ashes 2010

Roy00

New Member
Re: ashes 2010

not a big Siddle fan either

Bollinger has a lot more tricks

Siddle is ok as a hit the deck kind of guy..but its mostly mindless stuff
he can be useful with the right balance of attack, but Johnson and Siddle in the same side..NO WAY

if history is anything to go by though, these CA selectors are idiots and will go with the same combo as the last Ashes series
 

Boris

Active Member
Re: ashes 2010

Roy00;405858 said:
not a big Siddle fan either

Bollinger has a lot more tricks

Siddle is ok as a hit the deck kind of guy..but its mostly mindless stuff
he can be useful with the right balance of attack, but Johnson and Siddle in the same side..NO WAY

if history is anything to go by though, these CA selectors are idiots and will go with the same combo as the last Ashes series
I don't want to go on my usual Siddle ramble, but I think he will be alright in a few years time. He was selected too young on the back of one 8fa, not much else to really talk about. Given a couple of more years he can mature into a smart bowler, he's got the skills, but at the moment he seems to be trying to be an express bowler that just can't bowl fast enough. Plus watching his action makes me injure something just watching him.

He's got to also work on putting more than one spell together. He bowls one spell that is brilliant, troubles the batsmen ball after ball and gets a couple of wickets. The next spell he's bowling a metre wide of off and the batsmen are either leaving him easily or cashing in on it. That's why he generally has a good economy rate, because he never bowls a ball that actually has to be played at.

Couple of years, maybe, right now, no.
 

Roy00

New Member
Re: ashes 2010

Boris;405859 said:
I don't want to go on my usual Siddle ramble, but I think he will be alright in a few years time. He was selected too young on the back of one 8fa, not much else to really talk about. Given a couple of more years he can mature into a smart bowler, he's got the skills, but at the moment he seems to be trying to be an express bowler that just can't bowl fast enough. Plus watching his action makes me injure something just watching him.

He's got to also work on putting more than one spell together. He bowls one spell that is brilliant, troubles the batsmen ball after ball and gets a couple of wickets. The next spell he's bowling a metre wide of off and the batsmen are either leaving him easily or cashing in on it. That's why he generally has a good economy rate, because he never bowls a ball that actually has to be played at.

Couple of years, maybe, right now, no.
he's a bit like Merv Hughes, but not quite as good yet
 

Beeswax

Member
Re: ashes 2010

Roy00;405858 said:
not a big Siddle fan either

Bollinger has a lot more tricks

Siddle is ok as a hit the deck kind of guy..but its mostly mindless stuff
he can be useful with the right balance of attack, but Johnson and Siddle in the same side..NO WAY

if history is anything to go by though, these CA selectors are idiots and will go with the same combo as the last Ashes series
That's what Harris was suggesting in an article, but they can't leave out Bolly now. How can they? Siddle will have to watch unless MJ is unbelievably poor in India.
 
Re: ashes 2010

Beeswax;405864 said:
That's what Harris was suggesting in an article, but they can't leave out Bolly now. How can they? Siddle will have to watch unless MJ is unbelievably poor in India.
Nah there is no way they would leave out Bollinger and play Siddle instead.Would't make much sense would it?I mean they've made a few poor decisions but why would they leave a guy out who seam the ball around in aussie conditions verses windies and pakistan and look unplayable at times for a guy who has just come back from injury.There's a reason why Hilfenhaus , Siddle , Johnson as a bowling combo went for so many runs per over in the last ashes.Johnson and Siddle in our attack together now is a no no. Both don't know how to take wickets through building pressure just yet and both aint new ball bowlers.Siddle doesn't do enough now to suggest he should be given the new cherry.And Johnson struggles to make the batsman play enough to even think about throwing him the new ball.Agreed that Siddle isn't the finish article yet and isnt quite ready.In the next 2 years or so think he'll be a really special bowler though.Bollinger, Hilfy and a more consistent Johnson is the best attack right now now.Harris as back up.McKay seems to have fallen down in the pecking order behind George.
 

