Joel Garner..Most Economical Bowler
How do you think he would do now against these better batters?-
mapoui
- Posts: 8507
- Joined: Wed Apr 14, 2010 10:07 pm
which better batters..these guys currently?
deh are nto better than in Garners day for the most part. garner wud do even better against these guys. he wud be even more fit, start earlier and last longer.
Garner was accuracy itself. tahst the thing about him I was most impressed with. as a bowler he was a unique type of fellow, almost without previous and subsequent example. and he could play roles to the T.
when he was the third and fouth bowler he bowler well within himself. when Roberts left and Holding cut down, he found himself with the new ball he lenghtened his run, increased his pace and became a devastating new ball bowler.
I was happy to find that stat to demonstrate what I thought of him was right. over a very long period of games he maintained an accuracy that no one has come close to.
and I believe it is the same in the whole history of test cricket where the serious bowlers are concerned. he has a wicket at 20:19 or something, that beats out everybody or almost everybdy else
that is what yu call a real bowler indeed, playing 8-10 tests a year for 10 years or so. I would have loved to have seen he and ambrose in the same team. imagine an attack of marshall, Holding, Ambrose and Garner.
no tean wud score over 150 against them. I mean it wud be hard enuff to score against Holding and marshall. it would be impossible to score against Ambrose and Garner
deh are nto better than in Garners day for the most part. garner wud do even better against these guys. he wud be even more fit, start earlier and last longer.
Garner was accuracy itself. tahst the thing about him I was most impressed with. as a bowler he was a unique type of fellow, almost without previous and subsequent example. and he could play roles to the T.
when he was the third and fouth bowler he bowler well within himself. when Roberts left and Holding cut down, he found himself with the new ball he lenghtened his run, increased his pace and became a devastating new ball bowler.
I was happy to find that stat to demonstrate what I thought of him was right. over a very long period of games he maintained an accuracy that no one has come close to.
and I believe it is the same in the whole history of test cricket where the serious bowlers are concerned. he has a wicket at 20:19 or something, that beats out everybody or almost everybdy else
that is what yu call a real bowler indeed, playing 8-10 tests a year for 10 years or so. I would have loved to have seen he and ambrose in the same team. imagine an attack of marshall, Holding, Ambrose and Garner.
no tean wud score over 150 against them. I mean it wud be hard enuff to score against Holding and marshall. it would be impossible to score against Ambrose and Garner
-
BallOil
- Posts: 19409
- Joined: Thu Feb 04, 2010 11:12 pm
I just watched Fire in Babylon. You have to give them credit what them did back in the days...If the past will help with the current pain, let it be. Garner is a Giant!Westdem wrote:Allyuh need to involve more into predicting WI cricket rather that fcuking going back into de past!!!
