30 Mar 2008 12:35:02
Maxx
Ian Bell

Superb, fluent innings in the last Test against NZ. Great to watch.

Does his batting style remind anyone else of Darryl Cullinan?


30 Mar 2008 22:40:44
Mike Holmans
Re: Ian Bell

On Sun, 30 Mar 2008 12:35:02 -0700 (PDT), Maxx
<scary@executivemail.co.za > tapped the keyboard and brought forth:

>Superb, fluent innings in the last Test against NZ. Great to watch.
>
>Does his batting style remind anyone else of Darryl Cullinan?

Perhaps to begin with, but Bell learned to cope with Shane Warne
fairly quickly.

Cheers,

Mike

--


30 Mar 2008 15:16:56
Maxx
Re: Ian Bell

On Mar 30, 11:40=A0pm, Mike Holmans <m...@jackalope.demon.co.uk > wrote:
> On Sun, 30 Mar 2008 12:35:02 -0700 (PDT), Maxx
> <sc...@executivemail.co.za> tapped the keyboard and brought forth:
>
> >Superb, fluent innings in the last Test against NZ. =A0Great to watch.
>
> >Does his batting style remind anyone else of Darryl Cullinan?
>
> Perhaps to begin with, but Bell learned to cope with Shane Warne
> fairly quickly.

No serioulsy Mike - Bell in good flow reminded me alot of Cullinan's
actual technical batting style in looks and class, which is quite the
compliment as DC was a joy to watch. Cullinan did play some against
opposition besides Oz and Warne remember.


31 Mar 2008 00:01:34
Mike Holmans
Re: Ian Bell

On Sun, 30 Mar 2008 15:16:56 -0700 (PDT), Maxx
<scary@executivemail.co.za > tapped the keyboard and brought forth:

>On Mar 30, 11:40 pm, Mike Holmans <m...@jackalope.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>> On Sun, 30 Mar 2008 12:35:02 -0700 (PDT), Maxx
>> <sc...@executivemail.co.za> tapped the keyboard and brought forth:
>>
>> >Superb, fluent innings in the last Test against NZ.  Great to watch.
>>
>> >Does his batting style remind anyone else of Darryl Cullinan?
>>
>> Perhaps to begin with, but Bell learned to cope with Shane Warne
>> fairly quickly.
>
>No serioulsy Mike - Bell in good flow reminded me alot of Cullinan's
>actual technical batting style in looks and class, which is quite the
>compliment as DC was a joy to watch. Cullinan did play some against
>opposition besides Oz and Warne remember.

Yes, I know, but it was impossible to resist the straight line you had
provided.

I wondered why I hadn't thought of Cullinan when you posted, and
looking back at the scorecards I got an inkling. He scored over 1000
runs against England at an average of 49, but it was in Stephen
Fleming style, usually reaching 30 and hardly ever going past 70.
Looking at his record against other countries, he has an impressive
five tons against SL but with a highest of only 114*, and the rest
were dismissed: I'd sort of wondered whether he hadn't gone on because
SA had declared on 568-5 as soon as he reached three figures, but no.

I suppose I didn't see him bat long enough often enough for him to
imprint his style on my memory. In my experience, he played attractive
cameos and then got out when he was really starting to fly. He was one
of those guys who turned out not to be quite as wonderful as the hype
that preceded him, and there's nothing like being slightly
disappointing if you want to really, really piss people off. Having
been promised gold, even excellently-crafted silverware just won't
satisfy.

Of course, now that you bring up the comparison, I can't help feeling
that the air of faint disappointment which surrounds Cullinan could be
eminently suitable for Bell as time goes on. Mark Waugh escaped it by
playing for a team which won all the time, but he was another who
looked fantastic for an hour and a half and always left you wanting
more.

