Cricket 3

[Multaniette]

Sidebottom is developing into a good lad.

Oram's innings was amazing.

[Jeor]

Warnie won't come back - the Australian selectors are too ruthless to do that, and it's so far away still. Unless the Australian team suffers a precipitous drop in form in that time and suffers some series sweeps or something, no one is going to seriously entertain it. You'd hope that in over a year's time they'd be able to find another serviceable spinner - and even if you don't, there's nothing that says you can't win without one. The West Indies managed it, after all.

England always have a great first team on paper but it always seems they're missing parts of the puzzle (in the last few years Flintoff, Vaughan, Jones). And while their batting is very solid with some good averages in there, apart from Pietersen it needs a bit more of a giddy-up. Flintoff provides that automatically when he's playing. If they had all their first-team players in one piece at the same time, England should be playing much better than they have been lately.

[Paxter]

[quote name='Jeor' post='1361682' date='May 20 2008, 19.07']You'd hope that in over a year's time they'd be able to find another serviceable spinner - and even if you don't, there's nothing that says you can't win without one. The West Indies managed it, after all.[/quote]

I agree that in Australia/New Zealand/England/West Indies/South Africa you don't necessarily need a great spinner to win.
But very few teams can win in the subcontinent without a quality spinner. Remember, some of the great West Indian sides of years gone by could rely on high-quality finger spinners like Lance Gibbs and Sonny Ramadin to help win them series in India.

And with all due respect to Lee, Johnson and Clark, the Aussie pace attack does not even approach the WI fast bowling line-up that boasted players like Croft, Garner, Marshall, Holding etc. Lee is the best of the current Aussie attack and his bowling average is approx. 30% higher than the 4 West Indian players mentioned. No comparison.

So I think it's pretty clear that Australia need to find a high-quality spinner in the near future if they want to continue to win series at the rate thay did during the McGrath/Warne era.

Whether Beau Casson is that spinner I just don't know. To be honest, I think his batting is about as good as his bowling sometimes. The jury is out.

[Hereward]

[quote name='Paxter' post='1361955' date='May 20 2008, 15.42']To be honest, I think his batting is about as good as his bowling sometimes.[/quote]

A bit like Steve Harmison.

[Rimmer]

[quote name='Hereward' post='1362043' date='May 20 2008, 11.35']A bit like Steve Harmison.[/quote]
Daniel Vettori too, though he finally had a good test with the ball just then ;)

[Paxter]

[quote name='Rimmer' post='1362741' date='May 21 2008, 06.26']Daniel Vettori too, though he finally had a good test with the ball just then ;)[/quote]

Yeah, I agree. I think Vettori has changed from a specialist spinner to a genuine all-rounder ever since he broke through with that test hundred against Pakistan back in the summer of 2003-04.

[Jeor]

[quote name='Paxter' post='1361955' date='May 21 2008, 00.42']And with all due respect to Lee, Johnson and Clark, the Aussie pace attack does not even approach the WI fast bowling line-up that boasted players like Croft, Garner, Marshall, Holding etc. Lee is the best of the current Aussie attack and his bowling average is approx. 30% higher than the 4 West Indian players mentioned. No comparison.[/quote]

As far as Lee's record and rather high average goes, I think we need to give him some leeway. His bowling average and economy rate are both quite high (much like Jeff Thomson's) but as far as pure wicket-taking goes, his strike rate of taking a wicket every 51.5 balls stacks up favourably compared to the great West Indian fast bowlers of the last thirty years. For comparison, Malcolm Marshall (46.7) and Colin Croft (49.3) were exceptional in this regard, but Lee is around the same as Holding (50.9), Garner (50.8), and better than Andy Roberts (55.1), Courtney Walsh (57.8) and Curtly Ambrose (54.5). For interest's sake, McGrath's strike rate was 51.9.

While economy and average are certainly part of the bowling equation and Lee doesn't do well at all compared to any of those other players just mentioned, his strike rate at least belongs in that group. And his high average and economy rate aren't completely caused by profligacy with the ball; this current era of high and fast scoring outpaces any other period.

For the record, I don't think Lee is as good a bowler as McGrath, or Ambrose, etc. I do think, however, that he is firmly entrenched on the next rung down and has the opportunity to move up. He's had too many bad series to be considered a bowling great, but if he improves his consistency in the next few years he might be worthy of the comparison.

As to the question of the spinner - yes, the subcontinent would be very tough without a frontline spinner. As it is the Australian team has part-time spin options of Clarke and Symonds, but neither of those are test-match standard (despite Michael Clarke's best figures of 6/9 in that India test). I think putting someone in like Casson would be a mistake, and the baptism of fire would push his development back. But we'll see. I'm not even sure when the next Indian tour is, actually.

[Paxter]

As far as Brett Lee is concerned, I agree that his strike rate is very comparable to some of the WI greats. But Brett Lee's record in the subcontinent is incredibly poor compared to say, Malcolm Marshall. Over his entire career Brett Lee has taken only 7 wickets in the subcontinent at the whopping average of 60. Two of those wickets were against Bangladesh. Marshall managed 71 wickets @ 23. I think that shows why I have concerns for the Aussie bowling attack and I don't think you can say things like 'the West Indies managed it after all.'

[quote name='Jeor' post='1363490' date='May 21 2008, 14.18']I think putting someone in like Casson would be a mistake, and the baptism of fire would push his development back.[/quote]

I'm not convinced about that. Warnie had an absolutely disastrous debut and it didn't seem to hamper his development.

[quote name='Jeor' post='1363490' date='May 21 2008, 14.18']I'm not even sure when the next Indian tour is, actually.[/quote]

The next tour to India is scheduled for September this year! If MacGill is around it should be OK for the Aussies. But he's not going to be around forever.

