Road to the 2015 Ashes in England

[Dan]

Bowling records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPN Cricinfo

Best bowler in the world since his recall, and now people want him dropped? Insanity. Utter insanity.

 

[Antihippy]

I think people are just expecting him to blast the windies and getting wickets at an average below 20 is somehow not good. Fact is that the windie's lineup is so weak I would hesitate to base my entire judgement on it.

Not that it matters anyway because haze will raze the english lineup.

 

[Spark]

He clearly was told by Clarke not to bowl that way anyway. I'm a tad miffed that he couldn't ramp it up, but perhaps he was never asked to.

 

[Swingpanzee]

^ yeah I'm not too concerned about the pace attack, if anything it's one of the things Australia shouldn't be worrying too much about.

Watson or Mitch Marsh?

 

[Spark]

^ yeah I'm not too concerned about the pace attack, if anything it's one of the things Australia shouldn't be worrying too much about.

Watson or Mitch Marsh?

Watson for now.

 

[harsh.ag]

What? Bowling (and cricket in general) doesn't work like that. It's not just sliding scale of good <---> bad. A bowler like Starc is perfectly placed to dominate against a weak side. It's whether he can do it against stronger sides, as Johnson has, and as he hasn't throughout his career (particularly if it doesn't swing).

It's not like Johnson was terrible anyway. Merely below his best.

Was taking a bit of a piss since your logic was flawed (in and of itself), but you are right, and I agree Australia don't need another swing bowler. Johnson adds more to the attack than Starc does as of now.

...and it's not like Starc was that far superior to him anyway (10 @ 16 for Starc vs. 8 @ 19 for Johnson; and lets face it, both bowled some utter trash at times this series). Not to mention Johnson actually has a track record of good Test performances going back further than this series.

I'd call it a knee-jerk reaction, but it isn't even a reaction. It's getting funky for no reason whatsoever (unless we're assuming that Tests = ODIs, which I doubt anyone is because it's self-evidently stupid).

I think it more or less reflects fans' heightened expectations of Mitch, and how it seems he is performing below his best at the moment, while Starc seems to be giving it his all.

 

[Tangles]

He clearly was told by Clarke not to bowl that way anyway. I'm a tad miffed that he couldn't ramp it up, but perhaps he was never asked to.

This. I'd pick him but I'm concerned if he can't up the pace. We don't know that yet so it's premature to react before hand. It's a joy to watch genuine quick bowling so it'd be a shame if he can't do it anymore.

 

[Dan]

I want Mitch Marsh, but I'm not sure his bowling plays the role that Clarke would want it to play. Needs to be a bit more accurate and wicket-to-wicket-y. I almost feel like Marsh tries to be a proper bowler a bit too much, and may even be too tall for the role (see also: Henriques).

Watson skids it through, swings it a bit, is always attacking the edge or the front pad, and is pretty economical. Whereas Marsh operates a bit more on bounce (given his height). Watson's almost a mini-Harris, whereas Marsh is a mini-Haze. And Clarke wants the mini-Harris style of bowling from the all-rounder.

It's the only reason I can think of as to why Watson's still in the team, because Marsh's upside with the bat is huge compared to Watto.

 

[Antihippy]

This. I'd pick him but I'm concerned if he can't up the pace. We don't know that yet so it's premature to react before hand. It's a joy to watch genuine quick bowling so it'd be a shame if he can't do it anymore.

I mean you're still going to get genuine quick bowling with starc.

 

[Dan]

I think it more or less reflects fans' heightened expectations of Mitch, and how it seems he is performing below his best at the moment, while Starc seems to be giving it his all.

MJ performs below his best and takes 8 @ 19.
Starc looks to be 'giving it his all' and is only fractionally better with 10 @ 16.
Isn't that more an argument for Johnson, considering he can still ratchet it up from what we've seen in the Windies?

 

[Tangles]

I mean you're still going to get genuine quick bowling with starc.

Starc hasn't blown away top orders with 150+ bolts. He was much improved against WI but MJ last Ashes and at Centurion was scary fast. The intimidation factor is massive if he can still do it.

 

[Antihippy]

That centurion deck was honestly dangerous with the way Johnson was bowling.

 

[Gob]

Bowling records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPN Cricinfo

Best bowler in the world since his recall, and now people want him dropped? Insanity. Utter insanity.

i said this before the whole starc/johnson thing has nothing to do with numbers or at whom they were bowling its just that if starc does what he has been doing in this series, bowling late in swingers at high 140's, hes gonna take wickets no matter its chandrika or tendulkar batting. mitch doesn't deserve to get dropped heck i don't think he has been bowling badly its just that if both these bowlers are going to ball exactly the way they bowled in wi over in england then its far from rocket surgery to assume that starc would be more successful.

id start off with Johnson be course of the psychological advantage he has over england and hope that he'd get his pace back up but if he shows any sign of struggle he is gone.

 

[Antihippy]

Starc has been bowling late in-swingers at a high speed for his whole career, if that's all he needed he would a success by now. He hadn't had the control and probing line needed to make those wicket-taking balls, though he has hinted at developing that.

 

[Gob]

Starc has been bowling late in-swingers at a high speed for his whole career, if that's all he needed he would a success by now. He hadn't had the control and probing line needed to make those wicket-taking balls, though he has hinted at developing that.

He was in OD cricket but been floating them up regularly in tests in high 130's unless it's the 2nd new ball.

 

[Spark]

Nah that isn't true at all.

 

[Tangles]

What sort of pitches are going to be prepared? Roads to blunt both attacks or seamers that would help both? Seamers would be more interesting and lead to a which batting lineup is less bad shootout. Id back the Aussies to win that shootout.

 

[Gob]

Nah that isn't true at all.

sort of recall it was the case. either bowling short or bowling half volleys most of the time and certainly wasn't as quick.

 

[Red]

I want Mitch Marsh, but I'm not sure his bowling plays the role that Clarke would want it to play. Needs to be a bit more accurate and wicket-to-wicket-y. I almost feel like Marsh tries to be a proper bowler a bit too much, and may even be too tall for the role (see also: Henriques).

Watson skids it through, swings it a bit, is always attacking the edge or the front pad, and is pretty economical. Whereas Marsh operates a bit more on bounce (given his height). Watson's almost a mini-Harris, whereas Marsh is a mini-Haze. And Clarke wants the mini-Harris style of bowling from the all-rounder.

It's the only reason I can think of as to why Watson's still in the team, because Marsh's upside with the bat is huge compared to Watto.

This is true, sort of think Marsh's bowling will sit up and ask to be hit in England, while Watto bowls that type of Alderman-lite that succeeds in the Mother Country.

 

[jonbrooks]

I am giving England a snowball's chance in hell of competing in this Ashes series, let alone winning it. I just can't see how they will handle the swing and pace of Johnson and Starc.