Worst no 8 in Ashes history.... - World A-Team Cricket Forum

Rachael · #1 (**permalink**) 28-12-2006, 05:12 PM

This might turn out to be a very short thread as the answer seems likely to be "no, no and no".

The questions are simple and all relate to Mahmood:

{i} Has their ever be a player less worthy of an England cap?

{ii} Has their ever been a less impressive no 8 in Ashes cricket?

{iii} Has their ever been a worse first change bowler cum number 8 batsman in world cricket?

ps. I appreciate that Mahmood has potential.... but I'm talking of Mahmood as he is right now... and based on evidence from his string of abject performances to date.

mudney

What is it with you Rachael? I mean Mahmood hasn't even done that badly, he took 4-100 which isn't bad. He should have played in the first test because he was part of a winning team so no doubt that affected him in some way.

Pete

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rachael

{i} Has their ever be a player less worthy of an England cap?

Liam Plunkett?

Ernest

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rachael

right now.

Oh I agree - now lets look at the facts.
Mahmood 4 wickets @25 each (right now)

England have never been able to mop up a tail - even in 2005 they nearly lost the Ashes because of that fact.
Mahmood removed three tail enders plus Gilly (right now).

Had the other bowlers taken there wickets @25 a wicket, Australia would have been out for 250.

Yes lets get rid of him - bring in Lewis.

KennyG · 28-12-2006, 06:52 PM in reply to Pete's post starting "Liam Plunkett?"

How about starting up a thread about #7 Racheal?
A keeper with an average of 20 should not escape your notice.

At least Mahmood was born in England,he deserves a cap more than the legions of turn coats you have had.

Rachael · 07:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ernest

Mahmood 4 wickets @25 each (right now)

Had Flintoff and Hoggard been fit, Mahmood's contribution might well have ended when he reached the diabolical low of 12-1-59-0. He did then claim some scalps... but all came with the game already lost... and only Hayden's will be recalled as the wicket of a (leaving aside my reservations) genuine, well-set batsman.

During the Aussie innings he bowled overs like the following:

Code:

62.1	Mahmood to Symonds, FOUR, and that's why. 

Short, wide and hammered with contempt behind square on the off. 
A gift and simply not good enough at this level  
62.2	Mahmood to Symonds, 2 runs, leg side, worked away behind square 
62.3	Mahmood to Symonds, no run, better line and Symonds into line to block 
62.4	Mahmood to Symonds, no run, big appeal but it hit Symonds well outside the line and was missing the off stump anyhow! 
62.5	Mahmood to Symonds, 2 runs, Mahmood errs to leg and Symonds flicks him away with obscene ease 
62.6	Mahmood to Symonds, 1 run, placed into space on the off side. Mahmood struggling to bowl a maiden ball

How about the following:

Code:

100.2	Mahmood to Warne, FOUR, cracking shot! Rubbish ball, mind; short, wide and Warne cracks square of the wicket, airborne, for four 
100.3	Mahmood to Warne, FOUR, oh, superb shot; again too short from Mahmood, straighter this time but Warne simply pulls it in front of square for four. Superbly timed 
100.5	Mahmood to Warne, 3 runs, 

again far too short and wide - this is irresponsible bowling - and he is fortunate not to concede four more, Warne hammering him on the front foot over extra cover

Or overs including deliveries like this....

Code:

106.1	Mahmood to Warne, FOUR, oh shot! A spanking extra cover drive. He hardly moved his feet, but didn't need to; just swung through the line and absolutely creamed it 
106.2	Mahmood to Warne, FOUR, Mahmood drops it short; Warne pulls him for four! Dreadful bowling and very entertaining batting

Mahmood's basic problem was stuff like the following:

Code:

64.1	Mahmood to Hayden, FOUR, oh dear. Overpitched, driven on the full back past Mahmood and it races to the rope 

64.6	Mahmood to Symonds, 3 runs, yet again too full, smacked through straight midwicket. 

66.6	Mahmood to Hayden, 1 run, but Mahmood provides the width with the last ball of the over and Hayden smacks the ball to the man sweeping on the off side 

68.5	Mahmood to Hayden, SIX, oh yes indeed! One step down the track and simply crashed into the crowd behind the bowler as spectators rise to the challenge and one holds a great catch. Flintoff looks on, unamused

When it's not four balls it's frequently easy singles easing the pressure....

Code:

90.5	Mahmood to Gilchrist, 1 run, full, but too straight and Gilly's off the mark, pushing this past the bowler 

92.2	Mahmood to Symonds, 1 run, too straight, too easy, another single

As Aggers, Boycott and others were noting in discussions of the recently-revealed England bowling 'plans'.... the only plan that's really needed for the vast majority of the time is "get six balls an over on the top of off stump"... and Mahmood is seemingly incapable of implementing that very basic plan.

mudney

He has the tools to be successful. He just needs to cut out bowling **** that he knows he shouldn't be bowling. I mean yesterday he would bowl an absolute beauty, me and my dad would be eggin him on and then he bowls it short and wide and sometimes we wonder why we bother. But I like him so I think we should stick with him because he'll come good soon.

Ernest

Rachael he got 4 wickets @25.

Econ rate is not an issue, if other bowlers had been as expensive and got the same amount of wickets, then the match might not have been over in three days.

What good is an econ rate of 2.5 - with no wickets.

Although early days - Mahmood takes his wickets cheaper than Lewis, or Harmison in Australia, very early days but we can only judge on matches played.

Lemming

I'm not entirely sure there's any point slating a 25 year old talented player who has come so far in four years in cricket. From what I have seen of Mahmood he appears to be pretty quick and capable of generating a little bit of seam movement bowling a nice fuller length - possibly Jason Gillespie-esque. I think he has the raw attributes to get good players out at the top level. OK so his bowling is wayward, but bowling plenty of overs against top players (whether at test or first class level) may well iron out these problems if his progress continues as it has so far in his short career.

I think Mahmood has quite a lot of talent and the correct raw skills to be a success in the future, his 4-for in this recent test has not hindered his progress in my opinion (note, no bowler in history has refused the wickets of tailenders and nor should Mahmood).

If Mahmood does not sort out his bowling accuracy within, say, 18 months then there is a problem. But to come into an unsettled, demoralised team most of the way into a hiding to nothing in an Ashes series and get 4/10 wickets (I know it's his second match) does not warrant a slating.

Mahmood is a decent prospect lacking the most difficult attribute, experience. It is senseless to lay into him before at least half of the current England team. For example Harmison, after four years of test cricket he still sometimes can't hit a barn door despite being one of the most feared fast bowlers in the world.

I believe this thread to be an attempt at winding people up. People who, being cricket lovers, would like to see guys with potential be given a chance to become good players. It's cricket that suffers when talented players like Mahmood are never given the growing room they deserve.

Rachael · 08:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lemming

Mahmood is a decent prospect lacking the most difficult attribute, experience.

Agreed. I like the natural action, the wrist position, the eye for the ball when batting and so on. My objection is simply to him gaining that experience as a passenger in a Test side when others (like Lewis) have never had that opportunity and have a far greater claim to being the finished article.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lemming

It's cricket that suffers when talented players like Mahmood are never given the growing room they deserve.

That's why the ECB and the leading clubs have worked so hard on an excellent domestic cricket structure and why an Academy exists: to ensure that players like Mahmood burst onto the Test scene not far short of the finished article (as batsmen like Hussey and bowlers like Clark have done) and to avoid mistakes of the past (like dragging around Devon Malcolm for year after year on the basis of promise that was never more than fleetingly (e.g. in THAT match, which stands out as such an exception to the rule) realised.

I've no objection to Mahmood being earmarked for the 2009 Ashes... but he should spend from now until then claiming a spot, not waltzing around having been granted one ahead of players like Lewis and Sidebottom who, like Bicknell, seem destined to be undeservingly overlooked.

ps. note to Ernest...

Quote:

During a match in which it appeared this England side were no longer able to play as a team, it was worth remembering why Australia had turned defeat in England into crushing victory here. Every member of the XI had contributed to the task of maintaining a suffocating hold on English throats, none more so than the most anonymous Australian in English eyes, Stuart Clark.

See http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article...521364,00.html

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode