Fantasy - The Ashes (CricketWeb Fantasy comp 1289079585)

It wasn't that bad! Went for about 3.5, which is a bit expensive, and didn't get too many wickets. Bad series, but it was only 2 Tests

 

He only went for 3.5 though. It was a bad series, I'll admit that haha, but it wasn't a horror one. It wasn't as if he was carted all day and couldn't take a wicket. He was just ineffective.

 

I didn't say he did his job. All I said is it wasn't a 'horror' series that would greatly blemish his record.

 

Because it's a two Test sample size. You'd be stupid to judge someone on two Tests. In the third and four Tests of the last Ashes Swann averaged 93. No-one looks at this years series and says, wow, Swann sucked in those two Tests he really isn't that good and will suck against Australia.

I'm not saying he wasn't shit, all I'm saying it doesn't matter. It's his only bad series, and even then it wasn't horrific.

 

**** this, you don't listen to reason. I've explained it above, but you seem to only want an argument.

 

But he wasn't! Jesus. He was ineffective, and bowled badly the majority of the time, but he wasn't "really, really, really horrifically bad"!

I'm not trying to claim it "isn't that bad". I said he bowled shit ffs. I'm saying it wasn't the horrific series you claim it and want it to be.

 

Find someone else to argue with mate, you're as stubborn as they come.

 

Don't see how one can argue going at 3.5 is good. If you're arguing for a test bowler to be economical you want them to be ideally ~2.5.

 

I'm not arguing it to be good. I'm arguing that it isn't "horrific".

 

I thought you were arguing that the 70 average wasn't horrific due to a good eco rate.

 

The average is bad, really bad - I guess you could say horrific. My point, though, was that he wasn't carted around all day, and just bowled poorly and without luck. The series against the Windies wasn't his best, but it was hardly horrific. No-one looks back at that series and says how bad Siddle was.