-
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.
Pecking order for Australian quicks?
- Thread starter stephen
- Start date
Furball
Evil Scotsman
Reckon Johnson and Harris are 2 places too low in your list.
Son Of Coco
Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Think Johnson is 56 places too high.
stephen
Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
You'd play Johnson over Bollinger? ITSTL
Furball
Evil Scotsman
I would, yes, but I thought you were asking what the actual pecking order would be. Bollinger is persona non grata as far as the Test side goes.
stephen
Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
I really don't think I've seen quite so much talent to choose from. Even in our heyday, we'd pick McGrath, Gillespie and then a lesser bowler like Bichel, Kasper or Lee. It really does feel like we currently have five or six quicks at the moment who could be the leader of the attack.
stephen
Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
I did say "should" specifically not to discount Bollinger from discussions
Son Of Coco
Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Yeah I agree. Bichel and Kasper would've probably been the leader of our attack if they were playing post McGrath. I don't think many of the guys who have just started their careers are potential leaders of the attack yet. They need some time to prove they can be consistent.
Spark
Global Moderator
I always liked you.
Siddle = Pattinson
Harris = Hilfenhaus = Cummins
Starc
Hazlewood = Cutting
Copeland
Johnson
Bollinger
That's how I reckon the selectors see it now for test cricket anyway.
I personally still don't think Hilf is that good. Always seems to bowl a little too wide and short for me and might not look as good against a quality, in-form lineup.
This is how I'd do it. Harris only down because of his age and injuries. Still have him around though coz he is gun when on the field.
Siddle (assuming pitching it up is the norm and not an exception now)
Pattinson
Cummins
Starc (drooling of the prospect of him becoming Wasim like)
Hazlewood
Harris
Hilfenhaus
Daylight
The rest (poor Copes, rate the guy still)
Harris = Hilfenhaus = Cummins
Starc
Hazlewood = Cutting
Copeland
Johnson
Bollinger
That's how I reckon the selectors see it now for test cricket anyway.
I personally still don't think Hilf is that good. Always seems to bowl a little too wide and short for me and might not look as good against a quality, in-form lineup.
This is how I'd do it. Harris only down because of his age and injuries. Still have him around though coz he is gun when on the field.
Siddle (assuming pitching it up is the norm and not an exception now)
Pattinson
Cummins
Starc (drooling of the prospect of him becoming Wasim like)
Hazlewood
Harris
Hilfenhaus
Daylight
The rest (poor Copes, rate the guy still)
Debris
International 12th Man
Cummins would be first picked for me if fit. He performed against the SA side, not these crap NZ and Indian sides. And in that test, he looked a far better bowler than Siddle. It was only one test but there were signs of greatness there that I have not seen in the other bowlers (maybe Pattinson). He is the bowler with the most improvement in him as well.
TumTum
Banned
Definitely. He was getting the ball to talk and the batsman were playing him very well, it was a great contest. Every over he bowled was fantastic. Siddle and Johnson on the other hand were **** (or made to look **** by good batting).
Shame he got injured, would of had a great summer.
Last edited:
Pattinson is no. 1 for me as he has everything - pace, skill, action, physique and attitude (obviously a **** and not the false variety like Johnson)
Whilst there is little doubt that Siddle and Hilf has improved exponentially, Pattinson is the first young bowler that I have seen in years (including McGrath) that has come into a year and led the attack virtually from the outset
Kid could be the next real superstar IMO
Whilst there is little doubt that Siddle and Hilf has improved exponentially, Pattinson is the first young bowler that I have seen in years (including McGrath) that has come into a year and led the attack virtually from the outset
Kid could be the next real superstar IMO
