Page 4 of 8 FirstFirst ... 23456 ... LastLast
Results 46 to 60 of 110

Thread: Current pecking order?

  1. #46
    Cricket Web Staff Member Richard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    2005
    Posts
    80,401
    Quote Originally Posted by Matt79 View Post
    Unless you think they'll succeed, and turn out to be correct in that supposition.
    As I say above, whether they turn-out to be correct is irrelevant, and I simply cannot see any logical reason to think such a thing (ie, that Siddle will succeed). If you do, then fair enough, you can think it a decent selection and I can think it a poor one, but I'm struggling to see how Siddle offers something totally different to Noffke (don't really know that much about Bollinger).
    He'll learn a hell of a lot from the experience and possibly develop faster as a result. A player's record is something that only non-participating fans of game care about, the players and selectors don't give a monkey's about their record, what matters to them is whether they'll get another game, and whether the player is doing the job they were selected for, respectively. The selectors couldn't care less if his average ends up 2 runs higher than would otherwise be the case because they pick him now rather than in a year's time. Especially if doing so brings along his development and results in him having a longer career.
    I've never once seen a premature selection result in a longer career (shorter plenty often enough - sometimes much shorter - but never longer). I've never once seen a player learn from being out of his depth. By talking to those currently better than he? Sure. But you don't need to play to do that - the best young players have always seeked-out and picked the brains of their elders and betters.

    And generally a player should and will care about his record. Likewise the selectors should care about it, because a player who's done poorly has done poorly for the team as well as himself.
    Given they, like 99% of the cricket world, think that having some variety in your attack is a highly desirable aim, and especially that having a slow bowler in India is essential, their hand was forced.
    I think most people, if they think about it, think having an effective attack is most important. I don't really understand how anyone can possibly claim with seriousness that a spinner who hardly bowls and takes 1-50 or so when he does adds anything desireable to an attack, in India or anywhere.
    And the rule regarding over-rates does virtually force you to have at least one spinner in your attack.
    The rule which virtually no-one ever enforces and which even with spinners most teams don't come remotely close to abiding by?
    RD
    Appreciating cricket's greatest legend ever - HD Bird...............Funniest post (intentionally) ever.....Runner-up.....Third.....Fourth
    (Accidental) founder of Twenty20 Is Boring Society. Click and post to sign-up.
    chris.hinton: h
    FRAZ: Arshad's are a long gone stories
    RIP Fardin Qayyumi (AKA "cricket player"; "Bob"), 1/11/1990-15/4/2006

  2. #47
    FBU
    FBU is offline
    State Vice-Captain FBU's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    London
    Posts
    1,101
    Lee
    Clark
    Johnson
    Hilfenhaus
    Bracken
    Tait
    Henriques

  3. #48
    Hall of Fame Member Johnners's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    19,041
    It should be:

    Johnson
    Watson
    Lee


    Don't need the others imo
    Quote Originally Posted by Jono View Post
    Mitch Johnson is ****ing awesome for cricket.
    Quote Originally Posted by pasag View Post
    Ponting's ability to ton up in the first innings of a series should not be understated. So much pressure, so important. What a great!

  4. #49
    FBU
    FBU is offline
    State Vice-Captain FBU's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    London
    Posts
    1,101
    Quote Originally Posted by Clapo View Post
    It should be:

    Johnson
    Watson
    Lee


    Don't need the others imo

    It won't be long before Watson is on the injury list again.


  5. #50
    Hall of Fame Member NUFAN's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Marrickville
    Posts
    18,007
    No surprise to see Magoffin with the bowling figures of 6 overs, 2/4 against Tasmania at the moment. Such a quality underrated performer.

  6. #51
    Hall of Fame Member NZTailender's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Dunedin, Otago, New Zealand
    Posts
    19,498
    Quote Originally Posted by Richard View Post
    I've never once seen a premature selection result in a longer career (shorter plenty often enough - sometimes much shorter - but never longer).
    Dan Vettori? Sachin Tendulkar? I mean we can see in retrospect Tendulkar had the class but played, IIRC, about 14 FC matches before he was picked.

    What's the cut off between premature selection and being experienced enough, match number wise?
    President of SKAS - Kat is King | Proud member of CVAAS - One of the best | LRPLTAS - Rosco rocks!
    The NZTailender Supporting XI:
    H Rutherford, T Latham, N Broom, M Bracewell, D Brownlie, BJ Watling, D de Boorder+, M Henry, B Wheeler, H Bennett, A Milne
    Go Tigers!
    R.I.P. Fardin & Craig

  7. #52
    Cricket Web Staff Member Richard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    2005
    Posts
    80,401
    Quote Originally Posted by NZTailender View Post
    Dan Vettori? Sachin Tendulkar? I mean we can see in retrospect Tendulkar had the class but played, IIRC, about 14 FC matches before he was picked.
    Tendulkar wasn't good enough at first - he was 16 FFS. It was extraordinary that he was good enough at 17, but he struggled initially - of course he did. I've seen absolutely nothing to suggest that playing at 16 did him any good whatsoever - had he debuted in England in 1990 he'd have been that much better off IMO.

    Vettori IIRR didn't disgrace himself early career.
    What's the cut off between premature selection and being experienced enough, match number wise?
    There isn't really a simple all-encompassing thing, but I'd say anyone who played before the age of 20 was exceptionally unlikely to be ready (exceptionally unlikely - not impossibly unlikely) and that you should give a player a good 25-30 games over a minimum of 2 seasons before picking them for international cricket.