[Jeor]

[quote name='Paxter' post='1363508' date='May 21 2008, 17.03']As far as Brett Lee is concerned, I agree that his strike rate is very comparable to some of the WI greats. But Brett Lee's record in the subcontinent is incredibly poor compared to say, Malcolm Marshall. Over his entire career Brett Lee has taken only 7 wickets in the subcontinent at the whopping average of 60. Two of those wickets were against Bangladesh. Marshall managed 71 wickets @ 23. I think that shows why I have concerns for the Aussie bowling attack and I don't think you can say things like 'the West Indies managed it after all.'[/quote]

As I said before, Lee has had too many bad series to be considered a great bowler - the subcontinent has always been one of those, and he had a terrible Ashes series in England (2001 I think). Johnson and Clark haven't bowled in Test matches on the subcontinent and Lee hasn't performed well, so I agree with you the situation does look quite bad. The reason I brought the Windies into it was more a general thing about winning without a spinner, not specifically in India, where it will be admittedly tough going.

[quote]I'm not convinced about that. Warnie had an absolutely disastrous debut and it didn't seem to hamper his development.[/quote]

Just because Warne survived such a mauling doesn't mean it's necessarily recommended for other young bowlers. :)

As to the Test matches currently going on:
Windies vs Australia
Very impressed by the Windies here. I was concerned that this could be a surprise 'bogey' series for Australia, because the Windies have nothing to lose and Hayden has gone missing. They're also playing in the Windies, a touring location that traditionally throws up a few dodgy pitches. While it really depends on the circumstances each time, dodgy pitches usually give the underdogs a bit more of a sniff. Ponting came back to form and Australia managed to put up a good total, but they didn't manage to flatten the West Indies batting order - not for the first time (and I suspect not for the last time either) Chanderpaul has shown his class again and been the sole pillar in the West Indies batting order. Morton and Bravo made some handy contributions and Smith had a 30-odd, but everyone else was in single figures.

While Chanderpaul and Bravo can be expected to fight for every single innings, their top order has been patchy for years - Sarwan really needs to lead by example here, especially as he's one of the prime culprits (ability/potential is there, but not results). Anyway with those four blitzed wickets (Australia 4/17!) they have a good chance, although I think anything above 250 will be beyond them. For this series, they have the bowlers and the pitches to get Australia out for middling totals (especially sans Hayden) so it's more a matter of whether they can rack up some scores with the batting.

England vs NZ
Great to see a century from Ross Taylor - he may well become that strokemaking middle-order batsman that NZ have been lacking since Astle quit, and some helpful contributions from the lower order helped him along as well. One of the remaining three recognised batsmen for England (Pietersen, Bell, Collingwood) needs to respond in kind. I'd hazard my money on Pietersen to break out from his strange slump (although technically he made a century a couple of games ago in the grand scheme of things he hasn't quite looked himself) - he's still there on 20-odd, and it's a reasonably pacy wicket. Having said all this, he'll probably get out first ball next morning. ;)

[Daeric]

Well after that almighty batting collapse I really thought England were out of it, but that was a big collapse by NZ as well. I think its going to be extremely difficult total to chase but its worth a shot.

[williamjm]

[quote name='SirRots' post='1370374' date='May 25 2008, 20.44']Well after that almighty batting collapse I really thought England were out of it, but that was a big collapse by NZ as well. I think its going to be extremely difficult total to chase but its worth a shot.[/quote]

It's definitely an achievable target but England are going to have to bat better than their limp first-innings performance. They did bowl very well though in the second innings, particularly Panesar who deserved his best Test bowling figures after bouncing back from a mediocre first innings.

I've not seen any of the West Indies vs Australia match but I'm a bit surprised to see them being bowled out for only 167 - was it a difficult pitch or are Australia just not batting well?

[sh_wulff]

[quote name='williamjm' post='1370525' date='May 26 2008, 09.30']I've not seen any of the West Indies vs Australia match but I'm a bit surprised to see them being bowled out for only 167 - was it a difficult pitch or are Australia just not batting well?[/quote]
moat likely a combonation of the 2 :cheers:

[Stubby]

[quote name='sh_wulff' post='1370753' date='May 26 2008, 12.27']moat likely a combonation of the 2 :cheers:[/quote]

From the little bit that I watched - the pitch was doing evil things.

The Windies quicks had it going reverse after only 20 overs or something, largely due to the damage done to one side of the ball by the pitch.

[Hereward]

Decent win after the situation we got ourselves in, but our batting lineup is still looking very fragile.

[Xray the Enforcer]

I feel obligated to stump for Monty, just because. ;)

[Paddy]

[quote name='Xray the Enforcer' post='1371007' date='May 26 2008, 16.35']I feel obligated to stump for Monty, just because. ;)[/quote]
Spider's got your stump right there in your av :)

[Xray the Enforcer]

[quote name='Paddiano Ronaldo' post='1371017' date='May 26 2008, 11.41']Spider's got your stump right there in your av :)[/quote]

:lol:
Spider Jerusalem: no ferret.

[Hereward]

Monty is a god. A particularly loud and beardy god, and a god with significant shortcomings in the ground fielding sphere, but a god nonetheless.

[Daeric]

I think it was Angus Fraser on 5live extra who put the loss down to the Kiwies in the 2nd innings not being sure what the ball was going to do and instead of what Strauss did of prod prod prod hit the loose ball, instead tried to hit out and failed horribley.

[delete this account pls]

Australia won, on the back of a five wicket haul from Stu Clark.