It was a curious decision by the selectors to drop Gabriel and Blackwood, and to replace them with Holder and Shilly.
So, in order to compare their performances, I will look at the match figures of the former duo in the second Test, and compare them to the match figures of the latter duo in the third.
Here's what we have so far:
Gabriel/Blackwood - 63 runs and 4-109
Holder/Shilly - 0-77 so far....
Let's see what happens as the match progresses.
Gabriel/Blackwood vs Holder/Shilly
-
mikesiva
- Posts: 19320
- Joined: Wed Mar 24, 2010 11:30 am
- Location: Watford, Hertfordshire
- Contact:
-
mapoui2
- Posts: 2106
- Joined: Sun Jun 02, 2013 3:19 pm
so far it looks like Holder is not only not ready but that he is the least of the young fast bowlers coming up.
Holder appears to be another favouritism pik. we have been fooled by a lot of hype about th that tall kid. he was given 10 overs and rather generously too, because he never threatened to take a wicket
Shilly took the top wickets at Sabina. he bowled out all the Kiwi top batsmen. so he just may be out of sync from the break by being dropped and now back in again
He may prove me wrong but I am not holding my breath on Holder. he does not look god enough to me
Holder appears to be another favouritism pik. we have been fooled by a lot of hype about th that tall kid. he was given 10 overs and rather generously too, because he never threatened to take a wicket
Shilly took the top wickets at Sabina. he bowled out all the Kiwi top batsmen. so he just may be out of sync from the break by being dropped and now back in again
He may prove me wrong but I am not holding my breath on Holder. he does not look god enough to me
Last edited by mapoui2 on Sat Jun 28, 2014 8:54 am, edited 1 time in total.
-
mikesiva
- Posts: 19320
- Joined: Wed Mar 24, 2010 11:30 am
- Location: Watford, Hertfordshire
- Contact:
As you guys know, I've been unimpressed with Holder for some time now....
Afro tells us he's gained a yard of pace, but nearly every delivery that came out of his hand was only in the 120s. That's not good enough, IMHO. Sure, because of his height, he's hard to get away, but that only serves a purpose in limited overs cricket. He needs to be bowling in the 130s to be a serious wicket-taking prospect. Garner was a tall man too, but he could bowl in the 130s. I was at Sabina Park to watch him having Hadlee doing all sorts of gyrations to escape Garner's hostile bowling in 1986. I can't see Holder doing that....
Morkel is a tall man too, but he bowls much faster than Holder.
Afro tells us he's gained a yard of pace, but nearly every delivery that came out of his hand was only in the 120s. That's not good enough, IMHO. Sure, because of his height, he's hard to get away, but that only serves a purpose in limited overs cricket. He needs to be bowling in the 130s to be a serious wicket-taking prospect. Garner was a tall man too, but he could bowl in the 130s. I was at Sabina Park to watch him having Hadlee doing all sorts of gyrations to escape Garner's hostile bowling in 1986. I can't see Holder doing that....
Morkel is a tall man too, but he bowls much faster than Holder.
-
mikesiva
- Posts: 19320
- Joined: Wed Mar 24, 2010 11:30 am
- Location: Watford, Hertfordshire
- Contact:
There were two Vincentians, Ian Allen and Cameron Cuffy, who were equally useless!mapoui2 wrote:what was his name..Allen or something
Are you thinking about Cuffy? He was tall and wutless!
-
mikesiva
- Posts: 19320
- Joined: Wed Mar 24, 2010 11:30 am
- Location: Watford, Hertfordshire
- Contact:
Here's what we have so far:
Gabriel/Blackwood - 63 runs and 4-109
First innings
Holder/Shilly - 0-77 and 48 runs....
Let's see what happens as the match progresses.
Gabriel/Blackwood - 63 runs and 4-109
First innings
Holder/Shilly - 0-77 and 48 runs....
Let's see what happens as the match progresses.
-
nick2020
- Posts: 789
- Joined: Sat Feb 23, 2013 11:01 am
Wouldn't it be a better exercise to look at the particulars of Gabriel vs Holder?
Holder is a good prospect. He can bat as he has demonstrated in the past and has good control of the ball. He does lack speed but if given a choice I would pick Holder over Gabriel.
But the numbers do not tell the full story. Holder had better numbers than Taylor in the first inns. Roach, who some people were not happy with, is the best bowler in this test.
Blackwood was unfairly dropped. But the selectors wanted to win instead of develop. Sad.
Holder is a good prospect. He can bat as he has demonstrated in the past and has good control of the ball. He does lack speed but if given a choice I would pick Holder over Gabriel.
But the numbers do not tell the full story. Holder had better numbers than Taylor in the first inns. Roach, who some people were not happy with, is the best bowler in this test.
Blackwood was unfairly dropped. But the selectors wanted to win instead of develop. Sad.
-
bossman19TT
- Posts: 1046
- Joined: Fri Mar 09, 2012 2:10 pm
Bowlers should NOT be picked on battin ability, but WICKET TAKIN ABILITY. Good control is fine fuh limited overs, but wicket takin ability is required fuh Tests...someting Holder does not yet appear to have.nick2020 wrote:Wouldn't it be a better exercise to look at the particulars of Gabriel vs Holder?
Holder is a good prospect. He can bat as he has demonstrated in the past and has good control of the ball. He does lack speed but if given a choice I would pick Holder over Gabriel.
But the numbers do not tell the full story. Holder had better numbers than Taylor in the first inns. Roach, who some people were not happy with, is the best bowler in this test.
Blackwood was unfairly dropped. But the selectors wanted to win instead of develop. Sad.
Shilly should be finished after dis series. Never rated him, it was only ever his doosra which caused trouble an brought wickets. TIME TO GO