 |
|
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
K
Joined: 09 Sep 2011
|
| Post subject: |  |
|
| Donny wrote: | Looks like they've found a good one in Jamieson.
... |
Good start for Jamieson, but I guess the test (apart from maintaining form) is whether he can reproduce this in foreign, overseas conditions too.
cricinfo's page on him tells us:
He turned 25 at the end of last year.
His first-class bowling average is 27.56, ER 3.22, and SR 51.2.
And:
'"I was pretty much a batter all through high school and then made the New Zealand U-19s and Dayle Hadlee got a hold of me and told me to run in, which kind of shifted me towards becoming more of a bowler," Jamieson said. "I always liked batting, it was probably what I grew up admiring the most - whilst I did bowl, I did not think of that as my career option growing up.
"Now I'm a bowler who can bat, trying to get to the allrounder stage, that's where I ideally want to be."'
(Dayle is brother of Richard.)
Last edited by K on Sat Feb 29, 2020 8:38 pm; edited 3 times in total |
|
|
|
 |
Donny 
Formerly known as MAGFAN8.
Joined: 04 Aug 2002
Location: Toonumbar NSW Australia
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| K wrote: | | Another good day for NZ. They will hope that the openers can continue tomorrow and build a platform for the best batsman in the world, Kane Williamson. |
Is this the same Williamson who has 9 ducks, 18 scores of 2 & under and 39, of 10 and under in Test cricket ?
Smith has 4 Test ducks. No contest - however they get them. 
_________________
Donny.
It's a game. Enjoy it. |
|
|
|
|
K
Joined: 09 Sep 2011
|
| Post subject: | |
|
If Smith batted at 3, he'd have about 20 ducks. It's easier batting down the order, protected by those higher up. Just ask S. Waugh, hiding at 5. Look at how SW did at 3.
Oddly, P4S is so desperate to maintain the Myth of Smith, that he actually once gave Smith extra credit for batting at 8. Try working that one out! |
|
|
|
|
Donny
Formerly known as MAGFAN8.
Joined: 04 Aug 2002
Location: Toonumbar NSW Australia
|
| Post subject: | |
|
K. Do you really think a stylish 18 - with excellent technique - from Williamson is better for the team, than a 70+ by a a batsman who is like a wounded crab, at the crease, in a swarm of mozzies ?
_________________
Donny.
It's a game. Enjoy it. |
|
|
|
|
K
Joined: 09 Sep 2011
|
| Post subject: | |
|
Again, this is not about "style". (Khawaja supporters think he's very "stylish".)
It's not that number 3 batsmen are "more stylish". To survive, they need better technique, or they end up failing like Khawaja. The number 3 often comes in in the first over of a Test, especially if he plays for a smaller nation.
It's like AFL goal-kicking, which is not about "style" or "elegance" either. It's just that players with sound technique like P. Daicos, A. Didak, ..., tend to deliver, while people like J. Manson, ..., well...
And, in AFL goal-kicking, as in cricket, you need to look at the numbers more carefully than simply being impressed by grossly inflated high numbers. Otherwise, the guy who always has shots from the goal-square looks like he's a great kick. (B McEvoy may or may not be an example. Certainly I'd need more evidence before I think he's one of the great kicks in AFL history. He is, after all, a ruckman, and they are not known to be great kicks.) |
|
|
|
|
Pies4shaw 
pies4shaw
Joined: 08 Oct 2007
|
| Post subject: | |
|
For 100 years, at least, the best batsman in the team has always batted at number 4.
As for discussion of Williamson, the guy struggled to last 5 balls on Australian pitches. If the modern Test wicket is a “road”, why did Williamson find himself on so many “No Through” roads? |
|
|
|
|
K
Joined: 09 Sep 2011
|
| Post subject: | |
|
Bad form is temporary; defective technique is (mostly) permanent.
Kane averaged 70+ or something like that on the previous tour of Oz against the same or similar Oz bowlers.
(Opening sentence from report at the time:
"Now that he's battered Australia, star Kiwi batsman Kane Williamson really can lay claim to conquering the world.")
