Kyle v Keegan

[eugene]

I agree with hhm that Meth offers little with the bat, I think many on this forum have been mistaking him for an allrounder. His batting actually seemed of a better standard when he first emerged on the scene than it is now - he does have an ODI half-century against the WI I think. But in more recent times he has doen nothing with the bat.

Hhm, I understand the desire to have 7 batsmen plus a seaming allrounder (presumably Chigs?) but the prospect of only only three frontline bowlers plus Chigs worries me. I fear such a move would pretty much ensure we would never bowl the opposition out and the best result we could ever hope for would be a draw achieved by our batsmen. 6 batsmen plus an allrounder (seamer or otherwise) should be expected to get the job done on the batting front. It is a big ask for 3 full time bowlers plus Chigs to take 20 wickets however.

[FlowerPower]

Hmmm and Eugene...you will note my argument wasnt really based on Meth, it was more an "...and.. " mine was based on what Meth has to offer as a bowler, point taken, (and agreed) its not a shoot off between Jarvis the batsman and Meth the batsmen, just on the bowling, I'd say I still feel Meth would have offered a bit more, based on history, but maybe lets see how Jarvis goes...

[eugene]

I think Meth definately offers more than Jarvis with the bat, that isn't saying much though.

[FlowerPower]

Meth is considerably better than Jarvis with the bat. He knocked up a sixty odd in the Logan Cup final. He is not a tes No. 7, but he'd be better at 8 or 9 than our options in this test.

Agree with you number 8, up and no higher, but batting aside, I fancy his wicket taking, swing, discipline, over the raw pace of Jarvis, UNTIL Jarvis proves himself in FC...

[Kriterion_BD]

and THAT is why you pick a genuine, even if raw, pacer over a 72 mph swing bowler like Meth!

[FlowerPower]

You see l wouldn't mind Jarvis going at 4 an over if he was taking wickets but as it stands l'd rather Meth who'd give both wickets and control..having said that Kyle has been unfortunate.

[brmtaylor.com admin]

You see l would mind Jarvis going at 4 an over if he was taking wickets but as it stands l'd rather Meth who'd give both wickets and control..having said that Kyle has been unfortunate.

Yeah, he's produced 3 wicket taking balls. He looked really good yesterday I thought, he's looked a bit slower and less accurate today though.

[wicor]

Can someone please explain the fuss about Meth to me? I honestly think the guy is very very average. He might take wickets in Zimbabwe cricket but he looks way below international status to me. Granted I've not seen a lot of him but even judging by his stats the guys only average. Way behind the likes of Mpofu, Rainsford and S Masakadza, Vitori, Chatara and Jarvis have bags of potential so can't see why he should be around the test squad. To me he's at the level of Mupariwa

[FlowerPower]

Not to say he is a McGrath or Clark but he is that sort of bowler not express or terifying but controlled and economical not to mention moving it both ways AND still takes pleanty wickets doing the containing role....hence this fuss of his bring overlooked for Keegan- good prospect ...but not as good as Meth yet...both good in their own way...but Meth is ahead imo...hence the fuss.

[FlowerPower]

Just to add and clarify l rate Jarvis but l think he 1. unfairly beat Meth to the green cap and 2. is yet to do the yards and prove the potential ...only 6 FC matches...but l rate him and he is a prospect but not ahead of Meth.