @ 23) and it's important he's not thrown in too young.

He's said himself he needs a couple of seasons in the County Championship before he's fully ready. I hope Moores gives him time.

If he has no physical problems I'd like to see him tour with the A team to Pakistan this winter.

Vaughansashes2009 6th June 2007 15:36

His economy in FC cricket is ok at 3.6 but I guess like most leggies he will get spanked from time to time.

Although Warne played his first test at 23 he had only played 12 FC games or something, so Adil is ahead of the game here.

I cant decide if I want him to be in the mix this winter, even if it is as 3rd spinner for experience.

William 6th June 2007 15:38

Quote:

Originally Posted by englandsashes2009 (Post 55275)
Although Warne played his first test at 23 he had only played 12 FC games or something, so Adil is ahead of the game here.

I bet he'd got quite a few first grade games under his belt though.

Vaughansashes2009 6th June 2007 15:44

Quote:

Originally Posted by William (Post 55278)
I bet he'd got quite a few first grade games under his belt though.

True it is a different set up.

Does anyone know just what Warne had played when he was 23.

Adil has played under 19 level and been successful, although of course the luck with the standard of opposition can make a real difference here.

Bandit 6th June 2007 15:53

Certainly seems to be one for the future, everyone seems to rate him highly.

Once selected, as it seems he undoubtedley will be, he must have a decent run in the side. Warne made his debut at 22 and went for something like 220 runs and 1 wicket in his first 2 tests; if that had happened here in those days he'd probably have been sent back to his county never to be heard of again, and that is something that must not be allowed to happen to Rashid.

He will certainly open up other avenues to the attack if he develops as a leg spinning all rounder. Just imagine, Rashid and Panesar bowling in tandem, back to the days of Laker and Lock, Emburey and Edmunds (okay, I know Laker and Emburey were off spinners but so what). But then which of the quickies would get left out?

Vaughansashes2009 6th June 2007 16:09

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bandit (Post 55292)
Certainly seems to be one for the future, everyone seems to rate him highly.

Once selected, as it seems he undoubtedley will be, he must have a decent run in the side. Warne made his debut at 22 and went for something like 220 runs and 1 wicket in his first 2 tests; if that had happened here in those days he'd probably have been sent back to his county never to be heard of again, and that is something that must not be allowed to happen to Rashid.

He will certainly open up other avenues to the attack if he develops as a leg spinning all rounder. Just imagine, Rashid and Panesar bowling in tandem, back to the days of Laker and Lock, Emburey and Edmunds (okay, I know Laker and Emburey were off spinners but so what). But then which of the quickies would get left out?

Well the quicks hardly inspire confidence do they and Rashid could be the ideal 6/7 if and when Fred calls it a day, allowing us to still play 3 quicks solving a problem, not causing it.

Rosbif 6th June 2007 16:24

I don't think he'll turn out to be a batsmen of #6 quality. I'm not saying its impossible but I think the sheer work load will inhibit his ability to be both a specialist leg spinner and a specialist batsmen (which is what batting at #6 means). If he were to average what he does now, say around the late 20's early 30's he would make a very good #8 and an average #7 but nowhere near a #6.

Lancastrian 6th June 2007 16:30

In a way I would quite like it if Rashid's batting doesn't prove that reliable, so that he is clearly a leg-spinner rather than an allrounder/batsman. Leg spin is hard enough on it's own without him having to be a serious batsman as well. I'd be perfectly happy with him to be of the Shane Warne/Brett Lee standard with the bat - dangerous rather than reliable. Interestingly though he was first picked for Yorkshire as a batsman, not a bowler.

Bandit 6th June 2007 16:38

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lancastrian (Post 55308)
In a way I would quite like it if Rashid's batting doesn't prove that reliable, so that he is clearly a leg-spinner rather than an allrounder/batsman. Leg spin is hard enough on it's own without him having to be a serious batsman as well. I'd be perfectly happy with him to be of the Shane Warne/Brett Lee standard with the bat - dangerous rather than reliable. Interestingly though he was first picked for Yorkshire as a batsman, not a bowler.

Then ideally we need a keeper who is #6 then we could bat Rashid at #7 plus four others. But is Prior a #6?

Rosbif 6th June 2007 16:40

I know where you're coming from with that comment about wishing him not to be TOO good with the bat, Lancastrian. Otherwise we might end up with another Flintoff scenario where we lumber a member of the team with the responsibility of two players. So not only do we expect him to take 5 wickets a game but we also expect him to put on 80 runs as well. I much prefer the attitude of 'Well done you did your job and took the wickets, oh and by the way that century you scored was a nice added bonus'. I don't understand why whenever we find a bowler who can bat suddenly there is the desire to then add another bowler and shift the bloke up another batting spot. It just shifts more work load, expectation and pressure onto the talented all-rounder who has to carry the team that bit more instead of supplementing it.

