Nate
You'll Never Walk Alone
You can always see right through me.
-
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.
Bryce McGain - too old to play tests?
- Thread starter Laurrz
- Start date
Richard
Cricket Web Staff Member
If India could produce Mumbai-2004/05-like surfaces every game against Australia, they'd be mad not to.
Producing a pitch like that isn't as simple as saying "I want a massive turner with uneven bounce".
Also, I presume the board don't want them very often as that means loads of lost days of cricket.
Prince EWS
Global Moderator
Well it'd be a lot easier if you had weeks in advance to do so due to Australia not picking a spinner in the squad at all.
It'd probably be wise to do so regardless of Australia's squad, but I think they'd go to that extra effort if Australia had no specialist spinners to select.
NUFAN
Y no Afghanistan flag
Australia are not stupid enough to not pick at least one specialist spinner in the touring party. He'd at least serve as a good net bowler, and if there are back to back tests it'd be tough not having at least one spinner especially if their is a raging turner or two.
Last edited:
Richard
Cricket Web Staff Member
Oh, yeah, they might, I don't disagree with that at all. But I don't think they can produce such surfaces at all the grounds - even with two months' notice - just because they want to. A little bit of it has to be inherant, and the Wankhede (and Brabourne for that matter) Stadium has always had the natural soil type to aid the production of pitches like that.
Mr Mxyzptlk
Request Your Custom Title Now!
Picking Casson is really about the same as not picking a spinner for India, IMO.
Richard
Cricket Web Staff Member
Hmm, well the pitch at the Wankhede Stadium in 2004/05 meant that if you looked purely at his figures without looking at the game you'd think Nathan Hauritz had done damn well. On surfaces like that, Casson won't be a complete waste of space (nor will he be likely to do much other than cost matches, of course) so you'd do as well to pick him as Noffke.
But I'd imagine if India can produce the sort of surface everyone (bar perhaps a few Australians) want to see, it'll be more like the one at the Chepauk in 2004/05 than the Wankhede.
But I'd imagine if India can produce the sort of surface everyone (bar perhaps a few Australians) want to see, it'll be more like the one at the Chepauk in 2004/05 than the Wankhede.
James90
Cricketer Of The Year
Honestly don't see the point in picking McGain. He may have been the best last season but I still don't think there's enough proof to say he's the best we've got. Also, it's quite obvious we don't have a test quality spinner so why go with one who doesn't have the potential to turn into one and won't even have longevity in the team? Australia will stick with Casson for a short while and possibly take Cullen, Heal or Hauritz to India as well.
As I've said previously though. We should be playing four quicks in the starting XI with Clarke filling the spinners role if absolutely necessary.
As I've said previously though. We should be playing four quicks in the starting XI with Clarke filling the spinners role if absolutely necessary.
Mr Mxyzptlk
Request Your Custom Title Now!
I don't see a problem with picking a spinner in the squad, but not just for the sake of picking a spinner. I honestly believe that Michael Clarke would do as well as Casson in India, given the chance.
Prince EWS
Global Moderator
Well you don't think McGain might be a good selection in the squad, partly to discourage them from putting in such an effort to do so and partly as an excellent selection on the chance the pitch looked as though they'd managed it?
I wouldn't pick him for the sake of having a spinner, but if the pitch looked like it'd turn more than normal, I'd get him in faster than you can say "Dad's Army".
Nate
You'll Never Walk Alone
Noffke > McGain in the end.
aussie
Hall of Fame Member
I see McGain situation a bit similar to Colin Miller back in 98/99 season when AUS went to PAK. Only difference is i think Miller was doing fantastic things in stake cricket i.e taking 17 wickets in a match or something.
Given that i haven't seen him bowl i get the feeling that he bowled all-right, but basically state batsmen were just working him out. But even though spin isn't & shouldn't play a big part taking McGain to India is the safest option you would think, even if he gets smashed since it would be foolish to expose a young spinner in IND.
Given that i haven't seen him bowl i get the feeling that he bowled all-right, but basically state batsmen were just working him out. But even though spin isn't & shouldn't play a big part taking McGain to India is the safest option you would think, even if he gets smashed since it would be foolish to expose a young spinner in IND.
Nate
You'll Never Walk Alone
A stake isn't cricket either, wiseguy.
my god thats a frightening lineupIf McGain does get picked for Australia's next series,
he ill be making his debut against
Sehwag
Gambhir
Dravid
Tendulkar
Ganguly
Laxman
Not the easiest assignment for a debutante spinner
atleast play jaffer lol
Richard
Cricket Web Staff Member
I'd hope if they are thinking to, McGain's presence wouldn't discourage them. But I'd have McGain in the squad before any other spinner, I've already said that. And given you'd probably have 6 or maybe even 7 bowlers in a touring-party, he'd probably be 1 of them.
Anyway, the way people are talking about Casson at the current time I'd be very surprised if he didn't end-up in the party, probably in the team for the First Test. He'll presumably get the chance to bowl against Bangladesh first too.
Burgey
Request Your Custom Title Now!
I thought the consensus was the Mumbai pitch last time around wasn't considered of test standard. IIRC Imran came out and said something to that effect, as did a number of commentators from all over the place.
Richard
Cricket Web Staff Member
I don't care who said it wasn't of Test standard, it didn't kill anyone and a crap bowler like Nathan Hauritz still got smashed easily enough for it to cost the match for his team. Mind, Australia should still have chased that target. A rare loss that should have been victory for them (along with such luminaries as The ARG 2003, Headingley 2001 [denied by lost play more than themselves], Kensington 1999, The MCG 1998/99 and Karachi 1994/95).
I wouldn't want to see Tests being played on those sorts of wickets too often, as it basically means the game will last less than 3 days, but I don't mind the odd one here and there. And after a wicket was deliberately prepared to suit Australia in the very previous Test to said Mumbai '04/05 game, I saw even less wrong with it.
aussie
Hall of Fame Member
you could have quoted anything else excpet the typ TBH..A stake isn't cricket either, wiseguy.