The Philander puzzle

[King Tendulkar]

Philander is not all that. Will get destroyed in passive conditions

[Trichromatic]

Philander is not all that. Will get destroyed in passive conditions

Who doesn't get destroyed in passive conditions? :dontknow:

[Ultimate_Game]

Philander is not all that. Will get destroyed in passive conditions

He will still do better than most. He keeps it tight and relies mostly on seam. Usually swing bowlers find it tougher in passive conditions compared to seam bowlers and Philander will have that advantage. And as McGrath showed if you can continuously target the off stump corridor you will do just fine no matter where you bowl.

[LilleeoftheNile]

Indeed. And he ends up with the best average of all the bowlers and second top wicket taker behind Steyn. Amazing how keen people are to write someone off just because they're not 'super-fast'.

Philander can bowl fast when he wants to. But also to some extent the mediums cash in on the quicks.... like the article asked "who would you rather face, Steyn, Morkel or Philander?" could have asked "who would you be trying to score from, Steyn, Morkel or Philander?" (i know Morkel isn't super fast, but quick enough to be scary with his height)

[Trichromatic]

He will still do better than most. He keeps it tight and relies mostly on seam. Usually swing bowlers find it tougher in passive conditions compared to seam bowlers and Philander will have that advantage. And as McGrath showed if you can continuously target the off stump corridor you will do just fine no matter where you bowl.

A good bowler remains good bowler almost everywhere. An average bowler doesn't need unfavorable condition (like subcontinent) to struggle. Ex - Anderson.

[Crookbond]

A good bowler remains good bowler almost everywhere. An average bowler doesn't need unfavorable condition (like subcontinent) to struggle. Ex - Anderson.

Trying to rub it in :cantstop:

[Trichromatic]

Trying to rub it in :cantstop:

Hehe, not really. Despite the common perception that bowler like Philander will struggle when the pitch will not be green top and bowler like Anderson can do well anywhere except subcontinent which is not good for pacers anyway, this series has shown that it's not the case. Anderson has been an average during most part of his career and did well in last 2-3 years. But once he had to face resistance from good batting in home conditions, he struggled big time. S. Rajesh posted on cricinfo that Anderson, Broad and Bresnan couldn't dismiss Amla even once in 650 deliveries they bowled to him while Finn dismissed him twice in 65 deliveries that he bowled. I remember Nasser saying same thing about Philander that how his average will drop very fast because he won't find similar opposition and green tops in England. Philander ended series with avg of 23 which is still very good. I know this doesn't prove that Philander can bowl everywhere, but this does prove that average bowler can fail anywhere. Only good bowling or batting by opposition is needed.

[rkt.india]

Philander had struggled in county cricket before this test series. He is a good study for fast bowling experts though.

[msb1991]

Philander had struggled in county cricket before this test series.

Meh, wouldn't call 23 wickets at 21.34 struggling. Especially since it is unlikely he was going full tilt and he was getting accustomed to the conditions.

[ganeshran]

Philander has an inbuilt radar built in which makes him keep bowling that nagging line. Reminds me very much of McGrath

[Crookbond]

Hehe' date=' not really. [b']Despite the common perception that bowler like Philander will struggle when the pitch will not be green top and bowler like Anderson can do well anywhere except subcontinent which is not good for pacers anyway, this series has shown that it's not the case. Anderson has been an average during most part of his career and did well in last 2-3 years. But once he had to face resistance from good batting in home conditions, he struggled big time. S. Rajesh posted on cricinfo that Anderson, Broad and Bresnan couldn't dismiss Amla even once in 650 deliveries they bowled to him while Finn dismissed him twice in 65 deliveries that he bowled. I remember Nasser saying same thing about Philander that how his average will drop very fast because he won't find similar opposition and green tops in England. Philander ended series with avg of 23 which is still very good. I know this doesn't prove that Philander can bowl everywhere, but this does prove that average bowler can fail anywhere. Only good bowling or batting by opposition is needed.

I will call them T20 specialists. The first thing is to realize is Philander is a seam bowler not swing bowler and that makes him different from Anderson. You will notice that the bowlers who were most successful across the decades at most places, never relied ONLY on swing. In fact, I will expect Philander to have a bigger role in India than Morkel and Philander may even be third up for bowling behind Steyn and Morkel. Anderson on the other hand is a out and out swing bowler. The point of delivery for Anderson is not close to the stumps which makes him that much more dangerous in swinging conditions. But, this same delivery approach will rob him off in SC conditions. Reason? Simple - the ball will not swing and the angle will allow the batsman to pick him up from off and middle towards the leg side. You play out Anderson for the first 30 minutes and then plunder him for the next 30 hours would be my mantra to succeed against Anderson when there's no swing around.

[rkt.india]

Philander has an inbuilt radar built in which makes him keep bowling that nagging line. Reminds me very much of McGrath

Philander knows his limitation and uses his skill and seam to good effect. He does not try to bowl fast and bowls patiently in corridor.

[rkt.india]

I will call them T20 specialists. The first thing is to realize is Philander is a seam bowler not swing bowler and that makes him different from Anderson. You will notice that the bowlers who were most successful across the decades at most places, never relied ONLY on swing. In fact, I will expect Philander to have a bigger role in India than Morkel and Philander may even be third up for bowling behind Steyn and Morkel. Anderson on the other hand is a out and out swing bowler. The point of delivery for Anderson is not close to the stumps which makes him that much more dangerous in swinging conditions. But, this same delivery approach will rob him off in SC conditions. Reason? Simple - the ball will not swing and the angle will allow the batsman to pick him up from off and middle towards the leg side. You play out Anderson for the first 30 minutes and then plunder him for the next 30 hours would be my mantra to succeed against Anderson when there's no swing around.

Agree. The bold part is an issue with Umesh and Ishant as well.

[msb1991]

Philander knows his limitation and uses his skill and seam to good effect. He does not try to bowl fast and bowls patiently in corridor.

I'm so glad that he has shown that a bowler can succeed in Test cricket at 80mph without the 'experience' that some people think is necessary (despite having no substantive idea as to what it constitutes).

[msb1991]

Anderson on the other hand is a out and out swing bowler. The point of delivery for Anderson is not close to the stumps which makes him that much more dangerous in swinging conditions. But' date=' this same delivery approach will rob him off in SC conditions. Reason? Simple - the ball will not swing and the angle will allow the batsman to pick him up from off and middle towards the leg side. You play out Anderson for the first 30 minutes and then plunder him for the next 30 hours would be my mantra to succeed against Anderson when there's no swing around.[/quote'] Too simplistic. For one, Anderson is adept at reverse swing. Secondly, Anderson has the ability to bowl close to the stumps. [ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y98i7dGboSI]James Anderson 8 Wickets v Pakistan 2012 - YouTube[/ame]

[rkt.india]

I'm so glad that he has shown that a bowler can succeed in Test cricket at 80mph without the 'experience' that some people think is necessary (despite having no substantive idea as to what it constitutes).

Agree. I never said pace is only thing for success but it is an added advantage. Regarding Philander, dont undermine his skills. Being patient and bowling one channel relentlessly is another talent which most fast bowler don't possess. Other than that use of the wrist makes him innocuous. He for me is very much like how Mohammad Asif was.

[msb1991]

Agree. I never said pace is only thing for success but it is an added advantage. Regarding Philander' date=' dont undermine his skills. Being patient and bowling one channel relentlessly is another talent which most fast bowler don't possess. Other than that use of the wrist makes him innocuous. He for me is very much like how Mohammad Asif was.[/quote'] Bowling patiently in a channel is a skill but it is this skill which gains our so called 'trundlers' wickets at domestic level. Some of them are too slow for international cricket, but not all of them. He also showed that a medium pacer who looks poor in ODI cricket can be a very good Test bowler. This is an important lesson for ICF members - that the two formats are very different. Wrote an article on the topic here.

[rkt.india]

Bowling patiently in a channel is a skill but it is this skill which gains our so called 'trundlers' wickets at domestic level. Some of them are too slow for international cricket, but not all of them. He also showed that a medium pacer who looks poor in ODI cricket can be a very good Test bowler. This is an important lesson for ICF members - that the two formats are very different. Wrote an article on the topic here.

But most our bowlers dont have the skill to maintain a channel and other than Philander moves the new ball both ways while bowling in that channel because bowling without seam or swing movement even if one bowls with accuracy wont make much impact.

[Crookbond]

Bowling patiently in a channel is a skill but it is this skill which gains our so called 'trundlers' wickets at domestic level. Some of them are too slow for international cricket, but not all of them. He also showed that a medium pacer who looks poor in ODI cricket can be a very good Test bowler. This is an important lesson for T20 ICF members - that the two formats are very different. Wrote an article on the topic here.

Corrected

[Clarke]

Another Philly special