Nathan Bracken

Andre · 18-01-2003, 05:54 AM

Not sure he's really done enough to be where he is in Australian cricket. Doesn't do too much with the ball, never really takes a bagful and is certainly not the tightest of bowlers around..

I'd think some guys like Noffke/S Clark deserve more of a chance than Nathan.

Thoughts?

sean · 18-01-2003, 05:57 AM

Noffke is very unlucky to miss out ... but did he still have the finger injury when the squad was named?

Andre · 18-01-2003, 05:59 AM

Yeah, he might have, but if they were serious about him they would have drafted him in for McGrath in tomorrow's game because he is fit again apparently.

Eclipse · 18-01-2003, 06:01 AM

At times he is devistating and I dont know why but he has a Domestic One Day hatrick and seems to be a player that when he gets his action right can be really damaging.

His action needs sorting out but when he gets it righ he can swing the ball not alot but what he does get comes extremly late and thats why he can be dangerus.

Also the fact that hes a left armer counts alot for him. I think he has alot of potential and can improve alot he seems to have days were he is just outstanding and others were he is just avrage.

He is an exellent bowler at the death as well his yorkers are really good and really jam the batsman up.

Andre · 18-01-2003, 06:14 AM

Personally I think that Mathew Inness is a better left-armer than Bracken. Also, young Michael Clark looks a good bowler, so he doesnt have that much going for him.

Even young Doug Bollinger has looked more dangerous at domestic level this year than Bracken.

Bazza · 18-01-2003, 06:18 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Eclipse
Also the fact that hes a left armer counts alot for him

Please don't tell me the mighty Aussies have resorted to picking players because of thier handedness?!

Andre · 18-01-2003, 06:21 AM

Erm, can't see Mullally having ever been capped by us. Unlike some....

Eclipse · 18-01-2003, 06:25 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Andre
Personally I think that Mathew Inness is a better left-armer than Bracken. Also, young Michael Clark looks a good bowler, so he doesnt have that much going for him.

Even young Doug Bollinger has looked more dangerous at domestic level this year than Bracken.

Well Inness may be good at FC cricket but have you seen his One day stats there pritty ordanary.

If this were test cricket then Inness would have a better chance.

marc71178 · 18-01-2003, 08:19 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Andre
Erm, can't see Mullally having ever been capped by us. Unlike some....

For a spell, Mullally was a great ODI bowler (wasn't he in the top 5 for a time?)

Rik · 18-01-2003, 09:17 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by marc71178
For a spell, Mullally was a great ODI bowler (wasn't he in the top 5 for a time?)

Actually I am not quite sure why he was dropped, an average of 27 with the ball and an econ of under 4 an over is superb. He and Ealham used to tie up the runs mid-innings, a job now done by Harmison and Irani who keep going for 5 an over...:rolleyes:

sasnoz · 18-01-2003, 04:20 PM

mullaly was damn good last vb series the best bowler i reckon

Mr Mxyzptlk · 18-01-2003, 04:37 PM

Yes, I was always a Mullally fan myself. He sorta reminded me of Virgil from 'the Thunderbirds'...but that's beside the point. He's a fine bowler and a brilliant batsman...ok maybe not but he is a fine bolwer.

Ealham too is one of the better ODI players England has produced. He kept it tight, took valuable wickets and could score the odd run for you.

Rik · 18-01-2003, 04:53 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Mr Mxyzptlk
Ealham too is one of the better ODI players England has produced. He kept it tight, took valuable wickets and could score the odd run for you.

I see him as a similer player to Ian Harvey, both have similer averages in both batting and bowling. Also they were both dropped for not scoring enough runs and taking enough Wickets despite keeping it tight.

Mr Mxyzptlk · 18-01-2003, 04:56 PM

IMO, economy is more important than wickets in limited overs cricket...unless you're defending 140 odd.

masterblaster · 18-01-2003, 06:46 PM

Well, Nathan Bracken did get a red hot in-form Sachin Tendulkar out.

18-01-2003, 05:54 AM	#1 (permalink)
Andre International Regular Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: Australia Posts: 3,112	Nathan Bracken Not sure he's really done enough to be where he is in Australian cricket. Doesn't do too much with the ball, never really takes a bagful and is certainly not the tightest of bowlers around.. I'd think some guys like Noffke/S Clark deserve more of a chance than Nathan. Thoughts?

18-01-2003, 04:37 PM	#12 (permalink)
Mr Mxyzptlk Request Your Custom Title Now! Join Date: May 2002 Location: Trinidad and Tobago (Trinidad) Posts: 36,795	Yes, I was always a Mullally fan myself. He sorta reminded me of Virgil from 'the Thunderbirds'...but that's beside the point. He's a fine bowler and a brilliant batsman...ok maybe not but he is a fine bolwer. Ealham too is one of the better ODI players England has produced. He kept it tight, took valuable wickets and could score the odd run for you. __________________ 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." The Blog The Portfolio The...er...Twitter

18-01-2003, 06:46 PM	#15 (permalink)
masterblaster International Captain Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Australia Posts: 6,065	Well, Nathan Bracken did get a red hot in-form Sachin Tendulkar out. __________________ Self Elected Vice-President of AAAS (Ajit Agarkar Appreciation Society) "Uniting Ajit Agarkar Fans World Wide" Always Live Life With: Intensity, Integrity and Intelligence

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

18-01-2003, 05:57 AM	#2 (permalink)
sean School Boy/Girl Captain Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: Australia Posts: 177	Noffke is very unlucky to miss out ... but did he still have the finger injury when the squad was named?

18-01-2003, 05:59 AM	#3 (permalink)
Andre International Regular Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: Australia Posts: 3,112	Yeah, he might have, but if they were serious about him they would have drafted him in for McGrath in tomorrow's game because he is fit again apparently.

18-01-2003, 06:01 AM	#4 (permalink)
Eclipse International Debutant Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Nere a Spoon Posts: 2,873	At times he is devistating and I dont know why but he has a Domestic One Day hatrick and seems to be a player that when he gets his action right can be really damaging. His action needs sorting out but when he gets it righ he can swing the ball not alot but what he does get comes extremly late and thats why he can be dangerus. Also the fact that hes a left armer counts alot for him. I think he has alot of potential and can improve alot he seems to have days were he is just outstanding and others were he is just avrage. He is an exellent bowler at the death as well his yorkers are really good and really jam the batsman up.

18-01-2003, 06:14 AM	#5 (permalink)
Andre International Regular Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: Australia Posts: 3,112	Personally I think that Mathew Inness is a better left-armer than Bracken. Also, young Michael Clark looks a good bowler, so he doesnt have that much going for him. Even young Doug Bollinger has looked more dangerous at domestic level this year than Bracken.

18-01-2003, 06:21 AM	#7 (permalink)
Andre International Regular Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: Australia Posts: 3,112	Erm, can't see Mullally having ever been capped by us. Unlike some....

18-01-2003, 04:20 PM	#11 (permalink)
sasnoz Banned Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: new zealand Posts: 228	mullaly was damn good last vb series the best bowler i reckon

18-01-2003, 04:56 PM	#14 (permalink)
Mr Mxyzptlk Request Your Custom Title Now! Join Date: May 2002 Location: Trinidad and Tobago (Trinidad) Posts: 36,795	IMO, economy is more important than wickets in limited overs cricket...unless you're defending 140 odd.

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)