rkt.india Posted January 5, 2012 Posted January 5, 2012 P.k? He is gone. first let pk play in subcontinent..seeing how ordinary he was in the ranji trophy match, his success is highly unlikely.
Lord Posted January 5, 2012 Posted January 5, 2012 first let pk play in subcontinent..seeing how ordinary he was in the ranji trophy match' date=' his success is highly unlikely.[/quote'] cant be worse than Ishant though.no harm in trying
rkt.india Posted January 5, 2012 Posted January 5, 2012 Yep. Anyway' date=' as we saw with Harris and Hilf, if you miss games through injury and the replacements step up then you can't get back in easily. Before this series Harris was considered the best Aussie bowler and Hilf was making a comeback after a year, but Hilf took 7 wickets at the MCG and Harris couldn't make the XI even though he was fit.[/quote'] they did not play harris because they are not sure if harris can survive five days of test because he broken mid test in his last two tests in SA and SL.
saneindian Posted January 5, 2012 Author Posted January 5, 2012 PK's sutta intake needs to come down from 3-4 packs a day to 4-5 sticks a day for him to have a long test career. :P
Karan114 Posted January 5, 2012 Posted January 5, 2012 they did not play harris because they are not sure if harris can survive five days of test because he broken mid test in his last two tests in SA and SL. Wrong, he was in the 12 for the Sydney Test. He was in contention but was left out of because of Hilf's form. He had been left out of the MCG squad because of the uncertainty over his fitness, not Sydney.
Hell Raiser Posted January 5, 2012 Posted January 5, 2012 Both of these have a amazing start to their careers and looks very promising but their true test will be how they bowl when they are out of their comfort zone. As of now I would rate Pattinson just higher than Philander.
rkt.india Posted January 5, 2012 Posted January 5, 2012 cant be worse than Ishant though.no harm in trying ishant has done even better than zak in india. his record is poor outside india. before WI series, ishant had an average of 28 in india.
rkt.india Posted January 5, 2012 Posted January 5, 2012 Wrong' date=' he was in the 12 for the Sydney Test. He was in contention but was left out of because of Hilf's form. He had been left out of the MCG squad because of the uncertainty over his fitness, not Sydney.[/quote'] he was in the 12 just to assess his fitness and was found inadequately fit to play test if you had read reports coming out from Aus.
Karan114 Posted January 5, 2012 Posted January 5, 2012 he was in the 12 just to assess his fitness and was found inadequately fit to play test if you had read reports coming out from Aus. Fair enough, I stand corrected
saneindian Posted January 5, 2012 Author Posted January 5, 2012 he was in the 12 just to assess his fitness and was found inadequately fit to play test if you had read reports coming out from Aus. That was more because Aussies wanted to continue playing the winning side. That leaves Harris out in the cold for the moment, with quicks Ben Hilfenhaus, Peter Siddle and James Pattinson all outstanding with bat and ball at the MCG. "The three guys that did the job in Melbourne did the job fantastically well," Arthur said. "They are the incumbents and they are making those positions their own. "It's a great position to be in when you consider you've got Ryan Harris. http://uk.eurosport.yahoo.com/31122011/58/harris-likely.html No mention of Harris being left out due to his fitness issues! Had one of the three pacers underperformed at MCG, Harris would have walked into the side for SCG.
Bradman99 Posted January 5, 2012 Posted January 5, 2012 he was in the 12 just to assess his fitness and was found inadequately fit to play test if you had read reports coming out from Aus. Karan was right I think. They could have played him easily, but given the way the other lads were bowling, decided against it.
Karan114 Posted January 5, 2012 Posted January 5, 2012 That was more because Aussies wanted to continue playing the winning side. http://uk.eurosport.yahoo.com/31122011/58/harris-likely.html No mention of Harris being left out due to his fitness issues! Had one of the three pacers underperformed at MCG, Harris would have walked into the side for SCG. Karan was right I think. They could have played him easily' date=' but given the way the other lads were bowling, decided against it.[/quote'] Maybe I was correct after all :cantstop: rkt.india mentioned reports that found Harris's fitness to be inadequate after being selected for Sydney, which I thought I might have missed.
daryl1985 Posted January 5, 2012 Posted January 5, 2012 Both bowlers are excellent to watch. I like watching Philander more but Pattinson will probably do better in unhelpful conditions as he generates more bounce and was quite a bit quicker. There is no way Pattinson will be dropped when Cummins returns. In my opinion, Pattinson is the better of the two at the moment. Siddle has proved himself to be a superb 3rd seamer in the last few months while Hilfenhaus has come on leaps and bounds since last year and seems to have developed a useful inswinger. Despite this, i still think that Harris is currently their best bowler and when he comes in for the Perth test we will be ****ed.
Karan114 Posted January 5, 2012 Posted January 5, 2012 Both bowlers are excellent to watch. I like watching Philander more but Pattinson will probably do better in unhelpful conditions as he generates more bounce and was quite a bit quicker. There is no way Pattinson will be dropped when Cummins returns. In my opinion, Pattinson is the better of the two at the moment. Siddle has proved himself to be a superb 3rd seamer in the last few months while Hilfenhaus has come on leaps and bounds since last year and seems to have developed a useful inswinger. Despite this, i still think that Harris is currently their best bowler and when he comes in for the Perth test we will be ****ed. You mean being 2-0 down and having lost the second game by an innings and lots we aren't already ****ed? :haha:
rkt.india Posted January 5, 2012 Posted January 5, 2012 Maybe I was correct after all :cantstop: rkt.india mentioned reports that found Harris's fitness to be inadequate after being selected for Sydney, which I thought I might have missed. i had read that report. i think a thread too was made by someone on that.
adi B Posted January 5, 2012 Posted January 5, 2012 i have no doubt in my mind that pattinson is the far better bowler.... + aint philander a budhha
Cricket Tragic Posted January 5, 2012 Posted January 5, 2012 Their success will depend on their fitness. This.
maniac Posted January 5, 2012 Posted January 5, 2012 I think Philander will be a more all round bowler i.e Tests,ODI,T20 where as Pattinson will only be a good test bowler....doesn't look like he has what it takes to be a good LOI bowler. But since this thread is about tests I would go with Pattinson....he has age on his side too.
ganeshran Posted January 5, 2012 Posted January 5, 2012 Philander's bowling to right handers is amazing. Keeps bowling that accurate nagging off stump line with both swing and seam movement.
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now