Beeswax

Member
Re: ashes 2010

Roy00;405872 said:
McKay's just a put it there kind of bowler. a run saver in limited overs but he's not a Test type bowler
McKay looks very dull and unthreatening. I don't understand how he took a lot of first class wickets.
 
Re: ashes 2010

Beeswax;405901 said:
McKay looks very dull and unthreatening. I don't understand how he took a lot of first class wickets.
I was thinking the same thing also.From the little i've soon of George , he seems alot better than Mckay.Both not express though.If George develops more tricks with the ball he'll be a really handful.He really generates good bounce, simple action , good control.If given an opportunity i think he wouldn't disgrace himself but he isn't quite ready yet imo.
 

Boris

Active Member
Re: ashes 2010

I think MacKay is a great back-up bowler. I like his bowling and the way he goes about his cricket, but I'm not sure he's international class. If the present is anything to go by, some back-up bowlers are going to get quite a few games, especially considering that if Lee and Clark were never injured most of us would barely have seen or heard of Siddle, Bollinger, Hilfenhaus, Harris, George, MacKay etc etc in the last couple of years. Injuries are going to increase, and the team with the greatest depth will come out on top more often than not.
 
Re: ashes 2010

Competition for fast bowling spots will be more interesting than it already is in the next 2 years or so.Copeland , Hazlewood, Cutting ,Starc all look very good already (especially Copeland and Hazlewood).
 

Beeswax

Member
Re: ashes 2010

Boris;405951 said:
I think MacKay is a great back-up bowler. I like his bowling and the way he goes about his cricket, but I'm not sure he's international class. If the present is anything to go by, some back-up bowlers are going to get quite a few games, especially considering that if Lee and Clark were never injured most of us would barely have seen or heard of Siddle, Bollinger, Hilfenhaus, Harris, George, MacKay etc etc in the last couple of years. Injuries are going to increase, and the team with the greatest depth will come out on top more often than not.
Not Hilfy, he's been touted as an international bowler for years. The others, I grant you.
 
Re: ashes 2010

Beeswax;406015 said:
Not Hilfy, he's been touted as an international bowler for years. The others, I grant you.
Yes there was quite a bit of attention on hilfy especially since he was a genuine swing bowler.Hilfy is now the most reliable bowler in this team.Bollinger has really come around, he's really improved.My pecking order in terms of pacers would be : 1.Hilfy 2.Bollinger 3.Johnson 4.Harris 5.Copeland 6.Siddle 7.George 8 Mckay
 

Boris

Active Member
Re: ashes 2010

Beeswax;406015 said:
Not Hilfy, he's been touted as an international bowler for years. The others, I grant you.
Yep, you're right. But then again he did play a couple of ODIs didn't he and got a bit of a flogging? I can't remember properly but he was back on the list a little bit for some reason.

Just goes to show it's not only talent, but also quite a lot of luck, that goes into playing for your country.
 

Beeswax

Member
Re: ashes 2010

Boris;406032 said:
Yep, you're right. But then again he did play a couple of ODIs didn't he and got a bit of a flogging? I can't remember properly but he was back on the list a little bit for some reason.

Just goes to show it's not only talent, but also quite a lot of luck, that goes into playing for your country.
In cricket, it is a hall of a lot of luck (including hard work and talent). Look at a sport like hockey, players can get subbed on and off ,the current Aus coach is more than willing to throw young players in at the deep end to get them experience, the term 'player rotation' appears to be his byword.

That doesn't happen in a sport like cricket at international level. It has a very conservative view of matches. Probably because of the style of the sport and the make-up of the international schedue. In test cricket each series' main value is in winning, not in planning for the future. Whereas a sport like hockey, they are planning towards the big tournaments so flexibility has to be built in.

And in ODI's, Punter's complaint about 'fringe players not getting enough practise' for the World Cup at state level is a case in point. The assumption is that the first 11 will play every match at international level unless injury intervenes.

This also shows that even though it is a team sport, it is a team sport of individual contests as certain players are seen as irreplaceable (like a tennis squad for the Davis Cup).
 

T-PainE

Member
Posted this in the other thread, tell me your thoughts.

1 - Hughes Never deserved to be dropped.
2 - Watson Arguably our most important player. Has become a force with both bat and ball
3 - Katich Now, Kat has the temperament to hold the entire innings together at 3, why not utilise that?
4 - Ponting With the pressure (somewhat) now off because he's not at 3, maybe he can get back to that killer 60+ average form
5 - Clarke Won't ever be dropped, I think he was a better fit at 5
6 - Khawaja Simply cannot be ignored anymore.... can he?
7 - Paine Has not put a foot wrong since coming in, the selectors will go with Haddin, though
8 - Johnson Still our most lethal bowler on his day. The trouble is finding that day
9 - Hilfenhaus The best genuine swing bowler in the country. A much needed player
10 - Bollinger I'm not his biggest fan, but our attack seems to look a better one when he plays
11 - O'Keefe/George Depending entirely on pitch and conditions, we've got the spinner there and a 4th paceman if needed. I liked the look of George in India. If he can find another 5 or so km's we have yet another fast bowling prospect.
 

D.K

Active Member
T-PainE. You say that Khawaja simply cannot be ignored? can you run through what he has done to have this tag slapped on him? I did notice he crunched a massive score the other week.

We don't want to push the youngsters too quick, look at how one JP Duminy is going now? Came on in a blaze of glory, bowlers found out his weaknesses and now he is getting murdered and rarely making a run.
 

T-PainE

Member
T-PainE. You say that Khawaja simply cannot be ignored? can you run through what he has done to have this tag slapped on him? I did notice he crunched a massive score the other week.

We don't want to push the youngsters too quick, look at how one JP Duminy is going now? Came on in a blaze of glory, bowlers found out his weaknesses and now he is getting murdered and rarely making a run.
Well he's a 23 y.o gem of a batsmen, who averages 53.90 currently for NSW. He just recorded a new high score of 214 (that massive score you referred to) He also made 85 on debut for NSW, showing that the "nerves" really don't get to him.

I agree they shouldn't be thrown in too early, but we've slipped to 5th in the rankings. How much further do we have to slide before the selectors realise change is needed?
 

Boris

Active Member
Well he's a 23 y.o gem of a batsmen, who averages 53.90 currently for NSW. He just recorded a new high score of 214 (that massive score you referred to) He also made 85 on debut for NSW, showing that the "nerves" really don't get to him.

I agree they shouldn't be thrown in too early, but we've slipped to 5th in the rankings. How much further do we have to slide before the selectors realise change is needed?
Selectors aren't throwing the youngsters in yet. Ponting, Hussey and Katich are going to serve their terms with the youngsters being groomed for the big game slowly by going on tours, playing the odd game and perhaps getting contracts next year.

You don't want to throw too many youngsters in at once, the selectors have a plan of how they are going to do it and I don't think they are being too worried about losses and slipping in the rankings, in a couple of years their long term plans should pay off.

The young players might be singing out, but just remember the extra time they spend scoring big domestically will be good for them and shows the selectors if they can trust their consistency. I agree with the current team at the moment and especially agree with the way the youngsters are tagging along with the big names.
 

joshie91

Member
Cricket Australia selectors are the single greatest tossbags in the world. Simple as that. They overlook run machines like Klinger, Hodge and in the past Blewett, Lehmann and Jamie Cox. I could sit here all night rattling off names, but i wont, cbf.
Unfortunately, our selection pool isnt as deep as it once was, and I heard somewhere there have been more changes in squads/match teams etc in the last 18 months than in the 3 years prior. this isnt good for team chemistry.
 

Ljp86

Well-Known Member
Staff member
Hodge and Blewett were given enough chances at international level but for the most part failed. Klinger has only started making runs for the past two seasons, Cox had a reasonable but not oustanding first-class career and Lehmann was probably harshly dealt with so I'll give you that one.

The majority of those players would have made the side but the unfortunate thing for them is that the Australian side of that time was just simply too good and that everyone did their thing for the most part which made dropping guys pretty hard. When a team goes undefeated for two streaks of about 15 or 16 games it's pretty hard to drop a bloke, particularly with the superstar players the team had at the time.

Right now though your argument does have some merit. There are a few guys who would be treading on thin ice or would already be dropped if other people were picking the side.
 
Top