Best ODI XI - NOMINATIONS -Bowlers
-
Chris Pringle
-
SRJH (goes without saying ... and hadn't till now ... But in case it does ... )
-
Dan V
-
Chats
-
@booboo Hadlee was considered by may overseas commentators (well the Pommy press) to be a bit limited in ODI's. The theory being he was hittable because he always put it in the same slot.
Proves two things to me. The yawning chasm beytween theory and practice and also Pommy Press are muppets.
-
@dogmeat said in Best ODI XI - NOMINATIONS -Bowlers:
@booboo Hadlee was considered by may overseas commentators (well the Pommy press) to be a bit limited in ODI's. The theory being he was hittable because he always put it in the same slot.
Proves two things to me. The yawning chasm beytween theory and practice and also Pommy Press are muppets.
I recall that happening to Chats (at least) once because bowling machine.
Rameez Raja tore into him at Chch and nearly won an ODI from an impossible position.
But when your RPO is waay less than 4 (3.3 SRJH, 3.57 The Mer) it can't have happened too often.
-
Hadlee:
Bowling
Overs: 1019.4
Balls: 6182
Maidens: 185
Runs Conceded: 3407
Wickets: 158
Average: 21.56
4 Wickets in Innings: 6
5 Wickets in Innings: 5
Best: 5/25
Economy Rate: 3.31
Strike Rate: 39.13
% of Team Wickets Taken: 19.48@dogmeat said in Best ODI XI - NOMINATIONS -Bowlers:
Pommy Press are muppets.
Uh, huh. Smacked all over the park at 3.31 per over and a wicket every 21.56 runs conceded.
-
-
Does Boult get into this team?
Bond and Hadlee are miles out in front for opening bowlers (by average) and Pringle is a fair bit ahead of Boult too.
Ferguson only has 37 matches but his record is much the same as Boult’s and he was a first change bowler I believe.
-
@gt12 said in Best ODI XI - NOMINATIONS -Bowlers:
Does Boult get into this team?
Bond and Hadlee are miles out in front for opening bowlers (by average) and Pringle is a fair bit ahead of Boult too.
Ferguson only has 37 matches but his record is much the same as Boult’s and he was a first change bowler I believe.
I’m gonna say it.
Boult is a very good player but he’s probably overrated. Big gulf between him and Paddles/Bond and very little between Southee and Wags.
-
@MN5 said in Best ODI XI - NOMINATIONS -Bowlers:
@gt12 said in Best ODI XI - NOMINATIONS -Bowlers:
Does Boult get into this team?
Bond and Hadlee are miles out in front for opening bowlers (by average) and Pringle is a fair bit ahead of Boult too.
Ferguson only has 37 matches but his record is much the same as Boult’s and he was a first change bowler I believe.
I’m gonna say it.
Boult is a very good player but he’s probably overrated. Big gulf between him and Paddles/Bond and very little between Southee and Wags.
Their value is as a package - they all do their jobs very well as a team, but as individuals none of them are in the same league as Bond or Hadlee.
-
@MN5 said in Best ODI XI - NOMINATIONS -Bowlers:
@gt12 said in Best ODI XI - NOMINATIONS -Bowlers:
Does Boult get into this team?
Bond and Hadlee are miles out in front for opening bowlers (by average) and Pringle is a fair bit ahead of Boult too.
Ferguson only has 37 matches but his record is much the same as Boult’s and he was a first change bowler I believe.
I’m gonna say it.
Boult is a very good player but very little between Southee and Wags.
Yep, I'm not sure how anyone can really separate the three of them.
I actually think Southee is rated lower as a bowler due to peoples opinions of his batting. The two are not linked though.
-
@Godder said in Best ODI XI - NOMINATIONS -Bowlers:
Hadlee could just as easily be an all-rounder, but it probably doesn't matter that much, the team is going to bat all the way down.
Can't see the metronome issue actually playing out in games, he'd obviously vary things more now than he had to then.
Not sure I'd rate Hadlee as a true all rounder. His batting was adequate and certainly handy.
-
@booboo said in Best ODI XI - NOMINATIONS -Bowlers:
@Godder said in Best ODI XI - NOMINATIONS -Bowlers:
Hadlee could just as easily be an all-rounder, but it probably doesn't matter that much, the team is going to bat all the way down.
Can't see the metronome issue actually playing out in games, he'd obviously vary things more now than he had to then.
Not sure I'd rate Hadlee as a true all rounder. His batting was adequate and certainly handy.
Maybe not in ODIs (he was certainly no C Cairns or Harris), but he was acknowledged as a world class all-rounder in tests. He's got the same issue as Smith - his batting met the needs of the team at the time, so he put most of his time and energy into his main role. In the modern era of NZC contracting, both would have put more effort into batting and their stats in those areas would probably be better.
-
@Godder said in Best ODI XI - NOMINATIONS -Bowlers:
@booboo said in Best ODI XI - NOMINATIONS -Bowlers:
@Godder said in Best ODI XI - NOMINATIONS -Bowlers:
Hadlee could just as easily be an all-rounder, but it probably doesn't matter that much, the team is going to bat all the way down.
Can't see the metronome issue actually playing out in games, he'd obviously vary things more now than he had to then.
Not sure I'd rate Hadlee as a true all rounder. His batting was adequate and certainly handy.
Maybe not in ODIs (he was certainly no C Cairns or Harris), but he was acknowledged as a world class all-rounder in tests. He's got the same issue as Smith - his batting met the needs of the team at the time, so he put most of his time and energy into his main role. In the modern era of NZC contracting, both would have put more effort into batting and their stats in those areas would probably be better.
Paddles himself said he was a bowler who batted. Mind you in the shithouse teams he played in he probably would have been a good chance to make it as a batsman with his 27 average.
He was an absolute pro and one of the best seamers that ever existed....I don’t think he could have have possibly been a better batsman either.
-
@MN5 said in Best ODI XI - NOMINATIONS -Bowlers:
@Godder said in Best ODI XI - NOMINATIONS -Bowlers:
@booboo said in Best ODI XI - NOMINATIONS -Bowlers:
@Godder said in Best ODI XI - NOMINATIONS -Bowlers:
Hadlee could just as easily be an all-rounder, but it probably doesn't matter that much, the team is going to bat all the way down.
Can't see the metronome issue actually playing out in games, he'd obviously vary things more now than he had to then.
Not sure I'd rate Hadlee as a true all rounder. His batting was adequate and certainly handy.
Maybe not in ODIs (he was certainly no C Cairns or Harris), but he was acknowledged as a world class all-rounder in tests. He's got the same issue as Smith - his batting met the needs of the team at the time, so he put most of his time and energy into his main role. In the modern era of NZC contracting, both would have put more effort into batting and their stats in those areas would probably be better.
Paddles himself said he was a bowler who batted. Mind you in the shithouse teams he played in he probably would have been a good chance to make it as a batsman with his 27 average.
He was an absolute pro and one of the best seamers that ever existed....I don’t think he could have have possibly been a better batsman either.
I know he says that, but his peers said otherwise at the time. Of the 4 great all-rounders of his day, he was definitely the best bowler and worst batsman, but he was still included in the comparisons.
He's another player with an inauspicious start to his career, but if we just look at the 80s, his batting average was 31.23 and his bowling average was 19.7.
-
-
@Snowy said in Best ODI XI - NOMINATIONS -Bowlers:
@Godder said in Best ODI XI - NOMINATIONS -Bowlers:
Of the 4 great all-rounders of his day
Botham, Khan, Dev? Or have I got my dates a bit out?
Yep. Beefy started brilliantly but faded, Imran was the opposite. He was the best of them all round, Paddles was possibly a smidgeon better than him as a bowler ( fuck all in it ) but Imran was considerably better with the bat. Incredible player. Kapil clearly last In my opinion
Bowling records | One-Day Internationals | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPNcricinfo.com
