Cricket 24/7  

Welcome to the Cricket 24/7.

You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. There are also more forums available to members, such as the Lounge - where members chat about just about anything under the sun except cricket!

Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!

If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact contact us.


Go Back   Cricket 24/7 > Cricket Discussion Forums > England
Register FAQDonate Members List Calendar Casino Articles Terms of Use Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 25th July 2016, 00:05   #141
Fatslogger
Self Confessed Mentalist
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Hitchin
Team(s): England and Liverpool
Age: 42
Posts: 43,385
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir Virgs and Zamora View Post
"An all rounder should get in the side for either skill" klaxon.

Clearly this statement is horseshit. This means that someone is both one of the best six batsman in the country and one of the best four/5 bowlers. How many players has this applied to?

Kallis and sobers?

Botham was not a brilliant batsman
Khan was a brilliant bowler and okay bat and then good bowler and good bat.
Kapil was bowler who batted.
Flintoff was not a better batsman than Graham Thorpe in 2005.

An all rounder needs to be good at both - he does not have to be best available in both.

Did you know that the last time warks won the title woakes averaged 25 with ball and over 70 with bat. Not bad.
Sadly I mostly have to agree but Kallis was not even close to being a bowling pick for most of his test career, although a useful guy to have to bowl straight to Zimbabwe or Bangladesh as soon as he could get the ball and a foot or so outside off stump once cajoled into it against everyone else. Not even sure Sobers makes it on the criteria given, although the fact that he could bowl three diffferent styles might have got him in on utility. His bowling stats weren't all that though.

Woakes certainly meets even those absurd criteria as a county player though. At that level he's a complete phenomenon.
__________________
Work is the curse of the drinking classes - Wilde
Fatslogger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25th July 2016, 07:01   #142
Chin Music
Administrator
 
Chin Music's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: la sala de opinion equivocada
Team(s): ****
Posts: 24,212
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fatslogger View Post
Sadly I mostly have to agree but Kallis was not even close to being a bowling pick for most of his test career, although a useful guy to have to bowl straight to Zimbabwe or Bangladesh as soon as he could get the ball and a foot or so outside off stump once cajoled into it against everyone else. Not even sure Sobers makes it on the criteria given, although the fact that he could bowl three diffferent styles might have got him in on utility. His bowling stats weren't all that though.

Woakes certainly meets even those absurd criteria as a county player though. At that level he's a complete phenomenon.
Slogger, my heart is warmed to see the world being put to rights on this issue!
__________________
Quote:
"One of the greatest problems of our time is that many are schooled but few are educated" - Thomas More
Chin Music is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25th July 2016, 07:11   #143
Sir Virgs and Zamora
Posting God
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 20,469
Kallis could easily have been one on saffers best three bowlers but he was primarily a batsman so did not train as hard on his bowling as a specialist bowler might.

This whole discussion just shows what a silly argument "must get in side for batting and bowling" and ignored the fact that it is about the complete package a player brings.

Woakes is a fine batsman but I don't think he is in our best six.
Sir Virgs and Zamora is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25th July 2016, 08:08   #144
Ali TT
Posting God
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 18,827
We'll never know if Kallis would've been a first choice bowler were he not a batsman first.
__________________
WARNING
Reading the above post may cause bouts of nausea.
Ali TT is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25th July 2016, 10:01   #145
Bestie
International Material
 
Join Date: May 2016
Location: Exeter
Posts: 1,415
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ali TT View Post
We'll never know if Kallis would've been a first choice bowler were he not a batsman first.
And that shows one fallacy of the criteria, as all-rounders would need 48 hours in a day to dedicate as much time to each of their disciplines as people solely working on one, and without such intense work they'll never maintain such an elite level.

But yes. Well done Woakes. His county record is unbelievable, it's true. Can't remember the last all-rounder to have such good domestic stats. Congrats to him on passing 400 FC wickets in the Lord's game, too. Not bad going for 27.
Bestie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25th July 2016, 10:15   #146
Fatslogger
Self Confessed Mentalist
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Hitchin
Team(s): England and Liverpool
Age: 42
Posts: 43,385
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chin Music View Post
Slogger, my heart is warmed to see the world being put to rights on this issue!
It was my absolute pleasure Chin. I got to jump from one hobby horse to another (Woakes' amazing county stats) mid post too.
__________________
Work is the curse of the drinking classes - Wilde
Fatslogger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25th July 2016, 10:15   #147
Sir Virgs and Zamora
Posting God
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 20,469
Obviously this is true Ali. I would argue that around 300 test wickets at a little over 30 suggests that if he had worked harder on his bowling he would have been brilliant.
Sir Virgs and Zamora is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25th July 2016, 10:17   #148
Fatslogger
Self Confessed Mentalist
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Hitchin
Team(s): England and Liverpool
Age: 42
Posts: 43,385
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir Virgs and Zamora View Post
Obviously this is true Ali. I would argue that around 300 test wickets at a little over 30 suggests that if he had worked harder on his bowling he would have been brilliant.
Define "a little".
__________________
Work is the curse of the drinking classes - Wilde
Fatslogger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25th July 2016, 10:37   #149
geoff_boycotts_grandmother
Administrator
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 27,912
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fatslogger View Post
Sadly I mostly have to agree but Kallis was not even close to being a bowling pick for most of his test career, although a useful guy to have to bowl straight to Zimbabwe or Bangladesh as soon as he could get the ball and a foot or so outside off stump once cajoled into it against everyone else. Not even sure Sobers makes it on the criteria given, although the fact that he could bowl three diffferent styles might have got him in on utility. His bowling stats weren't all that though.

