Martyn dropped from test squad

[Scaly piscine]

true about Katich being a normal top-order bat but i dunno i'm just feeling a bit uncomfortable with him batting at 4 in the super test at least, i say give Hodge a go... & also MaCgilla could well & play but i've heard that in October the balls swings a bit at the SCG so well see what happens.

If it does there's only going to be one winner and it ain't the Ashes also-rans.

 

[aussie]

If it does there's only going to be one winner and it ain't the Ashes also-rans.

whatever yo...

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

If it does there's only going to be one winner and it ain't the Ashes also-rans.

I don't see why really. Assuming the World XI picks Pollock, Shoaib and Flintoff as their seamers, if there's swing around I'd say it would help McGrath and Lee just as much.

What Australia don't particularly want is a flat pitch that turns as the game goes on, because Murali and Kumble will have a field day.

 

[greg]

I don't see why really. Assuming the World XI picks Pollock, Shoaib and Flintoff as their seamers, if there's swing around I'd say it would help McGrath and Lee just as much.

What Australia don't particularly want is a flat pitch that turns as the game goes on, because Murali and Kumble will have a field day.

Kumble?

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

Kumble?

Whoops. Murali.

That actually changes the issue somewhat... I somehow forgot he wasn't playing, and with the high chance of Macgill playing a turner might be nice. A fairly lively early-season wicket is likely though, and I don't think we'll be seeing a six day test.

 

[Scaly piscine]

I don't see why really. Assuming the World XI picks Pollock, Shoaib and Flintoff as their seamers, if there's swing around I'd say it would help McGrath and Lee just as much.

That's what most of you Aussies had been saying all through the Ashes, when will you realise that Lee wastes swinging conditions in Tests and McGrath is a seam bowler when it comes to Tests - he took zero wickets with swing in the Ashes.

 

[Scaly piscine]

Actually the zero wickets is not strictly true, in the first Test his grubber ball to Flintoff was missing the stumps but the seam straightened after pitching and it swung in enough to hit the stumps.

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

That's what most of you Aussies had been saying all through the Ashes, when will you realise that Lee wastes swinging conditions in Tests and McGrath is a seam bowler when it comes to Tests - he took zero wickets with swing in the Ashes.

He took 8 for 30 odd against Pakistan with swing last summer. And he took wickets in the ODIs with swing, as you may recall. He's primarily a seam bowler obviously, but if the ball is swinging he can take an advantage from that as well, particularly recently as he has improved his swing bowling, both conventional and reverse. It's fairly likely that the wicket will be seam-friendly anyway, while the swing will depend more on the weather. Early-season in Sydney usually swings when it's overcast as Nathan "seven for four" Bracken can tell you. What the weather will be like is anyones guess.

 

[Scaly piscine]

He took 8 for 30 odd against Pakistan with swing last summer. And he took wickets in the ODIs with swing, as you may recall.

Except most of those 8 weren't beaten by swing and it doesn't alter the fact that he didn't take a wicket with swing (other than the fluke) in the Ashes. Also I clearly stated Tests because virtually everyone swings the white ball and takes wickets with it (and so it doesn't bear much relation to what happens in the 6-day Test).

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

Except most of those 8 weren't beaten by swing and it doesn't alter the fact that he didn't take a wicket with swing (other than the fluke) in the Ashes. Also I clearly stated Tests because virtually everyone swings the white ball and takes wickets with it (and so it doesn't bear much relation to what happens in the 6-day Test).

He played one test fully fit in the Ashes, and there was virtually no swing around in that game anyway. The point, such as there is, is that when conditions are helpful for swing, McGrath can swing the ball and take wickets with it. Examples of when he has done so recently are the Pakistan game at Perth (and yes, most of those wickets involved movement in the air, and McGrath even commented afterwards that he'd adjusted his action slightly to help with swing and it was the best spell of swing bowling he'd ever bowled), and for reverse swing, Christchurch against New Zealand where he took six for next to nothing once the ball started to go the other way. He's obviously not a swing bowler, but he can indeed bowl swing, in tests, and has done so in the past, and whether or not he has done it in his last three tests really isn't the point.

 

[marc71178]

in conditions that suit him which is likely to be the case at the SCG, he is world class....

And in conditions that suit him, Giles is World Class.

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

And in conditions that suit him, Giles is World Class.

Which conditions?

 

[marc71178]

Look at his record in the subcontinent - some superb efforts there.

A world class bowler doesn't need the excuse of conditions.

 

[aussie]

Look at his record in the subcontinent - some superb efforts there.

A world class bowler doesn't need the excuse of conditions.

well said marco, well then i refrase MacGill isn't World class but he's good...

 

[marc71178]

But that only seems to be when he's bowling with 3 very good economical bowlers...

 

[age_master]

And in conditions that suit him, Giles is World Class.

conditions like that dont exist.

 

[greg]

And in conditions that suit him, Giles is World Class.

I think that's pushing it a bit

Does a decent job for what England require of him.

 

[Craig]

MacGill "world class" ?

Hmmm.

Maybe he isn't world class but he certainly isn't as bad as you make him out to be (I ask you for the umpteeth time when was the last time you saw him bowl in a Test match).

I mean he is a different type of spinner compared to Warne, he's an attacking bowler - prepared to give away a few runs for wickets, so he's a strike bowler, so that is why he is selected.

(IMO he comes in for far too much stick on this site)

 

[Craig]

But that only seems to be when he's bowling with 3 very good economical bowlers...

As I said he is a strike bowler, so if another bowler is keeping it tight, it allows him to attack one end and in the hope of getting some wickets.

It is a bit like Giles, his role is the opposite, it is to defend and hold up an end (and obviously to grab a wicket or 5) and allow the likes of Jones, Harmison etc. to attack at the other end and grab some wickets when the batsman is tied down and is looking for runs.

Is it me or do I find a simple way os viewing cricket and not over complicating things?

 

[greg]

As I said he is a strike bowler, so if another bowler is keeping it tight, it allows him to attack one end and in the hope of getting some wickets.

It is a bit like Giles, his role is the opposite, it is to defend and hold up an end (and obviously to grab a wicket or 5) and allow the likes of Jones, Harmison etc. to attack at the other end and grab some wickets when the batsman is tied down and is looking for runs.

Is it me or do I find a simple way os viewing cricket and not over complicating things?

Quite right. He and Giles are one-dimensional bowlers offering different things (and you can argue about how well they do their respective jobs). As we discussed a few weeks ago what marks out truely world class (and in their case Great) bowlers like McGrath and Warne is that they do both and more.