Cheers,

Mike

--


31 Mar 2008 12:13:58
Andrew Dunford
Re: Ian Bell


"Mike Holmans" <mike@jackalope.demon.co.uk > wrote in message
news:mp50v3171vk8h493n1ak3dh4pn3tc3r5fe@4ax.com...
> On Sun, 30 Mar 2008 15:16:56 -0700 (PDT), Maxx
> <scary@executivemail.co.za> tapped the keyboard and brought forth:
>
>>On Mar 30, 11:40 pm, Mike Holmans <m...@jackalope.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>> On Sun, 30 Mar 2008 12:35:02 -0700 (PDT), Maxx
>>> <sc...@executivemail.co.za> tapped the keyboard and brought forth:
>>>
>>> >Superb, fluent innings in the last Test against NZ. Great to watch.
>>>
>>> >Does his batting style remind anyone else of Darryl Cullinan?
>>>
>>> Perhaps to begin with, but Bell learned to cope with Shane Warne
>>> fairly quickly.
>>
>>No serioulsy Mike - Bell in good flow reminded me alot of Cullinan's
>>actual technical batting style in looks and class, which is quite the
>>compliment as DC was a joy to watch. Cullinan did play some against
>>opposition besides Oz and Warne remember.
>
> Yes, I know, but it was impossible to resist the straight line you had
> provided.
>
> I wondered why I hadn't thought of Cullinan when you posted, and
> looking back at the scorecards I got an inkling. He scored over 1000
> runs against England at an average of 49, but it was in Stephen
> Fleming style, usually reaching 30 and hardly ever going past 70.
> Looking at his record against other countries, he has an impressive
> five tons against SL but with a highest of only 114*, and the rest
> were dismissed: I'd sort of wondered whether he hadn't gone on because
> SA had declared on 568-5 as soon as he reached three figures, but no.
>
> I suppose I didn't see him bat long enough often enough for him to
> imprint his style on my memory. In my experience, he played attractive
> cameos and then got out when he was really starting to fly. He was one
> of those guys who turned out not to be quite as wonderful as the hype
> that preceded him, and there's nothing like being slightly
> disappointing if you want to really, really piss people off. Having
> been promised gold, even excellently-crafted silverware just won't
> satisfy.
>
> Of course, now that you bring up the comparison, I can't help feeling
> that the air of faint disappointment which surrounds Cullinan could be
> eminently suitable for Bell as time goes on. Mark Waugh escaped it by
> playing for a team which won all the time, but he was another who
> looked fantastic for an hour and a half and always left you wanting
> more.

Cullinan's eleven-hour magnum opus at Eden Park in 1998/99 may have been
crafted on a dead pitch held together with glue, but nevertheless it was an
innings it was impossible to imagine Mark Waugh playing.

Andrew




31 Mar 2008 13:13:15
Maxx
Re: Ian Bell

On Mar 31, 1:01=A0am, Mike Holmans <m...@jackalope.demon.co.uk > wrote:
> On Sun, 30 Mar 2008 15:16:56 -0700 (PDT), Maxx
> <sc...@executivemail.co.za> tapped the keyboard and brought forth:
>
> >On Mar 30, 11:40=A0pm, Mike Holmans <m...@jackalope.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> >> On Sun, 30 Mar 2008 12:35:02 -0700 (PDT), Maxx
> >> <sc...@executivemail.co.za> tapped the keyboard and brought forth:
>
> >> >Superb, fluent innings in the last Test against NZ. =A0Great to watch.=

>
> >> >Does his batting style remind anyone else of Darryl Cullinan?
>
> >> Perhaps to begin with, but Bell learned to cope with Shane Warne
> >> fairly quickly.
>
> >No serioulsy Mike - Bell in good flow reminded me alot of Cullinan's
> >actual technical batting style in looks and class, which is quite the
> >compliment as DC was a joy to watch. =A0 Cullinan did play some against
> >opposition besides Oz and Warne remember.
>
> Yes, I know, but it was impossible to resist the straight line you had
> provided.
>
> I wondered why I hadn't thought of Cullinan when you posted, and
> looking back at the scorecards I got an inkling. He scored over 1000
> runs against England at an average of 49, but it was in Stephen
> Fleming style, usually reaching 30 and hardly ever going past 70.
> Looking at his record against other countries, he has an impressive
> five tons against SL but with a highest of only 114*, and the rest
> were dismissed: I'd sort of wondered whether he hadn't gone on because
> SA had declared on 568-5 as soon as he reached three figures, but no.
>
> I suppose I didn't see him bat long enough often enough for him to
> imprint his style on my memory. In my experience, he played attractive
> cameos and then got out when he was really starting to fly. He was one
> of those guys who turned out not to be quite as wonderful as the hype
> that preceded him, and there's nothing like being slightly
> disappointing if you want to really, really piss people off. Having
> been promised gold, even excellently-crafted silverware just won't
> satisfy.
>
> Of course, now that you bring up the comparison, I can't help feeling
> that the air of faint disappointment which surrounds Cullinan could be
> eminently suitable for Bell as time goes on. Mark Waugh escaped it by
> playing for a team which won all the time, but he was another who
> looked fantastic for an hour and a half and always left you wanting
> more.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Mike
>
> --

Actually Cullinan was rather consistent and productive, especially in
the second half of his career - averaging over 50 and scoring more
100's than 50's. His overall conversion rate of 14 hundreds and 20
fifties is not bad at all. So comparing him to Fleming is a bit
off.

His most famous innings against England was probably the 94 he scored
at the Oval in 1994 when Devon Malcolm demolished SA with 9/57 -
hardly all twinkle and out there.

Anyway, you analysing too much Mike - I simply meant the mechanics and
"looks" of his batting - even if it's just for 10 balls. I've noticed
it for a while.