What's Your Aussie Ashes Squad?

[Matt79]

Ah, cool. So that's actually Bowie in the picture?

EDIT: Oh, I see that that's not the actual cover, but obviously a homage. It's been an intense journey of self-discovery, these last few minutes.

 

[BoyBrumby]

EDIT: Btw Brumby, been wanting to ask you, what the hell is that avatar? I mean, I get that he's holding the Ashes urn, but what's with the weirdo harlequin?

It's a photo shop (not my own, I hasten to add) of Harmison & Dave Bowie circa Ashes To Ashes (hence my current location). Thought it was nicely done so swiped it.

EDIT: as saggers said, in fact...

 

[Matt79]

Now that I know what the story is, its no longer weirding me out and I can say "that's pretty cool"

 

[pasag]

 

[Jakester1288]

A bit shocked at all the Hilfenhaus love from the Australian Public. Has a bowler with a Test Average over 52 ever been so loved?!

Yeah most overrated player of all time.

I've never particularly liked or rated him, never saw what all the fuss was about.

 

[Burgey]

I've never particularly liked or rated him, never saw what all the fuss was about.

Post-2005, if you could swing the ball, you got a lotta love here.

 

[Richard]

I think Hilfenhaus seems to have a bit of polarised syndrome - there are (and have been for a while) some people talking him up as the next superman seamer; there also seem to be some people giving him far more stick than a mere three bad Tests (and a few bad ODIs, a game-form he doesn't seem particularly suited to) warrants.

Hardly anyone seems to talk of him as what, I consider, he is - a fine prospect who might well go on to be a very good, though not outstanding, Test bowler in the mould of a Hawke, McKenzie, McDermott, Gillespie or (relatively briefly in his case) Hughes.

He's never going to be a Lindwall, Davidson, Lillee or McGrath, but I think he could easily be far better than the likes of Brett Lee and certainly should play plenty of Test cricket.

 

[Noble One]

Major luxury that Ben Hilfenhaus and Doug Bollinger cannot make the first XI. Both are very handy cricketers, and given the correct opportunities would make more than capable test bowlers.

I have always enjoyed the approach Hilfenhaus has to his bowling. Pitch the ball up, swing the ball away, and bowl at good pace. Keeps things incredibly simple, which is why he has had such good success at domestic level. Don't believe you can read too much into his averages in South Africa, I believe he bowled better than that average suggests. Hilfenhaus never looked out of place on the test scene. His fortunes and respect would have been a complete reversal had two or three of those play and miss deliveries found an edge.

 

[pasag]

Major luxury that Ben Hilfenhaus and Doug Bollinger cannot make the first XI. Both are very handy cricketers, and given the correct opportunities would make more than capable test bowlers.

I have always enjoyed the approach Hilfenhaus has to his bowling. Pitch the ball up, swing the ball away, and bowl at good pace. Keeps things incredibly simple, which is why he has had such good success at domestic level. Don't believe you can read too much into his averages in South Africa, I believe he bowled better than that average suggests. Hilfenhaus never looked out of place on the test scene. His fortunes and respect would have been a complete reversal had two or three of those play and miss deliveries found an edge.

But that's the whole problem, it's so simple that it doesn't trouble the batsmen. They know that all they have to do is ignore it and they'll be fine. He looked amazing in helpful conditions in SA but he didn't take many wickets because the batsmen realised what to do almost immediately.

 

[Noble One]

But that's the whole problem, it's so simple that it doesn't trouble the batsmen. They know that all they have to do is ignore it and they'll be fine. He looked amazing in helpful conditions in SA but he didn't take many wickets because the batsmen realised what to do almost immediately.

Agree entirely. The South African batsmen played him incredibly well, and essentially worked his style out quickly. Regardless, Hilfenhaus drew numerous play and misses from the South African batsman. An output of 12/13 wickets from that South African series would have been seen as a massive achievement for a debutant. With more luck he could have achieved that.

Some of the best bowling performances from Hilfenhaus for Tasmania have been when the ball isn't swinging a mile. Allows him to pitch the ball on off, and threaten with more deliveries.

 

[Uppercut]

If Hilfenhaus had taken 7 wickets @52 in a series that Australia lost he would have been quite rightly heavily criticised for his below-par performance.

 

[howardj]

For all the gnashing of teeth of Symonds' ommission, the guy has made 50 in just two of his last 11 Test innings. Add that stat to the fact he's an incorrigible troublemaker, and I'm glad the selectors have cut ties with him in the longer form.

 

[Son Of Coco]

For all the gnashing of teeth of Symonds' ommission, the guy has made 50 in just two of his last 11 Test innings. Add that stat to the fact he's an incorrigible troublemaker, and I'm glad the selectors have cut ties with him in the longer form.

Yeah, it seems people are willing to give him a lot of credit for performances that are a fair way in the past now.

 

[Matt79]

Re Hilfy, I think part of the love is that he got picked for a T20 IIRC that had a massive televised audience and looked absolutely fantastic - was moving the ball at right angles through the air. Would have been the first time many fans had seen him and such first impression stick. His average performance in SA by contrast wasn't on free-to-air tv here, so not many people saw it.

 

[Nate]

But that's the whole problem, it's so simple that it doesn't trouble the batsmen. They know that all they have to do is ignore it and they'll be fine. He looked amazing in helpful conditions in SA but he didn't take many wickets because the batsmen realised what to do almost immediately.

Exactly.

Agree entirely. The South African batsmen played him incredibly well, and essentially worked his style out quickly. Regardless, Hilfenhaus drew numerous play and misses from the South African batsman. An output of 12/13 wickets from that South African series would have been seen as a massive achievement for a debutant. With more luck he could have achieved that.

But he didn't. Every bowler drew some play and misses. Hilfenhaus was no more or less lucky than any bowler in that series. As others have said, he swings it straight from the hand, and after the First Test, the batsmen realised immediately to leave the majority of his deliveries, and then wait for the inevitable bad ball when he digs it in out of frustration.

He had a strike-rate over 100 frbs! That's the same as Marcus North's!

 

[Jakester1288]

I have always enjoyed the approach Hilfenhaus has to his bowling. Pitch the ball up, swing the ball away, and bowl at good pace.

From the 10-20 overs I saw from him on streams, it seemed to me as though he was pitching it short, and occasionally wide, and being belted to the boundary. Also, I don't understand why the selectors have him so many ODI's in our limited overs summer a few months ago, but he was dreadful there. I do know that ODI's isn't his best format though, and he has big wraps in the longer form, but I haven't seen anything to suggest he is good enough at test level yet.