SA Footy

How will Flintoff compare as a allrounder against the greats ( botham, Imran, Hadlee, Dev , Miller etc). I believe he is overrated. Flintoff avge for both bat and ball is about 35 which isnt good enough to be a number 6 bat or an opening bowler. Love watching him play as he gives it everything and had a great 2005 Ashes which over inflated him.

Might have the talent but if you don't put the score on the board...........

Captaincy isn't helping him either. Should be batting 7 and bowling 1st change.

The only decent knock he's played was in the 2nd innings in Perth.

For a captain/allrounder his batting performances have been in the main very poor. Some of the ways in which he's got out have also been dreadful!

In his defence many players + captains have been made to look ordinary
on tours of Australia.
As a bowler, he will bounce back and kill us again in England.[prefer 1st change]
As a batsman will be average but adequate as the bowling allrounder[not a speciallist]
As a captain , NO needs to concentrate on himself.
As a fieldsman, fields very well for a bowler.

The big difference is if he batted 6 for Australia and bowled 1st change he would
be a very good player and contributor[and we could carry his batting]
In an underperforming England team is needed to be a lot better with the bat.

He would WALK into the Australian team.

mal wrote:He would WALK into the Australian team.

Lee is the only one I could see him replacing...

Punk Rooster wrote:

mal wrote:He would WALK into the Australian team.

Lee is the only one I could see him replacing...

With Warne and McGrath gone after the Sydney Test I'm sure there would be plenty of room to fit him in.

rod_rooster wrote:

Punk Rooster wrote:

mal wrote:He would WALK into the Australian team.

Lee is the only one I could see him replacing...

With Warne and McGrath gone after the Sydney Test I'm sure there would be plenty of room to fit him in.

And with WATSON injured even more room.

rod_rooster wrote:

Punk Rooster wrote:

mal wrote:He would WALK into the Australian team.

Lee is the only one I could see him replacing...

With Warne and McGrath gone after the Sydney Test I'm sure there would be plenty of room to fit him in.

But with Warne & McGrath currently playing?
I probably don't watch enough cricket to back my next point too heavily, but I think Lee & Flintoff would be hard to seperate.

Punk Rooster wrote:

rod_rooster wrote:

Punk Rooster wrote:

mal wrote:He would WALK into the Australian team.

Lee is the only one I could see him replacing...

With Warne and McGrath gone after the Sydney Test I'm sure there would be plenty of room to fit him in.

But with Warne & McGrath currently playing?
I probably don't watch enough cricket to back my next point too heavily, but I think Lee & Flintoff would be hard to seperate.

Yeah, with Warne and McGrath playing Lee would be the obvious one to leave out. The batting strength with Flintoff at 8 would be pretty impressive.

Don't think it is too hard to separate Flintoff and Lee as batsmen but as bowlers not a lot in it IMHO.

If you had a AU/EG combined team would =

HAYDEN
LANGER
PONTING
HUSSEY
pieterson
CLARKE
GILCHRIST
flintoff
WARNE
CLARK
MCGRATH

LEE 12th man

Might partially answer your question Punky.

Brett Lee batted better in England, than Flintoff did in Australia.
Not sure I'd want either batting for my life though...

Punk Rooster wrote:Brett Lee batted better in England, than Flintoff did in Australia.
Not sure I'd want either batting for my life though...

Freddy faced better bowlers and is clearly a better batsman than LEE

I think freddy would be a great ist change bowler batting at number 8. Dont believe he is a good enough bat to be in the top 6 in any Test playing country apart from bangas, zimb and windies.

mal wrote:If you had a AU/EG combined team would =

HAYDEN
LANGER
PONTING
HUSSEY
pieterson
CLARKE
GILCHRIST
flintoff
WARNE
CLARK
MCGRATH

LEE 12th man


Might partially answer your question Punky.

I'd go slightly different to you on that hypothetical 12.

Instead of Stuart Clark I'd go with Matthew Hoggard. And, I'd include Brett Lee as an extra bowler and leave Michael Clarke out. I think your lineup is a bit light on for quick bowlers!

Paul Collingwood would be my 12th man.

WESTOZ thats a big call HOGGARD instead of CLARK.

mal wrote:WESTOZ thats a big call HOGGARD instead of CLARK.

That's lunacy.

Back to the question...

Flintoff is probably third tier.

First is Sobers.

Second is Miller, Botham, Imran, Kapil Dev, Hadlee etc.

Third is Flintoff, Pollock and so on.

I never saw Miller play, but I would think Garfield Sobers and Keith Miller are the only two players who would have held a regular Test spot as a top order batsman or as a front line bowler. Most other all-rounders are bowlers who batted in the middle order.

If anything, you would say perhaps Sobers and Miller were batting all rounders whereas Botham, Dev, Imran, etc are bowling all rounders.

Magpiespower wrote:

mal wrote:WESTOZ thats a big call HOGGARD instead of CLARK.

That's lunacy.

Back to the question...

Flintoff is probably third tier.

First is Sobers.

Second is Miller, Botham, Imran, Kapil Dev, Hadlee etc.

Third is Flintoff, Pollock and so on.

Good call magpiespower.

regards,

REB

Rik E Boy wrote:

Magpiespower wrote:

mal wrote:WESTOZ thats a big call HOGGARD instead of CLARK.

That's lunacy.

Back to the question...

Flintoff is probably third tier.

First is Sobers.

Second is Miller, Botham, Imran, Kapil Dev, Hadlee etc.

Third is Flintoff, Pollock and so on.

Good call magpiespower.

regards,

REB

Magpiespower + REB be gentle on Westoz he has only had 65 posts
Im prepared to give him the benefit of the doubt re: Hoggard + Clark
as he may be hungover from New Years Eve.
He will no doubt come to his senses and Post that he has made an error of judgement.
Or maybe he thought S. Clark was M Clarke ?