OTOH, Smith's defective batsmanship was brutally dismantled in the BBL by Pattinson and Zampa, neither of whom have been regular members of the Oz Test team. |
|
|
|
|
Pies4shaw
pies4shaw
Joined: 08 Oct 2007
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Smith won the BBL. Where do you get off? |
|
|
|
|
Pies4shaw
pies4shaw
Joined: 08 Oct 2007
|
| Post subject: | |
|
NZ 5/142 at Lunch (losing 5 79 in that session).
Kane's getting better (well, less worse, perhaps) - he went 7 balls without knicking one today. Bumrah's Bunny?
By the way, his average in the first innings (of the four) in Tests is 39.92 - but against proper teams it is 5 (South Africa), 16.6 (Australia), 31.66 (England) and 36.2 (India). Like most batsmen, he is a far more competent player when the ball stops moving about in the air and off the seam.
Just for a funny comparison, the "techniqueless" Bradsmith's average in the first innings (of the four) in Tests is 89.76 - and against proper teams it is 78.25 (SA), 53.2 (NZ), 85.18 (England) and 154.16 against India.
Actually, looking at Williamson's team-by-team averages is informative, too: 113.83 v Bangladesh (Bradsmith 29.75), 78.6 v Zimbabwe (Bradsmith has never played them), 66.13 v Sri Lanka (Bradsmith 41.16), 47.93 against West Indies (Bradsmith 165.66), 47.5 against SA (Bradsmith 41.53), 47.44 against Pakistan (Bradsmith 53.92), 43.7 v England (Bradsmith 65.11), 41.11 v Australia (Bradsmith v NZ 58.23) and 38.05 v India (Bradsmith 84.05).
Is it a fair assessment to say that if you want a guy to stand up for you against Bangladesh or Zimbabwe, Williamson's your man and if you want someone to stand up for you against England or India, home or away, Bradsmith is your man?
Fish, barrel, gun.
Meanwhile, NZ is 8/190. I spoke too soon. Make that 9/190. No, make that 8 again, following the review. |
|
|
|
|
Donny
Formerly known as MAGFAN8.
Joined: 04 Aug 2002
Location: Toonumbar NSW Australia
|
| Post subject: | |
|
NZ 235. Shami 4/81, Bumrah 3/62.
_________________
Donny.
It's a game. Enjoy it. |
|
|
|
|
Donny
Formerly known as MAGFAN8.
Joined: 04 Aug 2002
Location: Toonumbar NSW Australia
|
| Post subject: | |
|
India 2/31. Wickets for Boult & Southee.
_________________
Donny.
It's a game. Enjoy it. |
|
|
|
|
K
Joined: 09 Sep 2011
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Pies4shaw wrote: | | Smith won the BBL. Where do you get off? |
This is a stupid argument. You must know that. It's like people saying that Pyke, the Canadian former rugby player who played in Sydney's premiership team, was a better player than Nathan Buckley. Do you really believe what you are implying? |
|
|
|
|
Pies4shaw
pies4shaw
Joined: 08 Oct 2007
|
| Post subject: | |
|
^ Well, no it isn't. Bradsmith is the best player with bat in hand since (at least) 1948. I don't think anyone would seriously suggest that Pyke is the best ruckman of the last 70 years (that's Thor, of course).
India is 3/55, now. Kohli isn't much of a player, either, really - but at least he got to double figures (this time).
Last edited by Pies4shaw on Sun Mar 01, 2020 3:51 pm; edited 2 times in total |
|
|
|
|
Donny
Formerly known as MAGFAN8.
Joined: 04 Aug 2002
Location: Toonumbar NSW Australia
|
| Post subject: | |
|
3/55. Kohli out for 14.
_________________
Donny.
It's a game. Enjoy it. |
|
|
|
|
K
Joined: 09 Sep 2011
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Pies4shaw wrote: | | ^ Well, no it isn't. ... |
Your argument was simply that FTB happened to play for the winning BBL side. Even worse, we all know who wins the BBL is a bit of a lottery, but even if they were worthy winners, it doesn't say anything about one random player on their roster. (I'd say the most impressive part of that team at the back end was the bowlers Hazlewood, SO'K, Lyon, Dwarshuis, and so on.) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum
|
|
The Rules
FAQ
Usergroups
Calendar
Search
Log in
Register