  8. #53
    Hall of Fame Member NUFAN's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Marrickville
    Posts
    18,007
    Quote Originally Posted by NUFAN View Post
    And now for my rankings.
    1. Stuart Clark
    2. Brett Lee
    3. Ashley Noffke
    4. Steve Magoffin
    5. Ben Hilfenhaus
    6. Mitchell Johson
    7. Shaun Tait
    8. Nathan Bracken
    9. Doug Bollinger
    10. Peter Siddle
    11. Ryan Harris
    12. Brett Geeves

    Doubt many will agree with me, I just like the looks of both Magoffin and Hilfenhaus.

    Magoffin is an underrated bowler, he's now played almost 50 first class matches and his average is under 28, so he is very good. I don't see him often at all in 4 Day matches, but still rate him highly. I predicted him before the season to be the Shield leading wicket taker this year, started off well.

    The Hilf did have a bad year last year, but was injured a lot and I loved him in 2006/07. Started this season well also.
    1. Stuart Clark
    2. Brett Lee
    3. Ashley Noffke
    4. Steve Magoffin
    5. Ben Hilfenhaus
    6. Mitchell Johson
    7. Shaun Tait
    8. Nathan Bracken
    9. Doug Bollinger
    10. Peter Siddle
    11. Brett Geeves
    12. Ryan Harris
    13 Dirk Nannes

    Edited my list to include one of my favourite cricketers Dirk Nannes who deserves to now be officially on the pecking order after his brilliant [i'm guessing] 7/50.

  9. #54
    Cricket Web Staff Member Richard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    2005
    Posts
    80,401
    Haha, Holland to be denied Nannes services as he's dramatically called into the Australian fray at the age of 34?

  10. #55
    Cricketer Of The Year James90's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Brisbane
    Posts
    7,572
    Went to The Gabba this morning. Nannes looked gun. Just hitting the deck hard at that nagging length.

    Anyway:
    1. Brett Lee
    2. Stuart Clark
    3. Ashley Noffke
    4. Doug Bollinger
    5. Mitchell Johnson
    6. Nathan Bracken
    7. Steve Magoffin
    8. Shaun Tait
    9. Ben Hilfenhaus
    10. Dirk Nannes
    11. Peter Siddle
    12. Brett Geeves
    Stedders' Supported XI (in batting order)
    NJ Kruger, *SM Katich, LA Carseldine, MEK Hussey, Mohammad Ashraful, NT Broom, AA Noffke, +Mushfiqur Rahim, Mashrafe Mortaza, DE Bollinger, WAP Mendis.

    CricketWeb Black!!!

    Quote Originally Posted by NUFAN View Post
    I think Ponting forgot to take his Swiss Ulti-Vites when he was on 99 not out.
    RIP Fardin.

  11. #56
    Hall of Fame Member NUFAN's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Marrickville
    Posts
    18,007
    Obviously I was a bit wrong with Mitch Johnson, he's done way better than predicted.

    What would everyone's one day bowling pecking order be currently?

  12. #57
    Hall of Fame Member NUFAN's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Marrickville
    Posts
    18,007
    Bump.

    9 months later and boy the pecking order has changed heaps! Noffke has fallen considerably and Siddle has obviously gone up heaps.

  13. #58
    Hall of Fame Member aussie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Cricket
    Posts
    16,845
    Right now it should be:

    Johnson
    Lee
    Siddle
    Clark
    Hilfenhaus
    Nannes
    Bollinger
    Noffke

    No one else should be considered for a test spot, although Tait can always come into this group if he begins to find some control to his bowling in the coming years.

    Plus also i am closing watching the stats of McKay & Magoffin, given i am yet to see them bowl.

    BTW can Nannes still play for AUS IF selected??

  14. #59
    Hall of Fame Member NUFAN's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Marrickville
    Posts
    18,007
    Yeah McKay is definitely one to keep an eye on, Geeves is up there too.

    Can't see any reason why Nannes couldn't play for Australia if selected seeing as though Eoin Morgan switched to England.

  15. #60
    RTDAS pasag's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Looking for milksteak
    Posts
    31,678
    Quote Originally Posted by aussie View Post
    Right now it should be:

    Johnson
    Lee
    Siddle
    Clark
    Hilfenhaus
    Nannes
    Bollinger
    Noffke

    No one else should be considered for a test spot, although Tait can always come into this group if he begins to find some control to his bowling in the coming years.

    Plus also i am closing watching the stats of McKay & Magoffin, given i am yet to see them bowl.

    BTW can Nannes still play for AUS IF selected??
    Siddle would be second because of developmental reasons. He's seen as the future of the attack. Bollinger would be ahead of Nannes (talking Tests of course) and I think by getting selected Hilfenhaus has shown he's ahead of Clark though that can change pretty quickly and I think Clark is only one good match away from going right near the top.
    Rest In Peace Craigos
    2003-2012

Page 4 of 8 FirstFirst ... 23456 ... LastLast


Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 26
    Last Post: 10-02-2008, 04:11 AM
  2. Order, Order.
    By Matteh in forum Off Topic
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 12-09-2007, 03:42 AM
  3. Current players [on current form] making any side
    By silentstriker in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 09-07-2006, 02:29 AM
  4. postal order
    By triplejapp in forum General
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 25-08-2004, 08:58 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •