-
Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.
You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.
*Official* Road to 2013 Ashes
- Thread starter GIMH
- Start date
LongHopCassidy
International Captain
Hard not to with those moobs tbh.
Ruckus
International Captain
Na sorry, Siddle himself said his form was **** in the tour matches. It's not just that he wasn't trying or something.
Also think the whole 'has loads of wickets and therefore is invaluable' argument is being way overstated. As someone else also said, better bowlers come along. Just because someone happens to have been given enough opportunities to get lots of wickets, doesn't mean they should be in the side permanently and immune to being replaced by better alternatives.
Fortunately the inevitable selection of Siddle isn't a shocker by any means, and I expect him to do at least a serviceable job. I just think it's a pity that we could have potentially gone in with a really threatening attack if we made some other selections. It's not every day you can do that, and I think it could be a mistake given we need to throw absolutely everything at England.
The real problem for me though, and much bigger than Siddle, is the very likely selection of Starc. If he happens to have an off day, then there will be a lot of pressure on Siddle and Pattinson to get it right. And that's not what you really want with one bowler who isn't in the best form and another who is extremely inexperienced, especially in English conditions. Another thing that concerns me is that if Starc does get it right, he could be fast-tracked into subsequent matches. I feel with his consistency issues that could just be a ticking time bomb, Mitchell Johnson style, where he could cost us a match.
Also think the whole 'has loads of wickets and therefore is invaluable' argument is being way overstated. As someone else also said, better bowlers come along. Just because someone happens to have been given enough opportunities to get lots of wickets, doesn't mean they should be in the side permanently and immune to being replaced by better alternatives.
Fortunately the inevitable selection of Siddle isn't a shocker by any means, and I expect him to do at least a serviceable job. I just think it's a pity that we could have potentially gone in with a really threatening attack if we made some other selections. It's not every day you can do that, and I think it could be a mistake given we need to throw absolutely everything at England.
The real problem for me though, and much bigger than Siddle, is the very likely selection of Starc. If he happens to have an off day, then there will be a lot of pressure on Siddle and Pattinson to get it right. And that's not what you really want with one bowler who isn't in the best form and another who is extremely inexperienced, especially in English conditions. Another thing that concerns me is that if Starc does get it right, he could be fast-tracked into subsequent matches. I feel with his consistency issues that could just be a ticking time bomb, Mitchell Johnson style, where he could cost us a match.
Cabinet96
Global Moderator
People who want Siddle in the side aren't just looking at the number of wickets though, FFS. There have been a couple of **** posts in the last page about how Dizzy and Johnson also have more wickets than anyone else in the squad, but it's completely missing the point. Since the last Ashes series, Siddle has been the only Australian bowler to be a constant threat. He may not have reached the same peaks as someone like Pattinson, or even Starc at times, but his performances in the last two years have surpassed all of them due to the consistency factor. No regular breakdowns and no sudden times when he just bowls a heap of garbage.
Australia are exactly the sort of side where someone like Siddle is so valuable, as there are so many hot and cold merchants and people who might breakdown. He wasn't even that good against South Africa, but the South African batsman never got away from Australia when Siddle was playing, even when Pattinson broke down in Adelaide. It wasn't until Perth, when Siddle was absent that South Africa got out of control.
Ruckus
International Captain
Well sorry, but I can't agree with that. People are making it out that Siddle is some kind of bowling machine. There have been plenty of times over the past two years where Siddle has either looked very innocuous, hasn't been able to get the ball to move at all (despite other bowlers being able to) and/or has got his lengths wrong. He's definitely a lot more consistent than someone like Johnson, and much improved since McDermott took him under his wing, but he isn't immune to having an off day. Think people are conflating his ability to 'run in hard all day' with being a constant threat, which he isn't.
Think the Siddle a lot of people are describing is basically the one against India in Australia. For me, his bowling was at a peak level there, and I don't think he has managed to bowl quite in the same way since then (has definitely lost some pace for one). In that series he was a constant threat, and it shows in his results: 3/63, 3/42, 3/55, 2/88, 3/42, 3/43, 5/49, 1/47. Taking a few wickets nearly every innings he bowled.
Last edited:
Cabinet96
Global Moderator
I don't actually agree that he'll be the main threat against Cook, either. He's had issues with left armers in the past, but they've all been pretty over the top bowlers who angle it in, making him play regularly and not giving any room for the cut. Zaheer and Boult are probably the best examples. Starc is much more round arm, thus doesn't create quite the same angle, and also has a tendency to drift onto the legs or drop short and wide more.
It's far too simple to just see that Cook has struggled against a couple of left armers and assume that all left armers will trouble him equally. Strauss and Cook both got troubled by someone like Zaheer, but never had any issues with Johnson, who may be a different type of bowler to Starc, but is similarly round arm.
It's far too simple to just see that Cook has struggled against a couple of left armers and assume that all left armers will trouble him equally. Strauss and Cook both got troubled by someone like Zaheer, but never had any issues with Johnson, who may be a different type of bowler to Starc, but is similarly round arm.
dermo
International Vice-Captain
benchmark00 fuming atm
Ruckus
International Captain
Oh yeah, a future 4 man pace attack with a fit Cummins and consistent Starc would be amazing. So much variation and potential match winners. As Tobias Funke would say, I'm afraid I prematurely shot my wad on what was supposed to be a dry run if you will.
uvelocity
International Coach
this is so good. adders has a history of ****ing up the rankings
Adders
Cricketer Of The Year
LOL, As much as it sucks this actually vindicates what I was trying to tell that knob FFLOG on the other forum ages ago. That there is an annual update where points get added or taken without any games being played......I thought it happened in August though. I was right damn it!!this is so good. adders has a history of ****ing up the rankings
Jeez, we're a mile off South Africa now.......was hoping some good results over the next 2 Ashes series would have us back in striking distance of them.