Fringe Aussie fringe Players who would excel in other teams..

[Nate]

but just because you happen to have a good side, it doesnt mean that players who've never played test cricket(and the ones who have have been miserable failures anyways) would succeed for other teams. IMO a similar case could be made for england. how many sides in the world wouldnt have key, bell, collingwood, pieterson etc in their side?
IMO there are only 3 world class players who arent playing for australia ATM -katich, bevan and kasparowicz.

1) Bell probably, Key and Collingwood maybe, Pieterson - i dont think so.

2) Since when doesnt Kasper play for Aus? He was rested for one game to let MacGill play on a spin-friendly ground. He`ll be back in the team for NZ no doubt.

 

[Nate]

Oh yes, and in answer to the thread question - Bracken.

 

[Nate]

I think a few of us have to be fair.

AMEN!

 

[Nate]

and Zinzan, do not be put off by the force that is TEC. keep posting mate, good stuff =)

 

[tooextracool]

1) Bell probably, Key and Collingwood maybe, Pieterson - i dont think so..

and how much of pieterson have you seen? virtually nothing. but IMO if people are going to put players like hussey and even worse symonds then surely pieterson would be in there.

2) Since when doesnt Kasper play for Aus? He was rested for one game to let MacGill play on a spin-friendly ground. He`ll be back in the team for NZ no doubt.

he was dropped from the last ODI against NZ, and i wouldnt be surprised if the aussie selectors decide for unknown reasons to pick lee ahead of kaspa for their next test, probably on the basis of we need someone who can bowl 150k.

 

[Nate]

and how much of pieterson have you seen? virtually nothing. but IMO if people are going to put players like hussey and even worse symonds then surely pieterson would be in there.



he was dropped from the last ODI against NZ, and i wouldnt be surprised if the aussie selectors decide for unknown reasons to pick lee ahead of kaspa for their next test, probably on the basis of we need someone who can bowl 150k.

1) yea fair enough, but just because people put their "bad choices" in doesnt make yours right as well.

2) meh, Lee has done nothing wrong in ODIs and ODs since his return, so it wouldnt suprise me. and Kaspa wasnt dropped, he was "rested"

 

[tooextracool]

1) yea fair enough, but just because people put their "bad choices" in doesnt make yours right as well.

no i never did say it was right. i was simply pointing out how pointless it would be to put people's names down as world class when they havent even come near to proving themselves at the test match level.

2) meh, Lee has done nothing wrong in ODIs and ODs since his return, so it wouldnt suprise me. and Kaspa wasnt dropped, he was "rested"

why in the hell would you rest someone who was averaging 14.50 in a calender year @3.67 because of 1 poor performance??
as far as lee doing nothing wrong since his return is concerned, he got hammered in the natwest intl against pakistan at lords, got hammered against england in the icc championship trophy, got hammered in SL, had one half decent spell against pakistan in the videocon cup, before getting hammered against NZ(Arguably he picked up a couple of wickets but still went at over 5 an over). saying that lee did nothing wrong is almost like saying that rikki clarke deserves a recall.

 

[Nate]

no i never did say it was right. i was simply pointing out how pointless it would be to put people's names down as world class when they havent even come near to proving themselves at the test match level.



why in the hell would you rest someone who was averaging 14.50 in a calender year @3.67 because of 1 poor performance??
as far as lee doing nothing wrong since his return is concerned, he got hammered in the natwest intl against pakistan at lords, got hammered against england in the icc championship trophy, got hammered in SL, had one half decent spell against pakistan in the videocon cup, before getting hammered against NZ(Arguably he picked up a couple of wickets but still went at over 5 an over). saying that lee did nothing wrong is almost like saying that rikki clarke deserves a recall.

3.67 being econ?

and keep clarke outta this

yea thanks for pointing out my bad use of words again. man you are always spot on, i admire you
In the series against NZ he did quite well (who cares about your RR if you get wickets, within reason?) and also for Aussie A hes been bowling well. im just saying it wont suprise me if they pick him.

 

[tooextracool]

3.67 being econ?

and keep clarke outta this

yea thanks for pointing out my bad use of words again. man you are always spot on, i admire you
In the series against NZ he did quite well (who cares about your RR if you get wickets, within reason?) and also for Aussie A hes been bowling well. im just saying it wont suprise me if they pick him.

i personally have no idea what hes been doing for australia A, but i dont really care either. there is no claim for him to play ahead of someone who averaged 14 @ an ER of 3.67 in 2004.

