Starc vs Pattinson vs Cummins

[uvelocity]

Originally Posted by Spark

Can we not do the stupid of picking Test teams on ODI form

It's more about how he is bowling, wouldn't have a clue what the number of wickets or average are. Great shape, great length, great accuracy and consistency. It's not like he's bowling slow bouncers and allsorts to prosper in ODI's. He's bowling properly.

I'd probably be ballsy and drop hilf despite his excellent season, run with the 2 young blokes starc and patto with big heart to run in all day with them.

[Ruckus]

Originally Posted by rvd619323

27 wickets @ 34 last year in the Shield.
7 wickets @ 21 in the CC.

If he performs in the first handful of Shield games he plays, coupled with the way he's improved over the last few months and the swing he's getting, I wouldn't be surprised if he gets into the Test XI.

Bowling beautifully, but I agree he needs some FC numbers to back him up first.

The stats I can see on cricinfo say he got 12 wickets @ 29.25 in the FC matches?

[benchmark00]

Originally Posted by uvelocity

It's more about how he is bowling, wouldn't have a clue what the number of wickets or average are. Great shape, great length, great accuracy and consistency. It's not like he's bowling slow bouncers and allsorts to prosper in ODI's. He's bowling properly.

I'd probably be ballsy and drop hilf despite his excellent season, run with the 2 young blokes starc and patto with big heart to run in all day with them.

Will these tasters never learn?

[uvelocity]

spikey has no internet, somebody has to say it

but seriously, I didn't say don't pick hilf last year, but he is getting closer to the finish than the start, someone will break down so it's not curtains. If it was siddle/hilf/? I'd go starc today. Might go patto tomorrow, and look forward to starc/patto/cummo together one day.

[Ruckus]

If it comes down to one position being open, you just can't play Starc over Pattinson in tests. The guy has had like one or two mediocre games, with the rest being awesome. Starc on the other hand hasn't been impressive really at all in the tests he has played (with exception to the WACA match), and is showing signs of promise in the shorter formats and perhaps overall. I don't see how that can be used to justify his position over Pattinson though...that's crazy.

[TumTum]

How things have changed. Before Starc did not deserve to even play for NSW and now he is the best...

I still have big doubts over Starc. I get the impression that he's mentally weak and needs to be looked after to improve his performance. When things don't go his away I'm afraid he'll turn into Johnson. Although I have seen signs of improvement in this T20WC where he showed some emotion for once... Great that he has improved his control heaps too, but I still don't trust it.

Cummins I think he feels he's already a superstar, or maybe that's just how he always was. Off-field he is very good with the media. And on-field he feels so comfortable. Like from what I seen in this T20WC he ALWAYS sets his own field, no group huddles, just him pointing fingers in a captain like fashion. And I think it was him that asked to bowl that super-over against Pakistan. He craves responsibility and looks like he really enjoys his cricket. This explains why he also kept bowling in SA despite being injured.

Regarding Cummins bowling, he still has plenty to improve, especially tactically. What I was concerned with is when they asked him why he was bowling short, he replied because it was a team plan to cramp batsman. So he executed (and almost always executes) what he set out, but he still yet has to learn which way he should bowl.

Also I don't like Cummins being given specific plans to bowl from someone else. I mean sure he can bowl short really well and was the only bowler that could best succeed at it in the current side (with Siddle, Johnson, Lee etc not there). But I think his recent poor results have been as a results of this poor tactics from the team, he would perform far better if he just did what he felt was best. Whereas Starc was most likely given orders to attack the stumps, which is the perfect tactics for him (and like I said before he performs best when guided properly), but as a results Cummins is given the short end of the stick.

Pattinson is so much like Siddle attitude wise. He's always at the batsman and will have a very good career. He certainly is the most developed bowler. But how much does he have left to improve? I would say far less than Cummins and Starc.


Regarding upcoming Tests, it looks like they'll be rotated...
Young pace aces Pattinson, Starc, Cummins to rotate through Tests | thetelegraph.com.au

[benchmark00]

Jesus.

[Cabinet96]

I'd definitely go with Pattinson.

[Viscount Tom]

Originally Posted by Ruckus

The stats I can see on cricinfo say he got 12 wickets @ 29.25 in the FC matches?

That probably includes the Aus A tour too. He joined the team that lost the most overs to rain in the CC tbf reckon he'll have improved regardless with people like Sidebottom and Gillespie at Yorkshire though.

Originally Posted by benchmark00

Jesus.

Crucified and therefore unavailable.

[benchmark00]

So this is an interesting read:

Not so fast: injury leads to curb on young guns

More so the sports science stuff, and how much of an impact that's going to have on how teams are going to be selected from now on.

Turns out it's almost been predetermined that Cummins won't play more than one test, max, this season.

Send these young fast bowlers to work in the coal mines for 6 months, toughen the ****s up.

[Monk]

Originally Posted by TumTum

I still have big doubts over Starc. I get the impression that he's mentally weak and needs to be looked after to improve his performance. When things don't go his away I'm afraid he'll turn into Johnson.

Being a left arm quick doesn't automatically mean he'll be a soft cock just because Johnson's a soft cock and a left arm quick....

[NUFAN]

Reckon the 52 to 55 days per year is rubbish for under 25s. Is a Test automatically considered 5 days? Surely if Australia is batting for all or most of the day and the young bowler bowls only a few overs it doesn't count. Also, you would think bowling in a T20 match would be a little easier compared to an ODI.

I think its crazy to think that a Cricketer could blow out 25 candles and instantly be able to bowl for 20 more days in a year.

All this sports science stuff can be useful at times, but I think we can ruin careers and be at risk of easing someone in for too long and them not actually reaching their potential.

Basically Test Cricket is about picking the countries best eleven players and I want that to remain.

[benchmark00]

Originally Posted by NUFAN

Reckon the 52 to 55 days per year is rubbish for under 25s. Is a Test automatically considered 5 days? Surely if Australia is batting for all or most of the day and the young bowler bowls only a few overs it doesn't count. Also, you would think bowling in a T20 match would be a little easier compared to an ODI.

I think its crazy to think that a Cricketer could blow out 25 candles and instantly be able to bowl for 20 more days in a year.

All this sports science stuff can be useful at times, but I think we can ruin careers and be at risk of easing someone in for too long and them not actually reaching their potential.

Basically Test Cricket is about picking the countries best eleven players and I want that to remain.

If it's anything like AFL, which I'm sure it is just as advanced, each player will have a GPS attached to them and their output would be monitored. They wouldn't count the days where the GPS doesn't register anything (Australia batting all day) as a high intensity day.

It's crazy how much they use sports science in sports like AFL, every little thing is measured, and it's not surprising a sport like cricket is doing the same thing.

[uvelocity]

Originally Posted by benchmark00

Send these young fast bowlers to work in the coal mines for 6 months, toughen the ****s up.

nah **** they just use machinery these days, wouldn't know a shovel if you hit em over the head with it

[NUFAN]

Originally Posted by benchmark00

If it's anything like AFL, which I'm sure it is just as advanced, each player will have a GPS attached to them and their output would be monitored. They wouldn't count the days where the GPS doesn't register anything (Australia batting all day) as a high intensity day.

It's crazy how much they use sports science in sports like AFL, every little thing is measured, and it's not surprising a sport like cricket is doing the same thing.

Yeah but is a T20 warmup match up counted equally as bowling 25 overs in a day in Test Cricket?

Basically I disagree with the amount of days and would rather see a maximum amount of overs instead. Would be a farce if a captain didn't bowl someone mid match due to it though, lol.