View Single Post
  #42 (permalink)  
Old 01-04-2007, 09:00 PM in reply to Nostromo's post starting "It depends on what you understand by..."
pie_chucker's Avatar
pie_chucker pie_chucker is offline
Moderator
Selector-World XI (1980 onwards)
(SA) Passed Colin Bland's 1669 Test runs
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Northumberland, England
My main national team: England
My other team/s: Durham, Newcastle United
Posts: 1,770
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nostromo
It depends on what you understand by "guile". I interpret as an intelligent ability to understand the batsmen's weaknesses and try to fool them with your variations of pace, trajectory and spin. Despite his limitations, I agree that Giles had plenty of that and I have seen him get some good wickets with it (for example, the manner in which he drew Sehwag into a false stroke & bowled him in the 2002 Natwest Final). Vettori has more talent and guile than Giles; Panesar is undoubtedly talented as a spinner, but so far he strikes me more as an instinctive than a thinking bowler in the Harbhajan Singh mould. Look at the Indian; a few years ago, he used to bamboozle international batsmen and I still recall Gower and other commentators swearing blind to a golden future. He is still a good bowler, but there are distinct sign that oppositin batsmen have learned to read the signals correctly. I feel that the same thing might happen to Panesar over passing years; time will tell.
Please dont put him in the harbajhan mould, now there is an overhyped spinner! He has become predictable as his "doosra" has more arm flex than muralis .

In the context of a spinner I understand "guile" to be the same thing as you. IMO Giles may have the ability to understand a batsmans weaknesses but I dont think he has the natural skills to be able to decieve a batsman with pace or flight. I could quite easily see Monty decieving batsman through the air and he already varies his pace quite well.
__________________
Mark.
Reply With Quote