 

[Nate]

i personally have no idea what hes been doing for australia A, but i dont really care either.

ahhh how am i not suprised...

 

[tooextracool]

because it doesnt prove anything. ramprakash can score countless runs in england for all i care. a proven failure is a proven failure.

 

[Nate]

because it doesnt prove anything. ramprakash can score countless runs in england for all i care. a proven failure is a proven failure.

so now brett lee is a proven failure? oh my gosh...

what about flintoff, or symonds? both had their careers looking pathetic and then they turned it around, only in one-dayers for symonds. who says lee cant come back strong now? And Lee is hardly a failure. Test avg of like 32 and OD of around 23-24!! Failure my rear-end.

 

[tooextracool]

so now brett lee is a proven failure? oh my gosh...

what about flintoff, or symonds? both had their careers looking pathetic and then they turned it around, only in one-dayers for symonds. who says lee cant come back strong now? And Lee is hardly a failure. Test avg of like 32 and OD of around 23-24!! Failure my rear-end.

test average of 32, but not counting his first 2 series its something like 37. and flintoff certainly showed plenty of potential in both forms of the game, something that lee IMO doesnt have. regarding his ODI average, his ER is what matters and its around 4.7 odd. i wouldnt say that hes a proven failure in ODIs but hes not good enough to get into the side. in tests hes rubbish.

 

[age_master]

 

[Nate]

test average of 32, but not counting his first 2 series its something like 37. and flintoff certainly showed plenty of potential in both forms of the game, something that lee IMO doesnt have. regarding his ODI average, his ER is what matters and its around 4.7 odd. i wouldnt say that hes a proven failure in ODIs but hes not good enough to get into the side. in tests hes rubbish.

haha mate, you cant just not include two series! that is part of his career! regardless of whether he has been worse after that it still counts. a career avg of 31.66 is not rubbish. its more like below average.

ER is what matters? laughable. how about STRIKE-RATE?? Id take 2/47 off 10 anyday. 160 wickets in 91 matches at 22.58 is awesome. thats just stupid man. wickets are important, if not more important than ER.

 

[tooextracool]

haha mate, you cant just not include two series! that is part of his career! regardless of whether he has been worse after that it still counts. a career avg of 31.66 is not rubbish. its more like below average.

why not? certainly what matters is how hes been doing in his last 2-3 years in which time hes been rubbish. IMO what he did in his first 2 series is irrelevent because it came against teams that were poor away from home and he was a new kid on the block so no one knew anything about him. even an average of 32 odd is simply not good enough and if he plays more, its only going to go up to 35 odd.

ER is what matters? laughable. how about STRIKE-RATE?? Id take 2/47 off 10 anyday. 160 wickets in 91 matches at 22.58 is awesome. thats just stupid man. wickets are important, if not more important than ER.

how is that laughable?everyone knows that ER is the most important statistic in ODIs. IMO the reason why he has such an inflated average is because he bowls in the death and so gets cheap wickets.

 

[SJS]

How many players in the world would find a place in the Australian playing XI
a) for test matches
b) for ODI's

and who would they replace ??

 

[cric_manic]

How many players in the world would find a place in the Australian playing XI
a) for test matches
b) for ODI's

and who would they replace ??

ODI
cairnes,flintoff,kallis eathier of these players would make it into the australian odi team at the moment to replace someone like lehmann,watson or symonds
Test
murali for mcgill

 

[Nate]

why not? certainly what matters is how hes been doing in his last 2-3 years in which time hes been rubbish. IMO what he did in his first 2 series is irrelevent because it came against teams that were poor away from home and he was a new kid on the block so no one knew anything about him. even an average of 32 odd is simply not good enough and if he plays more, its only going to go up to 35 odd.



how is that laughable?everyone knows that ER is the most important statistic in ODIs. IMO the reason why he has such an inflated average is because he bowls in the death and so gets cheap wickets.

1) you have no idea what his average is going to do. it could just as easily go below 30.

2) bowling at the death also means you can get smacked but he bowls well at the death you see? he bowls well, he gets wickets. he doesnt bowl well, he gets smacked and his average dies.

 

[marc71178]

test average of 32, but not counting his first 2 series its something like 37. and flintoff certainly showed plenty of potential in both forms of the game, something that lee IMO doesnt have. regarding his ODI average, his ER is what matters and its around 4.7 odd.

But look at the number of wickets he takes.