Middlesex

I managed to get to days one and three of the Glamorgan game and to
today's FP game, from which I can make a few observations.

I remain underwhelmed by Billy Godleman, who was being touted a year
back as Middx's Next Big Thing. I can't remember seeing a top order
batsman who was so heavily bottom-handed.

The new Next Big Thing is Finn, who is 6'6" or so and can hide behind
telegraph poles, though he looks athletic rather than gangly in the
field. He has a high, clean action, and he gets a fair bit of bounce.
I always find it difficult to judge the pace of tall, bouncy bowlers
with clean actions; when they eventually show up on TV with a speed
gun trained on them, they always turn out to be faster than I thought
when watching them live. With that caveat, I think Finn is more
Caddick's pace than Brett Lee's. (Caddick in his Test days, that is: I
imagine he's rather slower now, though I haven't seen Somerset live
for a couple of years.)

Strauss has definitely changed his batting strategy. Both Glamorgan
and Kent set the standard Strauss field with two gullies and as many
slips as seemed reasonable and bowled accordingly, but those fielders
stood mostly idle; the few shots he did play in that quadrant were
quite deliberately played down and steered through the gap between the
slips and the gullies. His business shots have been the drive through
extra cover and the clip forward of square leg, though today one of
his first scoring efforts was a thundering straight on-drive which
almost decapitated Godleman.

I cannot tell whether Murtagh's unnatural success from the Nursery End
is because he's improved a lot or because he's just bowling very well
this week. It's certainly welcome with both Silverwood and Richardson
crocked. It could just be the mostly damp conditions that have
prevailed at Lord's this week, as Glamorgan's most awkward bowler was
Ryan Watkins, who is also a very brisk medium pacer.

Berg, the new Kolpakker, looks a decent enough first change pace man.

It's quite nostalgic seeing a tall bald guy bowling spin from the
Nursery End, though you quickly notice that Udal bowls right arm and
therefore isn't PH Edmonds.

I hope Joyce's 86 on Saturday was an indication that the slump my be
ending, because he hasn't looked to be in any sort of form when I've
seen him. Shah hasn't stayed around long enough to work out whether
he's in form at all.

As to the other sides, Glamorgan look to have a pretty useful bowling
attack while their batting seems lacking, while Kent, by selecting
Key, Walker and Azhar Mahmood, are clearly hoping to win through
superior weight.

Cheers,

Mike
--

Mike Holmans wrote:
> The new Next Big Thing is Finn, who is 6'6" or so and can hide behind
> telegraph poles, though he looks athletic rather than gangly in the
> field. He has a high, clean action, and he gets a fair bit of bounce.
> I always find it difficult to judge the pace of tall, bouncy bowlers
> with clean actions; when they eventually show up on TV with a speed
> gun trained on them, they always turn out to be faster than I thought
> when watching them live. With that caveat, I think Finn is more
> Caddick's pace than Brett Lee's. (Caddick in his Test days, that is: I
> imagine he's rather slower now, though I haven't seen Somerset live
> for a couple of years.)

Yep, I seem to recall him being upto mid 80s when I saw him on TV last
summer. Was very impressed in terms of ability.

--
Jan

In message <ve7a14d91gu92kfj725if1uqp6uvq6t9dj@4ax.com>, Mike Holmans
<mike@jackalope.demon.co.uk> writes
>Berg, the new Kolpakker, looks a decent enough first change pace man.

Taking the place of Danny Evans. RH
--
Robert Henderson
Blair Scandal website: [url]http://www.geocities.com/[/url] blairscandal/
Personal website: [url]http://www.anywhere.demon.co.uk[/url]

"Robert Henderson" <philip@anywhere.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
news:VetlSgchTiFIFww4@anywhere.demon.co.uk...
> In message <ve7a14d91gu92kfj725if1uqp6uvq6t9dj@4ax.com>, Mike Holmans
> <mike@jackalope.demon.co.uk> writes
>>Berg, the new Kolpakker, looks a decent enough first change pace man.
>
> Taking the place of Danny Evans. RH

Never mind Middlesex. Worry instead about Leicestershire, who have just
kicked off a Championship match against Warwickshire with an XI containing
what must surely be a record six South Africans, plus an Australian to boot.

Andrew

In message <67octpF2q1bucU1@mid.individual.net>, Andrew Dunford
<adunford@artifax.net> writes
>
>"Robert Henderson" <philip@anywhere.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
>news:VetlSgchTiFIFww4@anywhere.demon.co.uk...
>> In message <ve7a14d91gu92kfj725if1uqp6uvq6t9dj@4ax.com>, Mike Holmans
>> <mike@jackalope.demon.co.uk> writes
>>>Berg, the new Kolpakker, looks a decent enough first change pace man.
>>
>> Taking the place of Danny Evans. RH
>
>Never mind Middlesex. Worry instead about Leicestershire, who have just
>kicked off a Championship match against Warwickshire with an XI containing
>what must surely be a record six South Africans, plus an Australian to boot.
>

Their mentality is essentially treasonous. RH
>Andrew
>
>

--
Robert Henderson
Blair Scandal website: [url]http://www.geocities.com/[/url] blairscandal/
Personal website: [url]http://www.anywhere.demon.co.uk[/url]

