Current pecking order?

[NUFAN]

Inbox, you know Bracken is now ranked the World's best ODI bowler.

This is for Tests btw.

[sanga1337]

My pecking order:

1) Lee
2) Clark
3) Bracken
4) Johnson
5) Bollinger
6) Noffke
7) Siddle
8) Tait
9) Hilfy
10) Geeves

Rate Bracken quite highly. Should easily be in the test squad if he's not in the test team. Can't see how someone with such a good ODI record cannot even be considered for the test matches.

[Richard]

Originally Posted by inbox24

To be honest the selectors have gotten the Test pecking order wrong. This is what it should be:

1. Clark
2. Lee
3. Bollinger
4. Siddle
5. Hilfenhaus
6. Noffke

How on Earth is Noffke below all that lot when none of them (that's Bollinger, Siddle and Hilfenhaus obviously) have even strung 2 good seasons together?

[Richard]

You know, having just checked back on the figures, Siddle has in fact been picked for the Test squad on the back of 6 First-Class games. Because that's all he played last season, and in the 3 previous games he was very poor.

6 games is funnily enough the exact same number of games Darren Pattinson had played in 2008 prior to his Test selection.

[Prince EWS]

Originally Posted by Richard

How on Earth is Noffke below all that lot when none of them (that's Bollinger, Siddle and Hilfenhaus obviously) have even strung 2 good seasons together?

Doug Bollinger
2002-03 - 13 wickets @ 59.07
2003-04 - 1 wicket @ 87.00
2004-05 - 2 wickets @ 102.00
2005-06 - 10 wickets @ 58.70
2006-07 - 37 wickets @ 28.37
2007-08 - 45 wickets @ 15.44

One good season and one excellent season, consecutively, from where I sit. I think you underestimate how hard it is to take 37 wickets @ 28 in Australian First Class cricket TBH - the standard of the batting and the state of the pitches certainly make that a "good season", albeit not an excellent one as such.

It's not the sort of thing that screams out "proven long-term First Class performer" or anything, as some people seem to think, but I don't think it's that different from what Noffke has done of late, really.

Ashley Noffke
1999-00 - 6 wickets @ 17.50
2000-01 - 15 wickets @ 35.15
2001-02 - 29 wickets @ 28.46
2002-03 - 41 wickets @ 22.65
2003-04 - 15 wickets @ 51.33
2004-05 - 23 wickets @ 37.91
2005-06 - 17 wickets @ 30.94
2006-07 - 30 wickets @ 24.30
2007-08 - 51 wickets @ 19.03

He's been good in the last two seasons - like Bollinger - but not exactly better than him. He barely played in 2005-06 as he was on the outer from horrible showings in the previous two seasons.. you have to go back to 2001-02 and 2002-03 before to find another patch where he's done well in consecutive seasons.

I can definitely see the statisitcal argument for why Noffke should be ahead of Bollinger in the pecking order, but I don't think it's a complete disgrace that he isn't. There's a lot of ability and promise amongst the Australian quicks but as I showed in the other thread when I posted these stats the first time, there hasn't really been anyone put their hand up and consisently do it for three seasons in a row. Even two has been a rarity and the suggestion that Noffke has been "banging the door down" is a bit exaggerated given the relatively small period he has been performing well consistently for. I agree that he should be ahead of Siddle and Hilfenhaus based on his domestic exploits but he doesn't demand selection as much as people seem to think, particularly as a specialist bowler.

[Richard]

^ I guess.

[four_or_six]

I've heard a few times Ponting/selectors saying about Watson/Symonds that their batting averages are very good for someone whose home ground is the Gabba. Is there any thought that Noffke suffers in peoples estimation for the same reason?

[chaminda_00]

Originally Posted by four_or_six

I've heard a few times Ponting/selectors saying about Watson/Symonds that their batting averages are very good for someone whose home ground is the Gabba. Is there any thought that Noffke suffers in peoples estimation for the same reason?

Some would say that was the main reason why Bicheal and Kaspa were on the outer for so long. But then when you consider the runs that Hayden and Love were scoring around the same time, it doesn't really wash.

Horses for horse really. One of Noffke major issues is probably the fact that he didn't perform that well in Pakistan and India for Australia A, comparatively to his domestic performances. Whereas both Siddle and Bollinger showed more promise in sub continent conditions.

I think you will find our the next season or so. The selectors will go for a lot of horses for courses selection for the last couple bowling spots. Until they find some they really think the real deal. Probably unto Tait step ups IMO.

[Top_Cat]

M'thinks Noffke's just not rated as highly by the Aussie camp as others are. Bowls largely straight up-and-down fast-meds and I believe there are questions about his ability under pressure and whether, in taking the step up to international level, whether he'd suddenly lose his radar. It's why he had to get his batting up to get noticed.

It's part of why Bichel got ignored for so long. The perception was that playing half his games at the Gabba made him look a better bowler than he really was and when he actually was picked for Australia, it's hard to argue against that as he rarely looked like he was about to absolutely run through a side (7-fer against England in 2003 excepted where, for a 5 over spell, he was simply awesome). Kasper suffered a similar perception but to a lesser extent, probably helped by his bowling on an early tour to India. Noffke, I'd be surprised if the Gabba argument didn't come up when his name is bandied about the selection table.

[Richard]

Originally Posted by Top_Cat

It's part of why Bichel got ignored for so long. The perception was that playing half his games at the Gabba made him look a better bowler than he really was and when he actually was picked for Australia, it's hard to argue against that as he rarely looked like he was about to absolutely run through a side (7-fer against England in 2003 excepted where, for a 5 over spell, he was simply awesome).

Bichel never took a seven-for against England. Bichel in fact had just 1 very short period (5 Tests) between 2000/01 and 2002/03 where he was an effective Test bowler. 4 out of these 5 Tests came against batting units in various states of woefulness (West Indies 2000/01 and Pakistan 2002/03).

In his other 14 games Bichel averaged 39.58. This includes 3 games against England (the first 2 of which were the only ones out of his 19 Tests where he played as a first-choice) in which he took 10 wickets at 35.

I never really rated him much, despite his excellent success (at least, as far as taking wickets was concerned - he usually went for a few) in both Australian and English domestic cricket, and later on his not-inconsiderable batting skill.

[Prince EWS]

Originally Posted by Richard

Bichel never took a seven-for against England.

I think he's talking about an ODI. He took seven against England in the 2003 World Cup - he backed it up by taking Australia home with the bat at #10 in support of Bevan for a partnership of 50 odd as well. Top game that was; one of my favourite ODIs.

EDIT: Link

[Top_Cat]

What PEWS said. That ODI match was the only time I ever saw Bichel look absolutely top shelf. His ball to get Vaughan was good enough but the ball to knock over Hussain was just unplayable.

[Johnners]

Bichel, what a star.

[Richard]

Originally Posted by Prince EWS

I think he's talking about an ODI. He took seven against England in the 2003 World Cup - he backed it up by taking Australia home with the bat at #10 in support of Bevan for a partnership of 50 odd as well. Top game that was; one of my favourite ODIs.

EDIT: Link

Originally Posted by Top_Cat

What PEWS said. That ODI match was the only time I ever saw Bichel look absolutely top shelf. His ball to get Vaughan was good enough but the ball to knock over Hussain was just unplayable.

Oh, that.

Well Bichel was damn superb that whole tournament really, for mine - and in fact had been between that Super Challenge thingy against Pakistan in 2002 and the end of it, though the Cup was his last hurrah (went for 5.51-an-over at 49.61 in his 15 ODIs thereafter) and he'd never been much good until winter 2002 (4.69-an-over at 36.26 in 27 previous games). But I thought we were on about Tests.

But yeah, I don't think Bichel's ODI superlativeness was confined exclusively to that game, there were another 14 in 2002 and 2002/03. The England game was certainly the peak of that little period though - stunning spell.

[GingerFurball]

Why is Bracken so low down the pecking order. Has he been pigeon holed as an ODI performer only?

Granted, I'm of the school that ODI performances shouldn't have too much impact on selection on other forms of the game, but the fact that he's performed so well in international cricket should be a factor in my opinion.