How to handle Gilchrist
zRahul
Gilchrist approach to batting is lot like Srikant ( although he is
much better version Srikanth) trying to hit each and every ball.
Whenever a bowler bowled at the right spot with the ball directed at
the stumps he almost lost his wicket. I feel Gilcrist success in ODI
is mainly because lack of good bowlers who can bowl at the stumps. If
he had to regularly face bowlers like Akram, Ambrose, Walsh ,Kapil he
would always end up scoring quickfire 20s or 30s but not more than
that.
Tommorow that is what Indian opening bowlers will have to do . Let
Gilchrist do whatever he does, they have to bowl at the stumps no
matter what. he will miss a ball or mistime a ball sooner than later.
Zaheer can do that by bowling stump to stump over the wicket. I am not
sure about Agarkar he will be most liking be spraying the bowl arround
after getting hit for a few boundaries.
Jason Derby
arm bowler or a right armer going around the wicket. I have seen him
dismissed countless times this way. Vaas and Akhtar have had particularly
good success bowling this way to him. He plays with the bat away from the
pad when the balled is around that area and can also tend to play across the
line. If Khan can get it in this region he should have some success.
--
Regards,
Jason
Michael Blaxter
news:3fa1c7cd$0$1734$5a62...@freenews.iinet.net.au...
Actually, Gilschrist has improved on his technique against angled deliveries
coming around the wicket in recent times.
Up until about 2001-2002 Gilschist was regularly troubled by the likes of
Akram, and also Allan Mullali? of England. Since then, however, it appears
Gilchrist has sharpened up in this area,as he seldom gets out to this type
of delivery anymore. Gilchrist is definately susceptible to spin on slow
wickets (ala last Indian tour), and a tactic used more frequently against
him by some teams is to slow his game down and employ spin.
Andrew Dunford
"Michael Blaxter" <blak...@bigpond.net.au> wrote in message
news:p8lob.171835$bo1....@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
> "Jason Derby" <shad...@iinet.net.au> wrote in message
> news:3fa1c7cd$0$1734$5a62...@freenews.iinet.net.au...
> > Gilchrist's biggest weakness is the ball angled in at off stump from a
> left
> > arm bowler or a right armer going around the wicket. I have seen him
> > dismissed countless times this way. Vaas and Akhtar have had
particularly
> > good success bowling this way to him. He plays with the bat away from
the
> > pad when the balled is around that area and can also tend to play across
> the
> > line. If Khan can get it in this region he should have some success.
>
> Actually, Gilschrist has improved on his technique against angled
deliveries
> coming around the wicket in recent times.
> Up until about 2001-2002 Gilschist was regularly troubled by the likes of
> Akram, and also Allan Mullali? of England.
I've seen several batsmen - both left and right-handed - struggle when
facing Alan Mullally. Mostly because of the troublesome Law 6.1 ("the bat
overall shall not be more than 38 inches/96.5cm in length").
<snip>
Andrew
Anthony Swann
> I saw the recent Aus vs NZ ODI . I could not help notice that
> Gilchrist approach to batting is lot like Srikant ( although he is
> much better version Srikanth) trying to hit each and every ball.
> Whenever a bowler bowled at the right spot with the ball directed at
> the stumps he almost lost his wicket. I feel Gilcrist success in ODI
> is mainly because lack of good bowlers who can bowl at the stumps. If
> he had to regularly face bowlers like Akram, Ambrose, Walsh ,Kapil he
> would always end up scoring quickfire 20s or 30s but not more than
> that.
True, but a quickfire 20 or 30 at the top of the innings provides a good
start for the team, provided the batsman making the runs gets enough of
the strike. It sets the team up for a decent total, while also forcing
the fielding team on the back foot.
However, I do agree with you - Gilchrist is devastating, but Mullally made
him look very ordinary in 1998/99 out here in Australia in the one-day
tournament, regularly knocking his off-stump back. Unfortunately, there
is a distinct lack of top-class left-arm pacemen around in world cricket
these days - and the funny thing is that Mullally wasn't even in the upper
echelon of left-arm pacemen.
It'd be very interesting to see Zaheer Khan and Ashish Nehra bowling to
Gilchrist (and Hayden too, for that matter - I don't think he's faced too
much left-arm pace bowling at international level lately, and I do recall
Brett Schultz troubling him in South Africa in 1996/97).
> Tommorow that is what Indian opening bowlers will have to do . Let
> Gilchrist do whatever he does, they have to bowl at the stumps no matter
> what. he will miss a ball or mistime a ball sooner than later. Zaheer
> can do that by bowling stump to stump over the wicket. I am not sure
> about Agarkar he will be most liking be spraying the bowl arround after
> getting hit for a few boundaries.
*LOL* Poor Aggy! You gotta admire his perseverance though - he seems to
cop so much flak from Indian cricket supporters!
Cheers,
Ant.
--
to reply, use "aDOTswannATqutDOTeduDOTau", but replace "DOT" with "." and
"AT with "@" (I'm sick of getting spam!!).
org name]@optusnet.com.au The Wog
news:3fa1c7cd$0$1734$5a62...@freenews.iinet.net.au...
left
> arm bowler or a right armer going around the wicket.
I think he's got a lot better at facing this angle since the Poms sorted him
out. Always seemed to me he should just close his stance so he's playing
down the new line, and he may have done so. He doesn't seem to be playing
QUITE as much around it now.
> I have seen him
> dismissed countless times this way.
It was pretty chronic for a while.
> Vaas and Akhtar have had particularly
> good success bowling this way to him.
Who was the tall Pommy left hander (IIRC he was an Australian anyhow)? Hit
the top of off stump a lot.
Wog
Mike Holmans
>Who was the tall Pommy left hander (IIRC he was an Australian anyhow)? Hit
>the top of off stump a lot.
Alan "wides" Mullally.
Cheers,
Mike
Jason Derby
news:p8lob.171835$bo1....@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
From memory, Vaas got him that way twice last summer, once bowled and once
LBW I think. It is still the way to bowl at him IMO. I do recall him being
dismissed that way recently, against Zimbabwe perhaps? or in the first ODI
against India? Can't quite remember.
--
Regards,
Jason
Mad Hamish
>I saw the recent Aus vs NZ ODI . I could not help notice that
>Gilchrist approach to batting is lot like Srikant ( although he is
>much better version Srikanth) trying to hit each and every ball.
>Whenever a bowler bowled at the right spot with the ball directed at
>the stumps he almost lost his wicket. I feel Gilcrist success in ODI
>is mainly because lack of good bowlers who can bowl at the stumps. If
>he had to regularly face bowlers like Akram, Ambrose, Walsh ,Kapil he
>would always end up scoring quickfire 20s or 30s but not more than
>that.
You might want to look at who was in the Pakistan team in Gilchrist's
debut test series.
I'd also suggest that Pollock might be considered to be reasonably
accurate.
--
"Hope is replaced by fear and dreams by survival, most of us get by."
Stuart Adamson 1958-2001
Mad Hamish
Hamish Laws
h_l...@aardvark.net.au
Mad Hamish
I don't think it has to be so much angled in as moving in slightly.
Ambrose got him a couple of times from balls that moved back just
enough from over the wicket.
The ball really has to be just angling in to clip off-stump, too far
on the off-side and it goes, on middle stump or middle and off and it
normally goes past mid-on
I think the reason that Gilchrist has trouble with those balls is due
to too much bottom hand which results in him dragging across the ball
Paul Robson
--
Shariq A. Tariq
I am not sure I agree with you. I have seen Pollock and Donald try
this line with him and he hammered the daylights out of them. He may
have been dismissed with such a ball but that does not mean it's a
weakness. His weakness IMO is his mentality to dominate and and if he
is kept relatively quiet he will try to go all out. It is a task
easier said than done for any bowler
Shariq
Raj Datta
news:Aflob.4139$ws.3...@news02.tsnz.net:
> I've seen several batsmen - both left and right-handed - struggle when
> facing Alan Mullally. Mostly because of the troublesome Law 6.1 ("the
> bat overall shall not be more than 38 inches/96.5cm in length").
>
Pls explain (assuming you were not being facetitious).
Raj
Yuk Tang
news:Xns942565109EC04...@9.26.48.84:
Mullally tends to aim for off stump on a neighbouring pitch.
--
Cheers, ymt.
Email to: jim dot laker one at btopenworld dot com
Take it easy
news:Pine.LNX.4.44.031031...@localhost.localdomain:
> On 30 Oct 2003, zRahul wrote:
>
>> I saw the recent Aus vs NZ ODI . I could not help notice that
>> Gilchrist approach to batting is lot like Srikant ( although he
>> is much better version Srikanth) trying to hit each and every
>> ball. Whenever a bowler bowled at the right spot with the ball
>> directed at the stumps he almost lost his wicket. I feel
>> Gilcrist success in ODI is mainly because lack of good bowlers
>> who can bowl at the stumps. If he had to regularly face bowlers
>> like Akram, Ambrose, Walsh ,Kapil he would always end up scoring
>> quickfire 20s or 30s but not more than that.
>
> True, but a quickfire 20 or 30 at the top of the innings provides
> a good start for the team,
But a quickfire 70 or 80 is still worse for the opponents, right?
> provided the batsman making the runs
> gets enough of the strike. It sets the team up for a decent
> total, while also forcing the fielding team on the back foot.
<snip>
>> Tommorow that is what Indian opening bowlers will have to do .
>> Let Gilchrist do whatever he does, they have to bowl at the
>> stumps no matter what. he will miss a ball or mistime a ball
>> sooner than later. Zaheer can do that by bowling stump to stump
>> over the wicket. I am not sure about Agarkar he will be most
>> liking be spraying the bowl arround after getting hit for a few
>> boundaries.
>
> *LOL* Poor Shridhar! You gotta admire his perseverance though -
> he seems to cop so much flak from rsc!
Corrected it for you!
Takeiteasy.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Ant.
>
Jason Derby
news:fe23ec8f.0310...@posting.google.com...
It's tough to get him this way because if the ball comes on to his pads then
he clip you over mid wicket, more often than not for six, and if the ball is
outside off the he will put you away through the off side. The ball must be
angled in so that it is going to hit the very top of off stump. This is the
sort of ball that has got him countless times. IMO it is his biggest
technical flaw. Mainly because when the ball is right on the off stump
playing across the line towards the on side is dangerous and there is no
room to open the arms and put it through the off side. So he'll often poke
tentatively with a gap between bat and pad.
--
Regards,
Jason
Colin Kynoch
Raj Datta wrote:
Facetitious is Andrew's middle name.
I hear he is having surgery soon to remove the tongue that has
unfortunatley lodged permanently in his cheek.
;-)
Colin Kynoch
Andrew Dunford
"Colin Kynoch" <kynoch...@bigpond.com> wrote in message
news:3FA4964F...@bigpond.com...
I think you've slightly misunderstood the symptoms of the 'facetitious'
condition.
A person suffering facetitious has a large breast protruding from one of
their cheeks. I am indeed anticipating undergoing corrective surgery, but
have yet to decide whether to have the breast removed or balance things up
by adding a silicon implant on the other side.
Andrew
Augustus Fink-Nottle, Esq.
Myes! Look at those jowls!
- Gussie