Ashes 2006/07 = Walkover?

[Top_Cat]

2 tests and 2 tour games should be enough to get your rhythm back, i dont think that should be an excuse. Nor would they make him go from being wayward- which hes being for most of his career to accurate.

You can't count the two Tests; we're talking about how under-done he was prior to the Tests, aren't we? Anyway, he bowled a bit in his first Test (again he was still under-done) and was barely bowled at all in his second Test. Plus, those two tour games were pretty far apart. He was under-done and two games prior to his first Test isn't enough for a seasoned campaigner let alone a guy who is coming into his first Test. I would wager that no bowler could come in on that workload and bowl consistent areas in a Test match. Even Brett Lee, super-fit, raring to go and with Test experience didn't have consistent rhythm throughout the series.

As I said, I just think he was thrown to the wolves a bit. But he'll bounce back; he's inherited his Dad's inability to be flustered about anything.

Well i think you've seen as much of Mahmood as ive seen of Tait one would think. ODIs excluded given that he should have never ben picked in that form anyways. I dont rate Mahmood but surely you cannot deny that he must have something in him to be able to take wickets in the manner in which he has in 3 different countries on A tours.

Oh, he has something, for sure (and personally, it's great to see some teams picking the more risky options because seam-up fast-mediums bore me greatly). I just don't think he's quite as destructive as Tait.

i dont question that at the end of the day it was a poor decision on pontings part to not bowl him, but you cannot deny that Tait played some role in influencing that decision and the fact that Tait was either likely to go for 0/100 or take 5/60 was what put him off.

Absolutely but Tait's style of bowling is and has never been a secret. Either pick him and bowl him properly with the above expectation in mind or find someone else who fits your expectations. If the Aussies were wanting a guy to bowl consistent areas, Kasper would have been a better choice. And that said, with the series on the line, I don't think it was the time to be conservative.

it is of course all to convenient on hindsight to say that the result would have been the same whether tait had bowled or not, but the fact is that if Australia had taken their catches, the result might have been completely different.

As I said, Australia didn't deserve to the win the Test and England didn't deserve to not win the Ashes. If you drop a guy three times before 50, you deserve to be spanked to all parts even if Warne's drop was somewhat understandable considering his workload in the series.

 

[Mister Wright]

and how many quality pace attacks have showed up in Australia? How about none. the closest one to a quality pace attack was Nel,Ntini, Pollock, Langeveldt which caused more than enough problems to the aussie batsmen and certainly competed with australia despite the result.
Yes obviously we could use an attacking spinner, but we dont exactly have them growing on trees you know. Panesar is as i said earlier not even close to attacking, infact hes even worse than Giles, and even more one dimensional and doesnt even possess an arm ball. Australia will definetly try to go after him, and we all know how poorly Panesar bowled when India went after him in Mumbai.
As far as the number 8 batsman is concerned, i think its absolutely imperative that every side at least have a somewhat competent number 8 batsman. i cant even begin to count the number of games that have been won as a result of valuable lower order partnerships(the most recent one being the 3rd test in the SL- Eng series), and its doubly important in Englands case considering they have a tailender in Geraint coming in at 7.

But, is the England pace attack going to be one of quality? Harmisson and Flintoff were standouts for the World XI during the SuperTest, but even if they are both at full fitness they don't have much back-up with Simon Jones likely to miss the tour. It is hard to say how well Hoggard will go on Aussie pitches, but he needs to be more than a stock bowler who takes the odd wicket like he did in 2005. The thing that won England the Ashes was after Harmisson's and Hoggard's opening spells they had two inform quality bowlers to follow in Flintoff and Jones, and Giles would bowl the odd good ball mixed with his regular tripe.

Like I said I'm yet to see Panesar bowl at any level, and if what you say is right than he may not be an attacking bowler, but even the most stringent Giles advocator would have to admit that he is far from a test quality bowler and is more of a 'make up the numbers with a spinner type bowler'. He has never done well on any surface consistently let alone is shocking results in Australia. All I'm saying is, you can't do any worse than Giles so you may as well give someone else a bowl.

 

[tooextracool]

You can't count the two Tests; we're talking about how under-done he was prior to the Tests, aren't we? Anyway, he bowled a bit in his first Test (again he was still under-done) and was barely bowled at all in his second Test. Plus, those two tour games were pretty far apart. He was under-done and two games prior to his first Test isn't enough for a seasoned campaigner let alone a guy who is coming into his first Test. I would wager that no bowler could come in on that workload and bowl consistent areas in a Test match. Even Brett Lee, super-fit, raring to go and with Test experience didn't have consistent rhythm throughout the series..

well whether he was underdone or whether thats as good as he is at the moment, we'll never know. i honestly dont think theres much to his bowling though, and i wasnt surprised one bit about the way in which he bowled.

Oh, he has something, for sure (and personally, it's great to see some teams picking the more risky options because seam-up fast-mediums bore me greatly). I just don't think he's quite as destructive as Tait.

perhaps, but from what ive seen from both of them at the international level, i would find it hard to separate one from being better than the other. Mahmood definetly is capable of being better, if he could sort out his action and his accuracy. Which is the same situation for Tait really.

Absolutely but Tait's style of bowling is and has never been a secret. Either pick him and bowl him properly with the above expectation in mind or find someone else who fits your expectations. If the Aussies were wanting a guy to bowl consistent areas, Kasper would have been a better choice. And that said, with the series on the line, I don't think it was the time to be conservative.

The tait selection was understandable at the time, no matter how much you equate Kasper with line and length, he and Gillespie were absolutely destroyed in the test series, and its no surprise that Tait was picked ahead of him. Of course the right selection which i had mentioned during the time would have been Macgill, especially when you look at Englands woe against Kaneria last winter.

As I said, Australia didn't deserve to the win the Test and England didn't deserve to not win the Ashes. If you drop a guy three times before 50, you deserve to be spanked to all parts even if Warne's drop was somewhat understandable considering his workload in the series.

I dont think a drop catch is ever understandable. Much the same way in which KP's reverse sweep off murali or his hook shot of Akthar was understandable because of the fact that he got 100+ runs to his name. A mistake is a mistake irrespective of what the player has done before that.

 

[tooextracool]

But, is the England pace attack going to be one of quality? Harmisson and Flintoff were standouts for the World XI during the SuperTest, but even if they are both at full fitness they don't have much back-up with Simon Jones likely to miss the tour. It is hard to say how well Hoggard will go on Aussie pitches, but he needs to be more than a stock bowler who takes the odd wicket like he did in 2005. The thing that won England the Ashes was after Harmisson's and Hoggard's opening spells they had two inform quality bowlers to follow in Flintoff and Jones, and Giles would bowl the odd good ball mixed with his regular tripe.

It is hard to predict absolutely anything. No one knows whether Jones will ever play test cricket again, its incredibly likely that by the time he makes his comeback hes well past his prime and effectively useless. