Nathan Lyon 2016-17

[eth-dog]

Lyon is fine. Your hatred for him knows no bounds.

 

[Art Vandelay_]

Lyon should move past McKenzie and Benaud by the end of this series and become our 8th most successful test bowler.

 

[The_Reaper]

The most mediocre bowler to play 60+ tests for Australia

Lyon should move past McKenzie and Benaud by the end of this series and become our 8th most successful test bowler.

Yeah and Michael Clarke is a more successful test batsman than Bradman

 

[Art Vandelay_]

The most mediocre bowler to play 60+ tests for Australia



Yeah and Michael Clarke is a more successful test batsman than Bradman

And? Nothing you say can take away what he's achieved.

If he's so mediocre then that speaks volumes that even now he's comfortably the best spinner in the country*

*subcontinent aside.

 

[Beutbrute]

Lyon certainly isn't the best spinner in the country... He's in India as we speak

 

[The_Reaper]

And? Nothing you say can take away what he's achieved.

If he's so mediocre then that speaks volumes that even now he's comfortably the best spinner in the country*

*subcontinent aside.

Yeah. Maybe he'll take some wickets in Australia when it matters at some point.

Being a long time since he's contributed anything here.

 

[Art Vandelay_]

Yeah. Maybe he'll take some wickets in Australia when it matters at some point.

Being a long time since he's contributed anything here.

And yet no one can displace him...
You do realise the light that your criticism paints the rest in don't you?

 

[The Swans Blog]

Warne didnt end up with 700 bowling like a mug. His wicket taking was ridiculous, and he always threatened on any pitch. The same can't be said for MacGoo, even though he was a fine bowler in his own right.

Warne was able to do things with the ball no one else could, extract ridiculous amounts of spin, get bounce, variation of concealed wrist and bowling action, drift and skidding it.

Most spinners have just a few tools. Lyon can extract drift and bounce, and inconsistently spin it. He's suited to spinning conditions, but lacks natural variation and adaptability to be truly successful. He'll pick up 20 wickets in a 3-4 match series and barely get 10 the next 3 match series.

He'll still go for 100+ at least 1 innings in nearly every match he'll play, and regularly near 200 runs conceded.

Sure, he'll pick up 5 wickets, but at a lowsly economy rate against a team hitting 400+ in the first innings.

India are going to score big at least once this series and I expect him to go for a lot.

 

[eth-dog]

Warne didnt end up with 700 bowling like a mug. His wicket taking was ridiculous, and he always threatened on any pitch. The same can't be said for MacGoo, even though he was a fine bowler in his own right.

Warne was able to do things with the ball no one else could, extract ridiculous amounts of spin, get bounce, variation of concealed wrist and bowling action, drift and skidding it.

Most spinners have just a few tools. Lyon can extract drift and bounce, and inconsistently spin it. He's suited to spinning conditions, but lacks natural variation and adaptability to be truly successful. He'll pick up 20 wickets in a 3-4 match series and barely get 10 the next 3 match series.

He'll still go for 100+ at least 1 innings in nearly every match he'll play, and regularly near 200 runs conceded.

Sure, he'll pick up 5 wickets, but at a lowsly economy rate against a team hitting 400+ in the first innings.

India are going to score big at least once this series and I expect him to go for a lot.

He's gone for 100+ runs 21 times out of 123 innings'. So by "nearly every test match" you mean less than 20% of the time? Basically this is a completely inaccurate rant against Lyon because you don't like him.

In the 7 innings' where he's taken 5 wickets, 4 have had an economy rate of less than 3 and only 2 of the scores have had 400+. So again, this is a completely inaccurate rant because you don't like him.

In his latest test match he took 5/74 for the match at an economy rate of less than 3. Without his tight bowling in the first innings, does Rahul play that rash shot off O'Keefe, who gets his confidence up and rip through the rest? Probably not. Why don't you research these things before shooting your mouth off like an idiot?

 

[The Swans Blog]

He's gone for 100+ runs 21 times out of 123 innings'. So by "nearly every test match" you mean less than 20% of the time? Basically this is a completely inaccurate rant against Lyon because you don't like him.

In the 7 innings' where he's taken 5 wickets, 4 have had an economy rate of less than 3 and only 2 of the scores have had 400+. So again, this is a completely inaccurate rant because you don't like him.

In his latest test match he took 5/74 for the match at an economy rate of less than 3. Without his tight bowling in the first innings, does Rahul play that rash shot off O'Keefe, who gets his confidence up and rip through the rest? Probably not. Why don't you research these things before shooting your mouth off like an idiot?

You watched the summer, right? Or like the last 18-24 months of Nathan "GAARRRYYYYYYY" Lyon?

 

[Blue1980]

You watched the summer, right? Or like the last 18-24 months of Nathan "GAARRRYYYYYYY" Lyon?

Who do you hate more, Lyon or Shaun Marsh?

Not sure why you spend so much time wanting players in our side to fail to feel vindicated.

 

[PhatBoy]

And? Nothing you say can take away what he's achieved.

If he's so mediocre then that speaks volumes that even now he's comfortably the best spinner in the country*

*subcontinent aside.

You know Ishant Sharma has something like 200 test wickets.
Colin croft, universally regarded as one of the most frightening prospects for a batsman to ever see with a cricket ball on his hand, with an average to match, has something like 138.

Of course no one can take away your wickets but they can sure as hell give them some context.

 

[PhatBoy]

He's gone for 100+ runs 21 times out of 123 innings'. So by "nearly every test match" you mean less than 20% of the time? Basically this is a completely inaccurate rant against Lyon because you don't like him.

In the 7 innings' where he's taken 5 wickets, 4 have had an economy rate of less than 3 and only 2 of the scores have had 400+. So again, this is a completely inaccurate rant because you don't like him.

In his latest test match he took 5/74 for the match at an economy rate of less than 3. Without his tight bowling in the first innings, does Rahul play that rash shot off O'Keefe, who gets his confidence up and rip through the rest? Probably not. Why don't you research these things before shooting your mouth off like an idiot?

I could be wrong but I think Rahul had hit Starc for 3 boundaries the over before he got out so I don't think it was being tied down that inspired the shot.

 

[eth-dog]

You watched the summer, right? Or like the last 18-24 months of Nathan "GAARRRYYYYYYY" Lyon?

Yes. However that is completely irrelevant to the spiel you gave. I was merely informing you of the facts you had incorrect.

I could be wrong but I think Rahul had hit Starc for 3 boundaries the over before he got out so I don't think it was being tied down that inspired the shot.

Lyon had one end tied down for pretty much the entire innings; which forced them to attack from the other end. It was probably some sort of factor.

 

[The Swans Blog]

Don't make out like he was troubling anyone with his boiled eggs. Rahul was in and went for a 6 on a ball that wasn't on. SOK had replaced Lyon anyhow.

 

[Carlos Danger]

Yes. However that is completely irrelevant to the spiel you gave. I was merely informing you of the facts you had incorrect.

Lyon had one end tied down for pretty much the entire innings; which forced them to attack from the other end. It was probably some sort of factor.

Lyon going at 1 per over in the first innings, was easily the better bowler until SOK changed up his length & turned from bowling pies to grenades.

We could probably close this thread down & replace it with chunky chicken burning an effigy of Nathan Lyon instead, would save a lot of wasted posts.

 

[eth-dog]

Don't make out like he was troubling anyone with his boiled eggs. Rahul was in and went for a 6 on a ball that wasn't on. SOK had replaced Lyon anyhow.

No he didn't. That's why Warnie was going on about the change of ends you daft prick

Lyon going at 1 per over in the first innings, was easily the better bowler until SOK changed up his length & turned from bowling pies to grenades.

We could probably close this thread down & replace it with chunky chicken burning an effigy of Nathan Lyon instead, would save a lot of wasted posts.

It's entertaining embarrassing his complete lack of knowledge.

 

[The Swans Blog]

Not sure if you were watching the game, because that sure as hell isn't what Warnie was saying. Basically said that SOK was a rubbish bowler and Australia wasted their time picking him. When he snagged 3 in one over and 6 for the innings, Warne was unusually silent and didn't say a bloody word afterwards, after slagging him off for most of the innings before it.

 

[PhatBoy]

Not sure if you were watching the game, because that sure as hell isn't what Warnie was saying. Basically said that SOK was a rubbish bowler and Australia wasted their time picking him. When he snagged 3 in one over and 6 for the innings, Warne was unusually silent and didn't say a bloody word afterwards, after slagging him off for most of the innings before it.

And then proceeded to put it down to Smith switching him to the other end anyway

 

[eth-dog]

Not sure if you were watching the game, because that sure as hell isn't what Warnie was saying. Basically said that SOK was a rubbish bowler and Australia wasted their time picking him. When he snagged 3 in one over and 6 for the innings, Warne was unusually silent and didn't say a bloody word afterwards, after slagging him off for most of the innings before it.

Yes. And after that he put it down to the change of ends. It's in cricinfo's commentary too. Lyon bowled the 32nd over and O'Keefe the 33rd.

 

[The Offerman]

It's not just that Warne dislikes SOK for his lack of spin, it's more he goes out of his way to insult him and tell the viewers he's not up to it. Shane was utterly embarrassing on commentary throughout SOK's bowling stints and the fact that he still won't go out of his way to praise him (instead praising Smith for switching his bowling ends) says a lot for his character.

If only those at CA cared for SOK like they did Starc back in the day.

 

[The Swans Blog]

Starc was just another Johnson clone, another Lee clone.

 

[The Swans Blog]

Lyon is fine. Your hatred for him knows no bounds.

I don't hate him. I've always thought of him as a decent, dependable spinner. His last 12 months have been very poor and that's what this discussion is about.

 

[PhatBoy]

It's purely hypothetical but I'd love to know how Lyon would perform in a side like the West Indies or some versions of the Pakistan team or Lankans where there are rarely fast bowlers putting pressure on from the get go.

 

[The_Reaper]

It's not just that Warne dislikes SOK for his lack of spin, it's more he goes out of his way to insult him and tell the viewers he's not up to it. Shane was utterly embarrassing on commentary throughout SOK's bowling stints and the fact that he still won't go out of his way to praise him (instead praising Smith for switching his bowling ends) says a lot for his character.

If only those at CA cared for SOK like they did Starc back in the day.

Got to wonder if Warne is why O'Keefe took so long to get selected despite his superior record to everyone else picked.

Meanwhile any spinner Warne praises is fasttracked straight away into the national team.