Woakes certainly meets even those absurd criteria as a county player though. At that level he's a complete phenomenon.
Agree with that although Ronnie Irani was of course similarly phenomenal at county level.

Hard to think that just 6 months ago I was getting shouted down for suggesting that Woakes was someone England would probably have to find room for.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Michelle Fivefer
It was a poor innings by Bell with the bat.
geoff_boycotts_grandmother is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25th July 2016, 10:47   #150
Fatslogger
Self Confessed Mentalist
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Hitchin
Team(s): England and Liverpool
Age: 42
Posts: 43,385
Quote:
Originally Posted by geoff_boycotts_grandmother View Post
Agree with that although Ronnie Irani was of course similarly phenomenal at county level.

Hard to think that just 6 months ago I was getting shouted down for suggesting that Woakes was someone England would probably have to find room for.
Is the comparison with Irani intended to be compliment or cautionary tale? Worth pointing out that you'd far rather have an all rounder be test level with the ball and a bit below with the bat than the other way around, although suspect we're just being generous to Irani here.

Now is a good time to have been pushing Woakes as a player England couldn't ignore despite his modest original returns, isn't it?

Out of interest, can anyone think of a county player with similar stats to Woakes'? I suspect it's not that hard a hunt if you filter for bowling average better than say 27, as that won't leave all that many players who could also bat.
__________________
Work is the curse of the drinking classes - Wilde
Fatslogger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25th July 2016, 12:24   #151
Ali TT
Posting God
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 18,827
If we look at first class record, surely Keith Miller tops the lot. 14000 runs at 49, with a HS of 281, and 497 wickets at 22. His batting was weaker in tests, "only" averaging 37, but his bowling was just as good.
__________________
WARNING
Reading the above post may cause bouts of nausea.
Ali TT is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25th July 2016, 12:26   #152
Fatslogger
Self Confessed Mentalist
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Hitchin
Team(s): England and Liverpool
Age: 42
Posts: 43,385
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ali TT View Post
If we look at first class record, surely Keith Miller tops the lot. 14000 runs at 49, with a HS of 281, and 497 wickets at 22. His batting was weaker in tests, "only" averaging 37, but his bowling was just as good.
Plus he knew that pressure was a Messerschmitt up your arse, not playing a game of cricket.
__________________
Work is the curse of the drinking classes - Wilde
Fatslogger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25th July 2016, 12:26   #153
Ali TT
Posting God
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 18,827
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir Virgs and Zamora View Post
Obviously this is true Ali. I would argue that around 300 test wickets at a little over 30 suggests that if he had worked harder on his bowling he would have been brilliant.
Yes, but he'd have been less of a batsman.
__________________
WARNING
Reading the above post may cause bouts of nausea.
Ali TT is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25th July 2016, 12:39   #154
Summer of '77
Legendary
 
Summer of '77's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: London-Essex
Team(s): Kent, Essex, Surrey Stars
Posts: 8,664
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ali TT View Post
If we look at first class record, surely Keith Miller tops the lot. 14000 runs at 49, with a HS of 281, and 497 wickets at 22. His batting was weaker in tests, "only" averaging 37, but his bowling was just as good.
Or Frank Woolley - 58000 runs at 40 with 145 centuries, 2066 wickets at 19 with 28 ten-fers, and the only outfielder in f-c history to make 1000 catches.
Summer of '77 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 25th July 2016, 14:48   #155
Fatslogger
Self Confessed Mentalist
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Hitchin
Team(s): England and Liverpool
Age: 42
Posts: 43,385
Quote:
Originally Posted by Summer of '77 View Post
Or Frank Woolley - 58000 runs at 40 with 145 centuries, 2066 wickets at 19 with 28 ten-fers, and the only outfielder in f-c history to make 1000 catches.
You could have rounded the runs up. I'd never heard of him but it was a bit before my time.
__________________
Work is the curse of the drinking classes - Wilde
Fatslogger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25th July 2016, 15:04   #156
Summer of '77
Legendary
 
Summer of '77's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: London-Essex
Team(s): Kent, Essex, Surrey Stars
Posts: 8,664
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fatslogger View Post
You could have rounded the runs up. I'd never heard of him but it was a bit before my time.
Really? Obviously, he's a god to Kent cricket lovers but he did also play 64 Tests - in fact, at the time of his final game in 1934, he was the most capped cricketer in Test history.

It is more for the manner of Woolley's batting than his aggregate that he should be remembered. He famously coined the phrase 'When I am batting, I am the attack' and would wade into quality bowling, cutting and driving with disregard for his own wicket. At Lord's in 1921, against the might of Gregory, McDonald and Mailey, he made 95 out of 187 and 93 out of 283, being caught on the boundary as the second opportunity of a century arose. Once, the great Maurice Tate, having been plundered all around Canterbury, threw the ball into the turf, declaring "I cannot bowl to this man!". His brand of SLA, delivered from a height of well over 6ft, was flatter than the norm for the day, and he could either attack on favourable surfaces or tie an end up on flat tracks. If The Lion of Kent were around today, he'd possibly be the IPL's most expensive player.
Summer of '77 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 25th July 2016, 18:24   #157
Ali TT
Posting God
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 18,827
Of course the good doctor scored 54000 runs at 39, including 124 centuries, and just the 2809 wickets at 18.
__________________
WARNING
Reading the above post may cause bouts of nausea.
Ali TT is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25th July 2016, 18:35   #158
Summer of '77
Legendary
 
Summer of '77's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: London-Essex
Team(s): Kent, Essex, Surrey Stars
Posts: 8,664
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ali TT View Post
Of course the good doctor scored 54000 runs at 39, including 124 centuries, and just the 2809 wickets at 18.
Managed only 876 catches, though.
Summer of '77 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 25th July 2016, 23:30   #159
1000yardstare
Posting Goddess
 
1000yardstare's Avatar
JA 830 Cummins 149 Wagner 147 TCurran 21 SCurran 9
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: London
Posts: 20,869
Woakes s/r 49.6
Finn s/r 49.3

Woakes' s/r is coming down and Finn's is slowly going up.

Well done, two Tests 18 wickets at 11.66. We haven't had a bowler come in and be so successful. At least I can't think of one. How long can it last?
1000yardstare is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26th July 2016, 17:09   #160
sanskritsimon
Posting God
 
sanskritsimon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Team(s): Arkholme Bees, Hackney Grasshoppers, Holy Cross Academicals
Posts: 10,584
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir Virgs and Zamora View Post
... This whole discussion just shows what a silly argument "must get in side for batting and bowling" and ignored the fact that it is about the complete package a player brings.

Woakes is a fine batsman but I don't think he is in our best six.
You don't need to get into the side for batting and for bowling. Because once you're in the side for either of those things, you no longer need to get into the side. But also, on the flip side, you can't be dropped from the side as a bowler but stay in it for your batting. What might happen instead is that you stay in the side and do quite a bit of batting but the captain doesn't ask you to bowl much.

I do think, though, that you've gone to the other extreme. Yes it is nonsense to say (and incidentally this is probably why no one would say it) that an all-rounder must be able to get into the side on the basis of either discipline; but it doesn't follow that selection "is about the complete package a player brings". You could still have a batting all-rounder (e.g. Kallis) who you pick because they're one of the best 6 batsmen, and you ask them to do quite a bit of bowling too; or a bowling all-rounder (e.g. Pollock Jr) who you pick because they're one of the best 4 bowlers but you're also very glad of the extra runs at 7 or 8. If you've got someone who comes into both categories then you've got a very special player indeed. If you've got a player who comes into neither category then you've got a bits-and-pieces player who I think you'd be better off swapping for a specialist.

As for Woakes, it seems clear that at present he can be picked as one of our best four bowlers regardless of his batting. Whether his batting is also good enough to warrant his selection as one of our best 6 batsmen remains to be seen -- and may well never be seen. But it's worth remembering that his re-selection this summer seems to have been based on a bits-and-pieces assessment at that point, in that he leapfrogged Ball into the reckoning when Stokes was injured. To have picked a player as a bits-and-pieces player and to find that a few tests later he actually merits selection in one discipline alone is a great wonder and a success story of the summer. It might even be used as a justification for picking bits-and-pieces players (to see whether once they're in the test arena they can significantly "up their game" in one discipline or the other). But it rather throws into relief the contrasting case of Moeen, who was seemingly also picked on such a bits-and-pieces basis but has not proved himself to be selectable for either discipline in isolation -- meaning that his position is not secure, and even his greatest fans occasionally call for him to be dropped.
sanskritsimon is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 21:12.



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