They were a great side, of course, and a lot of elements went into their success. But an ability to bowl tight lines and lengths was a big part of it.
WWCC - Loyaulte Mi Lie
"People make me happy.. not places.. people"
"When a man is tired of London, he is tired of life." - Samuel Johnson
"Oh my God, there's a castle! A castle!"
McG was actually around the mid-140's when he was really putting in, the decision to bowl within himself was a deliberate one.
Re: the bowling, even without the greats, it hasn't been woeful the past couple of years. A few Tests aside, it's been relatively good. Generally speaking, you'll get solid value from any combo of Johnson/Bolly/Copeland/Siddle/Hilf (yes, even Hilf)/Harris/etc.
The biggest problems for the team as a whole have been with the bat. It's easy to blame the bowlers when the oppo gets 400+ but when that score has been in response to being rolled for <200 (sometimes < 100), well......
It seems, with the selection of Cummins, my Ashes Aftermath paper made its way into the halls of CA's Jollimont offices, and is being adopted at least in part, and I quote:
We need to blood and persist with some youth. I remember 1993-1995, when performing players like Jones and Boon were shown the door, and even Allan Border. In were brought young punks like Warne, McGrath, Slater, Martyn, Ponting, Hayden, Langer etc. Arguably, they all debuted before their time, and eventually got dropped. But they all made it back, no doubt hardened by the Test match cauldron. The point is that if you’re a good young player, Test cricket accelerates your development, it doesn’t stunt it.
The selectors need to invest in a core group of young players and give them time and get some games into them. I’d rather fail with a young team with some upside, than get lapped like we were last summer with older players in the team with no upside. It’s not about youth for youth’s sake, but rather selecting guys with upside to their games – and mostly such players happen to be young. When nobody is really performing, go with guys who have an upside.
It’s time to invest in young guys like O’Keefe, Usman, Smith, Paine, Cummins, Copeland, Pattinson, Lynn, and Ferguson - not fill the team with 29 year old debutants like North. Debuting guys at that age is in many cases dead-end. We need to plan not for our next Ashes series, but for our next era of dominance (like we did back in 1993-1995, see above). You can only do that by casting a little way forward, and investing in youth
- My much anticipated Australian cricket review is now available in Cricket Chat
- Winner of the 2011 and 2012 Cricket Web NRL and AFL tipping competitions
Yeah but your point about 29 year old debutants is stupid.
And yet, what real changes have been made? Marcuss North has been dumped, as has Katich. Watson has been allowed to continually underperform, Ponting is bulletproof, Clarke lost form for 6 months (and had more than enough credit in the bank to be retained) and Hussey was allowed to stink up the joint for 2 years.
Australia in South Africa 2011-12: Shane Watson, Shaun Marsh doubtful for ODIs | Cricket News | South Africa v Australia | ESPN Cricinfo
Much rather see Mitch Marsh over White. Watson's injury could well open the door for Marsh as well and Warner probably will get a chance to open. Hopefully he takes his chance as so far his SA tour has been a disaster.
The big question is not about Copeland v Cummins it's about whether the selectors have the guts to drop Johnson and go in with an attack of Harris, Copeland and Cummins.
AAlso I can't believe Hauritz didn't make the squad. Sure Lyon got 5 fer in the first game but he didn't look that great after that.
Haurie had a set back in India, that's why he's not playing this week.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)