Page 2 of 8 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 108

Thread: DIZZY - will he be dropped?

  1. #16
    Cricket Web Staff Member Richard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    2005
    Posts
    80,401
    As I say - I reckon Clarke, Hayden, Martyn and Langer are likely to play about as many decisive innings as Warne, Lee and Gillespie.
    And in the absence of any better alternatives - bowlers who can bat a bit are enough for me.
    Especially when you're in control of the pitches.
    RD
    Appreciating cricket's greatest legend ever - HD Bird...............Funniest post (intentionally) ever.....Runner-up.....Third.....Fourth
    (Accidental) founder of Twenty20 Is Boring Society. Click and post to sign-up.
    chris.hinton: h
    FRAZ: Arshad's are a long gone stories
    RIP Fardin Qayyumi (AKA "cricket player"; "Bob"), 1/11/1990-15/4/2006

  2. #17
    Request Your Custom Title Now! Mr Mxyzptlk's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    Trinidad and Tobago (Trinidad)
    Posts
    36,795
    Quote Originally Posted by Richard
    As I say - I reckon Clarke, Hayden, Martyn and Langer are likely to play about as many decisive innings as Warne, Lee and Gillespie.
    And in the absence of any better alternatives - bowlers who can bat a bit are enough for me.
    Especially when you're in control of the pitches.
    You're unbelievable! I dub this the unfortunate six-bowler theory.

    How in the world do you expect Australia to utilize 6 front-line bowlers in a Test innings against any opposition in this day and age? Even with 5 bowlers there tends to be one or two who don't get much of a bowl, and I'm wondering how exactly they justify their place if they bowl just a handful of overs.

    Unbelievable!
    Sreesanth said, "Next ball he was beaten and I said, 'is this the King Charles Lara? Who is this impostor, moving around nervously? I should have kept my mouth shut for the next ball - mind you, it was a length ball - Lara just pulled it over the church beyond the boundary! He is a true legend."


  3. #18
    International Regular oz_fan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Sydney, Australia
    Posts
    3,977
    Quote Originally Posted by Richard
    I don't think there's the slightest chance of it happening (nor, indeed, do I think MacGill will cause us many problems) but I think they could do worse.
    I don't think Langer is remotely likely to do much in Test cricket any more - I think he's finally been hit once too often, and it's not like his form in 2005\06 was anything to shout about. Yes, Jaques is undoubtedly a very, very good batsman but he's also far from a proven Test quantity.
    I do think we'll expose Hayden and Martyn again, and I think we've a good chance of doing the same to Gilchrist, but as I said a little while ago - it'd be darn foolish to be anything resembling certain of that. I certainly think if Clarke plays he'll do not-much.
    So yes, I think Australia could do much worse than
    Jacques
    Hayden
    Ponting
    Hussey
    Gilchrist
    Warne
    Lee
    Gillespie
    Clark
    McGrath
    MacGill
    As I say - I'm perfectly well aware it ain't gonna happen, but I think were it to do so, Australia would have a good chance.
    Certainly I think they'd be foolish to play less than 5 bowlers. I don't think most Australian batsmen are good enough against our bowlers, but McGrath, Gillespie, Clark, Lee, Warne on a green-seamer could be pretty lethal, too.
    So you want six bowlers when one of them (Warne) is going to bowl at least one third of the overs?

  4. #19
    U19 Cricketer sqwerty's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    sydney
    Posts
    452
    Quote Originally Posted by Richard
    I don't think there's the slightest chance of it happening (nor, indeed, do I think MacGill will cause us many problems) but I think they could do worse.
    I don't think Langer is remotely likely to do much in Test cricket any more - I think he's finally been hit once too often, and it's not like his form in 2005\06 was anything to shout about. Yes, Jaques is undoubtedly a very, very good batsman but he's also far from a proven Test quantity.
    I do think we'll expose Hayden and Martyn again, and I think we've a good chance of doing the same to Gilchrist, but as I said a little while ago - it'd be darn foolish to be anything resembling certain of that. I certainly think if Clarke plays he'll do not-much.
    So yes, I think Australia could do much worse than
    Jacques
    Hayden
    Ponting
    Hussey
    Gilchrist
    Warne
    Lee
    Gillespie
    Clark
    McGrath
    MacGill
    As I say - I'm perfectly well aware it ain't gonna happen, but I think were it to do so, Australia would have a good chance.
    Certainly I think they'd be foolish to play less than 5 bowlers. I don't think most Australian batsmen are good enough against our bowlers, but McGrath, Gillespie, Clark, Lee, Warne on a green-seamer could be pretty lethal, too.

    are you taking the p!ss?

    6 specialist bowlers?? You can only use 2 at a time......what's the point having 6?

    And as for Australian batsmen not being able to handle the poms attack - I hardly think they're going to fold and play as poorly as they did in England this time around on home soil.


  5. #20
    International Vice-Captain Linda's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Perth, West Aus
    Posts
    4,705
    Apart from anything else, Ponting can barely handle 4 bowlers properly. 6 is asking too much of the young fella.

    "I know I underperformed but after the past 18 months I thought I might have received more than four Test matches' grace."
    - DR Martyn.

    "Is there any way to make it longer?"
    Peter English on Twenty20


    Official Face of the v. hip 'Twenty20 Is Boring Society'

  6. #21
    Eternal Optimist / Cricket Web Staff Member GIMH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Jason Koumas is having a party
    Posts
    48,105
    Quote Originally Posted by Linda
    Apart from anything else, Ponting can barely handle 4 bowlers properly. 6 is asking too much of the young fella.
    Good point.

    Australia were found wanting with 4 bowlers last summer IMO, and it was where having an all-rounder, and the best one in the world at that, really paid off, tail comes in at the same point but you have one extra bowler. But I think it's obvious that Australia don't have an all-rounder good enough to help them beat England. You don't want Warne coming in at 7 do you? It's all well and good against Bangladesh, but you're facing the best attack in the world now! So I think the Aussies will have to go with 4 bowlers, but whatever they do I suspect they will be a little short either way.
    "It was an easy decision to sign. I could have gone elsewhere, I had calls, but it never entered my mind it's not about the money."
    Jason Koumas

    SWA

    RIP Craigos. A true CW legend. You will be missed.

  7. #22
    Cricket Web Owner James's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Sydney, Australia
    Posts
    23,832
    Quote Originally Posted by sqwerty
    are you taking the p!ss?

    6 specialist bowlers?? You can only use 2 at a time......what's the point having 6?

    And as for Australian batsmen not being able to handle the poms attack - I hardly think they're going to fold and play as poorly as they did in England this time around on home soil.
    The filter is there for a reason!

  8. #23
    U19 Captain Great Birtannia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    687
    My preferred Ashes Line up at this point in time would be:

    Hayden
    Langer
    Ponting
    Jaques (He only moved to open to get a game at NSW!!!)
    Hussey
    Gilchrist
    Lee
    Gillespie
    Warne
    MacGill
    McGrath

    Playing Martyn and Clarke is a waste of time. Neither earned their recall to the team and both will fail again against the English attack. We need to take the risk and play 5 bowlers. Symonds failed and Watson wasn't given a proper run and with all the injuries it is too late for him this time around, forget an allrounder completely.

    To that end, the Gabba pitch will be far more responsive, and generally I think, in Australian conditions, Clark has his nose in front of Dizzy
    Disagree.

    Clark has never really excelled in FC cricket in Australia. Remove the last 12 months of Gillespie's test career and it is faultless especially considering the amount of injuries he has had to overcome. He has went back to Pura Cup cricket and done all that he could possibly have been asked to. The selectors would be regretting not taking him to SA ahead of Kaspa, that would have been a much better measuring stick to see where he is at. As long as he averages under 30 for Yorkshire he is a lock for the side IMO.
    Last edited by Great Birtannia; 21-04-2006 at 11:52 AM.

  9. #24
    Hall of Fame Member aussie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Cricket
    Posts
    16,845
    . You got to be mad, there is no way Australia will or should play 6 BOWLERS in the ashes.

    Quote Originally Posted by Richard
    I don't think there's the slightest chance of it happening (nor, indeed, do
    I think MacGill will cause us many problems) but I think they could do worse.
    Why? England showed in the Ashes and in Pakistan/India that they still aren't good againts spin especially leg-spinners, so if conditions are helpul you would be foolish to say MacGill wouldn't cause England many problems.

    Quote Originally Posted by Richard
    I don't think Langer is remotely likely to do much in Test cricket any more - I think he's finally been hit once too often, and it's not like his form in 2005\06 was anything to shout about. Yes, Jaques is undoubtedly a very, very good batsman but he's also far from a proven Test quantity.
    Langer even though he was hit ONCE still looked in decent form. He may not have had the big socres since the ashes but thats simply because of the injuries he had. Its not as if he looked as if he was losing it at all. I'm very sure if he had an injury free summer, Langer would have had big runs.

    Quote Originally Posted by Richard
    I do think we'll expose Hayden and Martyn again, and I think we've a good chance of doing the same to Gilchrist, but as I said a little while ago - it'd be darn foolish to be anything resembling certain of that. I certainly think if Clarke plays he'll do not-much..
    I'd give you Martyn & Clark (more so) but not Hayden judging on his current batting form. I think it would be tempting fate to judge FOR CERTAIN how Gilly would do, i think he will get one or two big innings though.

    Quote Originally Posted by Richard
    So yes, I think Australia could do much worse than
    Jacques
    Hayden
    Ponting
    Hussey
    Gilchrist
    Warne
    Lee
    Gillespie
    Clark
    McGrath
    MacGill.
    The idea of picking 6 bowlers in modern day cricket yet alone for the ashes is absolutely absurd. How is a captain suppose to utilize all those bowlers in a match?

    Quote Originally Posted by Richard
    As I say - I'm perfectly well aware it ain't gonna happen, but I think were it to do so, Australia would have a good chance.
    Certainly I think they'd be foolish to play less than 5 bowlers. I don't think most Australian batsmen are good enough against our bowlers, but McGrath, Gillespie, Clark, Lee, Warne on a green-seamer could be pretty lethal, too.
    This sounds a bit more realistic, but unlikely to happen since Australia need the batting equally as much, so more likely Australia will play 6 bats instead of 5 bowlers.

    As i just mentioned the only batsmen in the side that may struggle againts England's pace attack are Martyn, Clarke & Gilly. The rest i'm confindent of doing well

  10. #25
    Hall of Fame Member aussie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Cricket
    Posts
    16,845
    Quote Originally Posted by Great Birtannia
    Playing Martyn and Clarke is a waste of time. Neither earned their recall to the team and both will fail again against the English attack.
    A bit of a over-reaction here i think. Martyn is going down a bit i wont doubt that, but i dont think he will be an absolute waste of time if he plays in the ashes. We MUST not forget that in the ashes Martyn was really worked out by the English bowlers a la Hayden & Gilchrist, he suffered from a lot of bad decision and bad shots. IMO if luck can be on his side this time his experience will be vital.

    Clark on the other hand, may fail yes but there is a chance he can make runs. After all he wasn't exactly hopeless during the ashes. All he needs to his adapt better shot selection and he'll be ok. If not Brad Hodge is another option.

    Quote Originally Posted by Great Birtannia
    We need to take the risk and play 5 bowlers. Symonds failed and Watson wasn't given a proper run and with all the injuries it is too late for him this time around, forget an allrounder completely.
    The 5 bowlers policy is an option but as i just mentioned, playing the 6 batsmen is equally as important as that. In Australia's dominace the 4 bowler policy was very successful, in the ashes Australia missed that. Warne was the only consistent treat after lord's to England.

    Its a fact that if McGrath could have played 5 test fully fit along with Warne bowling so well the ashes would have still been with Australia. Englands batting has its question marks so IMO the rejuvenated 4-man attack of McGrath/Lee/Gillespie/Warne will be enough to beat England.

    Also for now until the ashes is over the ``all-rounder`` option should be put on hold. But afterwards it will be definately needed with McGrath & Warne nearing retirement, the need for all-rounder will be vital. Shane Watson is the man wo has showed that promise at FC level so hopefully he will able to fill that role in the near future.


    Quote Originally Posted by Great Birtannia
    As long as he averages under 30 for Yorkshire he is a lock for the side IMO.
    This is for damn sure..

  11. #26
    Cricket Web Staff Member Richard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    2005
    Posts
    80,401
    Quote Originally Posted by Great Birtannia
    My preferred Ashes Line up at this point in time would be:

    Hayden
    Langer
    Just not gonna happen.
    Since the first time they opened together, Langer has ALWAYS faced first.

  12. #27
    Cricket Web Staff Member Richard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    2005
    Posts
    80,401
    Quote Originally Posted by Mr Mxyzptlk
    You're unbelievable! I dub this the unfortunate six-bowler theory.

    How in the world do you expect Australia to utilize 6 front-line bowlers in a Test innings against any opposition in this day and age? Even with 5 bowlers there tends to be one or two who don't get much of a bowl, and I'm wondering how exactly they justify their place if they bowl just a handful of overs.

    Unbelievable!
    You think after the Gillespie-Kasprowcz horror-story that many Australians wouldn't have been greatful for 6 bowlers last summer?
    As I said, though - I wasn't being entirely serious.

  13. #28
    Cricket Web Staff Member Richard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    2005
    Posts
    80,401
    Quote Originally Posted by oz_fan
    So you want six bowlers when one of them (Warne) is going to bowl at least one third of the overs?
    You know that for fact, do you?

  14. #29
    Cricket Web Staff Member Richard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    2005
    Posts
    80,401
    Quote Originally Posted by sqwerty
    And as for Australian batsmen not being able to handle the poms attack - I hardly think they're going to fold and play as poorly as they did in England this time around on home soil.
    I hardly think they're not.
    There's no reason to presume it's less likely than more.

  15. #30
    Cricket Web Staff Member Richard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    2005
    Posts
    80,401
    Quote Originally Posted by GeraintIsMyHero
    Good point.

    Australia were found wanting with 4 bowlers last summer IMO, and it was where having an all-rounder, and the best one in the world at that, really paid off, tail comes in at the same point but you have one extra bowler. But I think it's obvious that Australia don't have an all-rounder good enough to help them beat England. You don't want Warne coming in at 7 do you? It's all well and good against Bangladesh, but you're facing the best attack in the world now! So I think the Aussies will have to go with 4 bowlers, but whatever they do I suspect they will be a little short either way.
    As I say - the fact that they're facing the best attack in The World (hopefully, of course) means that batsmen and bowlers-who-bat are not as different as otherwise.

Page 2 of 8 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast


Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. **Official** Australia in Bangladesh
    By James in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 2277
    Last Post: 01-05-2006, 02:40 AM
  2. Martyn dropped from test squad
    By FaaipDeOiad in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 206
    Last Post: 24-09-2005, 05:41 PM
  3. Breaking News - Ganguly Dropped ???
    By SJS in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 18
    Last Post: 28-10-2004, 12:44 AM
  4. *Official* Zimbabwe in Australia Thread
    By Langeveldt in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 408
    Last Post: 25-09-2004, 08:53 PM
  5. MARK WAUGH DROPPED!!!!!
    By Top_Cat in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 23
    Last Post: 30-10-2002, 05:23 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •