View Full Version : Giles
Freo Big Fella
25 Jul 2005, 16:12
Off the top of my head, there's roughly 50 million people living in England. There's 18 Counties, so you'd take into account there'd be a reasonable amount of people playing representative cricket. Surely they can find a better spinner than Giles amongst all that?
dan warna
25 Jul 2005, 16:36
Off the top of my head, there's roughly 50 million people living in England. There's 18 Counties, so you'd take into account there'd be a reasonable amount of people playing representative cricket. Surely they can find a better spinner than Giles amongst all that?
nope
their best batsman is a bok. Their previous best batsman was a persian.
there is nothing left in england except to get obliterated by us, and give another generation of test cricketers the fear of Glen McGrath.
we could wheel him out when he's 50 to bowl offies and he'd still clean them up.
funkyfreo
25 Jul 2005, 16:45
Off the top of my head, there's roughly 50 million people living in England. There's 18 Counties, so you'd take into account there'd be a reasonable amount of people playing representative cricket. Surely they can find a better spinner than Giles amongst all that?
Or at least some similarly uninspiring spinners who at least know which end of the bat to hold on to.
If that G Jones is such a "great" bat maybe they can play his as a spinner. He cound't be much worse at it than he is at keeping.
Bestbird
25 Jul 2005, 16:55
Off the top of my head, there's roughly 50 million people living in England. There's 18 Counties, so you'd take into account there'd be a reasonable amount of people playing representative cricket. Surely they can find a better spinner than Giles amongst all that?
At least one that spins the ball
Hell, Boof would not have retired if he had played for the Poms
Not an attacking bowler, i don't see him getting more than 5 wickets this series.
pav_is_god
25 Jul 2005, 17:31
He's whole strategy is to bowl into the pads of the right hander and bore him shyteless until he makes a rash decision in a vain attempt to play cricket in the true spirit. He has to be one of the most negative bowlers going around.
Cooldude
26 Jul 2005, 01:51
Some Poms rate him, can you believe that?
The response when I told a Pom that Ashley Giles is ********:
More than one way to skin a cat. Is McGrath negative because he bores batsmen out?
Giles does his job. He does take wickets. He isnt in the class of Warne but then there isn't a spinner in England who is.
You clearly know very little about cricket
Allways kills me at stickcricket. :(
Allways kills me at stickcricket. :(Doesn’t matter what he chucks at you, just hit the left arrow!
TigerFan
26 Jul 2005, 08:55
Ashley needed treatment for depression - the Barmy Army heckled him that badly.
apparently they're already screaming 'GET HIM OFF!' before he's even bowled a ball.
subsequently, my MSN name is a tribute to 'wheelie bin' Giles
rightfoot_sloth
26 Jul 2005, 09:18
The Poms should dust off Ian Salisbury for the second test ! At least he can spin the ball.
The Poms should dust off Ian Salisbury for the second test ! At least he can spin the ball.
Or bring back Shaun Udal.
Some Poms rate him, can you believe that?
The response when I told a Pom that Ashley Giles is ********:
More than one way to skin a cat. Is McGrath negative because he bores batsmen out?
Giles does his job. He does take wickets. He isnt in the class of Warne but then there isn't a spinner in England who is.
You clearly know very little about cricket
True but he's a negative bowler, he's never going to get wickets against the Australians. If you want to get them out, you have to attack, instead of being defensive. England did that in the second innings through Hoggard and Giles and look where it got them...420 runs behind.
spookism
26 Jul 2005, 17:34
Or bring back Shaun Udal.
"Rubbish" Tufnell?????
funkyfreo
26 Jul 2005, 17:37
"Rubbish" Tufnell?????
NOw you just sound stupid.
Tuffers = legend of the game - suffered at hands of idiot selectors who as we see will sacrifice true ability for the sake of about 5 runs of batting average!!
Cooldude
26 Jul 2005, 17:53
At least Tuffers tried to spin the ball and get a batsman out
Instead of Ashley Giles, looking for a batsman to get himself out
Bowling over the wicket has three negatives: 1. It means you ain't backing your own ability. 2. It's negative, it is against the spirit of the game. 3. The crowd doesn't wanna watch ******** like this.
Yet there are many Poms who supports him bowling at line, are all Poms negative ********ers?
cschreuder61
26 Jul 2005, 18:20
Most negative bowler in world cricket. Can't stand the way he plays, and if england continue to have a bowler who plays like that in their team they can't expect to be No. 1 in the world. I've been strongly against him ever since I saw him bowl to tendulka in india, most disgraceful bit of bowling i've seen. Two footwide outside leg stump continously. Bad for the game.
Yeah, virtually identical averages and Tuffers actually had a slightly better economy rate.
Giles is a totally one-dimensional, negative bowler.
dan warna
26 Jul 2005, 19:07
Yeah, virtually identical averages and Tuffers actually had a slightly better economy rate.
Giles is a totally one-dimensional, negative bowler.
I think giles should continue to play.
Most negative bowler in world cricket. Can't stand the way he plays, and if england continue to have a bowler who plays like that in their team they can't expect to be No. 1 in the world. I've been strongly against him ever since I saw him bowl to tendulka in india, most disgraceful bit of bowling i've seen. Two footwide outside leg stump continously. Bad for the game.
whilst I agree to a large degree with what you say, the upshot of what he did to Tendulka was that Tendulkar got frustrated & was stumped for the first time in his Test career, basically he couldn't deal with it.
Sehway on the other hand, the little scallywag, got his dancing shoes on & took the big dog to Giles & tonked him all over the shop.
Clarke was a good example of how not to let him get o top.