Bandit 6th June 2007 16:46

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rosbif (Post 55312)
I know where you're coming from with that comment about wishing him not to be TOO good with the bat, Lancastrian. Otherwise we might end up with another Flintoff scenario where we lumber a member of the team with the responsibility of two players. So not only do we expect him to take 5 wickets a game but we also expect him to put on 80 runs as well. I much prefer the attitude of 'Well done you did your job and took the wickets, oh and by the way that century you scored was a nice added bonus'. I don't understand why whenever we find a bowler who can bat suddenly there is the desire to then add another bowler and shift the bloke up another batting spot. It just shifts more work load, expectation and pressure onto the talented all-rounder who has to carry the team that bit more instead of supplementing it.

So it provokes a selection conundrum on the basis that #6 needs to be a Test Match batsman in his own right because we cannot drop Monty (can we?) and to play two quicks and two spinners would probably not be feasible.

Lancastrian 6th June 2007 16:48

In Australia Cameron White was in a similar position to Rashid - promising with both bat and as a leg spinner - but unfortunately as his batting has improved his leg spin has fallen away.

I'd hate that to happen with Rashid, as an international standard leg spinner would be worth his weight in gold to English cricket. I'd happily take Danish Kaneiria type batting if it meant we got Danish Kaneiria like bowling.

Fatslogger 6th June 2007 16:52

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lancastrian (Post 55315)
In Australia Cameron White was in a similar position to Rashid - promising with both bat and as a leg spinner - but unfortunately as his batting has improved his leg spin has fallen away.

I'd hate that to happen with Rashid, as an international standard leg spinner would be worth his weight in gold to English cricket. I'd happily take Danish Kaneiria type batting if it meant we got Danish Kaneiria like bowling.

I'm not sure I would. Danish is a reasonable spinner but he's not that good. There are times when having a leggie is a great asset, of course and leg spin can balance an attack quite nicely. Still, I'd rather like Rashid to be better than Danish with the ball and he's already better with the bat.

Kim 6th June 2007 16:59

I dint think you will get Kaneria type batting Im afraid. Hes a very decent batsman - as batting at 6 at 19 years old in this year's strong Yorkshire line up and his under 19 exploits show - and I doubt that will go away.

CoE 6th June 2007 17:00

His first class average is actually 26 rather than 16! Quite a difference! I think he has serious potential because he has already showed lots of ability. I'd give him a while yet, but I wouldn't be surprised if he came in before 2009 certainly. If Monty plays well it could be a while yet, but I think two spinners is a massive asset. I just hate it when we have to play spin at both ends, and if we could do that to other teams, that would be great.

Bandit 6th June 2007 17:03

Quote:

Originally Posted by CoE (Post 55319)
His first class average is actually 26 rather than 16! Quite a difference! I think he has serious potential because he has already showed lots of ability. I'd give him a while yet, but I wouldn't be surprised if he came in before 2009 certainly. If Monty plays well it could be a while yet, but I think two spinners is a massive asset. I just hate it when we have to play spin at both ends, and if we could do that to other teams, that would be great.


So would you advocate a four man or five man attack with two spinners?

Lancastrian 6th June 2007 17:04

I picked Kaneiria to make a bit of a point - that now Shane Warne has retired that aren't that many good leg spinners about - and how hard it is to be one. Off the top of my head the best leg spinner in international cricket now is Kumble, followed by Kaneiria, so to get to that standard would actually be quite an achievement.

Rosbif 6th June 2007 17:04

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bandit (Post 55313)
So it provokes a selection conundrum on the basis that #6 needs to be a Test Match batsman in his own right because we cannot drop Monty (can we?) and to play two quicks and two spinners would probably not be feasible.

Why not drop Panesar? Lets assume that Rashid turns out to be a better spinner than Panesar and the team 'model' we follow is to play only 1 spinner, do we drop Panesar? Well in my mind absolutely if Rashid is better. Would we drop Harmison if a tall, fast quick came along who was better? Yep we would. So I don't see Panesar as being any different in that respect.

I suppose the question is could we play 2 spinners and 2 quicks IF we had a 4 bowler attack? Well, if Rashid and Panesar were better than the quick bowling options we have at that time, it could well happen. I advocate picking your best bowlers and not having variation for the sake of it.


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 20:10.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Cricket247.org