"Mike Holmans" <mike@jackalope.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
news:ve7a14d91gu92kfj725if1uqp6uvq6t9dj@4ax.com...
>I managed to get to days one and three of the Glamorgan game and to
> today's FP game, from which I can make a few observations.
>
> I remain underwhelmed by Billy Godleman, who was being touted a year
> back as Middx's Next Big Thing. I can't remember seeing a top order
> batsman who was so heavily bottom-handed.
>
> The new Next Big Thing is Finn, who is 6'6" or so and can hide behind
> telegraph poles, though he looks athletic rather than gangly in the
> field. He has a high, clean action, and he gets a fair bit of bounce.
> I always find it difficult to judge the pace of tall, bouncy bowlers
> with clean actions; when they eventually show up on TV with a speed
> gun trained on them, they always turn out to be faster than I thought
> when watching them live. With that caveat, I think Finn is more
> Caddick's pace than Brett Lee's. (Caddick in his Test days, that is: I
> imagine he's rather slower now, though I haven't seen Somerset live
> for a couple of years.)
>
> Strauss has definitely changed his batting strategy. Both Glamorgan
> and Kent set the standard Strauss field with two gullies and as many
> slips as seemed reasonable and bowled accordingly, but those fielders
> stood mostly idle; the few shots he did play in that quadrant were
> quite deliberately played down and steered through the gap between the
> slips and the gullies. His business shots have been the drive through
> extra cover and the clip forward of square leg, though today one of
> his first scoring efforts was a thundering straight on-drive which
> almost decapitated Godleman.
>
> I cannot tell whether Murtagh's unnatural success from the Nursery End
> is because he's improved a lot or because he's just bowling very well
> this week. It's certainly welcome with both Silverwood and Richardson
> crocked. It could just be the mostly damp conditions that have
> prevailed at Lord's this week, as Glamorgan's most awkward bowler was
> Ryan Watkins, who is also a very brisk medium pacer.
>
> Berg, the new Kolpakker, looks a decent enough first change pace man.
>
> It's quite nostalgic seeing a tall bald guy bowling spin from the
> Nursery End, though you quickly notice that Udal bowls right arm and
> therefore isn't PH Edmonds.
>
> I hope Joyce's 86 on Saturday was an indication that the slump my be
> ending, because he hasn't looked to be in any sort of form when I've
> seen him. Shah hasn't stayed around long enough to work out whether
> he's in form at all.
>
> As to the other sides, Glamorgan look to have a pretty useful bowling
> attack while their batting seems lacking, while Kent, by selecting
> Key, Walker and Azhar Mahmood, are clearly hoping to win through
> superior weight.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Mike
> --

I've seen both Godleman and Finn and I think I agree with you. For some
reason, we (England) seem to oscillate between two extremes. Back in the
1990s we had "honest" trundlers like Mullally, Cork, Fraser and so on who
could probably let one or two go with decent pace but on the whole operated
78-82mph. Under Fletcher, bowlers knew it was 85+mph or bust.

Finn is definitely in the metronome category because everyone seems to be
trying to produce another McGrath. One of McGrath's great attributes
wasn't so much his "style" - it was his brain and certainly his stamina.
I've seen McGrath bowl really really quickly (Barabados 1999) and bowl some
reverse swinging yorkers (Brisbane 1996) and I always felt McGrath wasn't
quite the metronome people made him out to be. Whether or not Finn has any
variation (which was certainly Fraser's undoing) time will tell but I think
on its own - metronomic accuracy won't get you many wickets. Pollock, for
example, has been insipid for several years before his recent retirement -
though I do concede I'd like 400+ test scalps.

Godleman I think has some sort of technical flaw. Not in stance but in
strokes, he reminds me a lot of Neil Fairbrother who I always felt used a
bat that was too heavy for him.

Good luck to both of 'em though - it's very early days.

On Tue, 29 Apr 2008 21:57:40 +0100, "lk" <gofyself@wrong.address.com>
tapped the keyboard and brought forth:


>> The new Next Big Thing is Finn, who is 6'6" or so and can hide behind
>> telegraph poles, though he looks athletic rather than gangly in the
>> field. He has a high, clean action, and he gets a fair bit of bounce.

>Finn is definitely in the metronome category because everyone seems to be
>trying to produce another McGrath. One of McGrath's great attributes
>wasn't so much his "style" - it was his brain and certainly his stamina.
>I've seen McGrath bowl really really quickly (Barabados 1999) and bowl some
>reverse swinging yorkers (Brisbane 1996) and I always felt McGrath wasn't
>quite the metronome people made him out to be. Whether or not Finn has any
>variation (which was certainly Fraser's undoing) time will tell but I think
>on its own - metronomic accuracy won't get you many wickets. Pollock, for
>example, has been insipid for several years before his recent retirement -
>though I do concede I'd like 400+ test scalps.

I do rather agree about Bollocks's insipidity. But he was half a yard
slower than Mcgrath and typically bowled six inches further outside
off stump: he was both easier to play (though not necessarily easier
to score off) and easier to leave. He didn't ask such difficult
questions of the batsman.

McGrath didn't go in for much variation in recent years either. He
could no longer bowl fast and instead maintained near-perfect control.

The main reason that Matthew Hoggard is a disaster in one-day cricket
- he doesn't even play it for Yorks now - is that he has very little
in the way of variation. But his method has served England very well
in Test cricket for several years.

Most of the best bowlers have accuracy as their greatest virtue: that
was just as true of Waqar Younis and Michael Holding as of Ambrose and
McGrath.

One of the great advantages allegedly possessed by Anderson is that he
has a number of variations. Saj Mahmood was also keen on variations
when he was in the England side, as was Plunkett when he didn't get it
right early on. Not only can they vary their length and pace, but they
also vary their line a lot. How deliberate all these variations
actually are, though, would make an interesting debate. Some would say
they are merely different ways to get carted.

If, like Wasim Akram, you can harness accuracy, pace and variation,
then you are indeed a highly dangerous bowler, but they come in that
order of importance.

You will gather that I don't care if Finn shows no variations before
2011 if he can perfect his control of line and length.

Cheers,

Mike



--