The bottom line is that he's a pretty mediocre spin bowler, unlike Warne but like all those second tier spinners in world cricket he needs a fair bit of help from the pitch to be a threat, when he has a bit of rough outside leg stump he can be dangerous.
In Pakistan a few years back when we won the series 1-0 he took a heap of wickets(20+?), pretty much level Saqlain(who was good then) & it wasn't from bowling over the wicket.
In answer to the question, there prbably isn't anyone better.
As for Ian Salisbury he cold spin it but he tended to bowl half volley, long hop, full toss etc with the odd good line & length ball thrown in for good measure as a shock tactic(in the same way that Robert Croft threw the odd turner in).
Atleast he is a better all rounder than Cam White...............:D
sinepari
26 Jul 2005, 20:36
whilst I agree to a large degree with what you say, the upshot of what he did to Tendulka was that Tendulkar got frustrated & was stumped for the first time in his Test career, basically he couldn't deal with it.
\.
You'll never, ever get anywhere near Australia with that strategy.
Aggression is the key, but controlled aggression. Look at Pieterson.
Giles is a waste of space.
eddiesmith
26 Jul 2005, 20:44
So it was disgraceful bowling negative to Tendulkar, did you complain when Warney did it to Pietersen in the 1st test? Or is it double standards
And YOTC, dont you ever give up?
Cooldude
26 Jul 2005, 20:46
You might not get turn in the English pitches for Giles, but at least back yourself and bowl around the thing to right hand bats, back yourself to get them out.
Umpires should step in if he does that over the wicket ******** too long, batsmen starts padding up and nothing happens. It's just a blight on the game
eddiesmith
26 Jul 2005, 20:51
You might not get turn in the English pitches for Giles, but at least back yourself and bowl around the thing to right hand bats, back yourself to get them out.
Umpires should step in if he does that over the wicket ******** too long, batsmen starts padding up and nothing happens. It's just a blight on the game
But its fine when Warney does it right? :rolleyes:
Cooldude
26 Jul 2005, 20:57
But its fine when Warney does it right? :rolleyes:
When Giles can turn the ball square and bowl batsman around their legs, then yes, it's fine.
fryingpan
26 Jul 2005, 23:19
Also, he would have to be the most un-attractive man in world cricket. Seriously, he is an ugly little rat.
And YOTC, dont you ever give up?
give up??? Giving up is for pricktorians, like Cam white. :D
cschreuder61
27 Jul 2005, 20:34
So it was disgraceful bowling negative to Tendulkar, did you complain when Warney did it to Pietersen in the 1st test? Or is it double standards
And YOTC, dont you ever give up?
you can't seriously compare what giles bowls to warne.
Warne still attacks and the batsman have to work very hard to defend even around the wicket because he turns it so much. How many times has he bowled people are their legs?
Giles was just leaving the ball wide outside leg waiting to tendulka to get bored. If tendulka just stood there all day, he wouldn't have got out. It was very poor way to play, and Mark Waugh used to hate it aswell because it isn't in the spirit of the game, because you aren't trying to get the batsman out by bowling good deliveries.
Poor cricketer IMO.
What about Robert Dawson, he is still on the County scene?
crackers57
28 Jul 2005, 10:22
Bring back Eddie 'Emmings
Stig O'Hara
28 Jul 2005, 10:58
For some reason, they love this bloke.
I always go back to 2004 first test v New Zealand at Lords,
in the first dig he bowled 5 overs for 32 no wickets.
Second dig, with frontline bowlers Harmison, Hoggard, Jones and Flintoff and New Zealand 5 for 250 odd and the new ball due, captain Trescothick, didn't take the new ball, and bowled Giles unchanged from one end til NZ eked out 340 odd, the ball ending up 121 overs old.
The ball looked like it had been in a blender and the look on the quicks when called on to bowl was priceless.
He bowled over the wicket for his entire 39 overs, and didn't even pose a threat. The Lords crowd, and as usual Botham in the commentary box were livid.
Never worked that one out.
dan warna
28 Jul 2005, 11:07
which is why we want England captains to continue their 20 year tradition of being mental midgets.
I suspect that you could pull someone out of the victorian district cricket competition seconds who could captain with more vigour and intelligence than some of the brits.
And could probably bat better than vaughan and bowl better than giles.
Stig O'Hara
28 Jul 2005, 11:23
You're right and they also have a coach,
who could surely offer some advice.
On the NZ occasion Giles bowled unchanged for 25 of the 50 remaining overs in that innings over 2 sessions,
surely when they had their cuppa at tea,
and it was only the 3rd day,
Fletcher could have suggested the quicks come on,
as they had knocked of NZs last 4 for 30 odd.
But no, the wheelie bin must have been in the zone and his 3 for 89 will go down as one of the great 3fors ever.
Johnson#26
30 Jul 2005, 10:24
1st Grade Hack.
For some reason, they love this bloke.
I always go back to 2004 first test v New Zealand at Lords,
in the first dig he bowled 5 overs for 32 no wickets.
Second dig, with frontline bowlers Harmison, Hoggard, Jones and Flintoff and New Zealand 5 for 250 odd and the new ball due, captain Trescothick, didn't take the new ball, and bowled Giles unchanged from one end til NZ eked out 340 odd, the ball ending up 121 overs old.
The ball looked like it had been in a blender and the look on the quicks when called on to bowl was priceless.
He bowled over the wicket for his entire 39 overs, and didn't even pose a threat. The Lords crowd, and as usual Botham in the commentary box were livid.
Never worked that one out.
The flip side is that he took a fair few wickets last summer & rose to 9 in the world rankings.
Not saying I'm a fan but he did have some reasonable success.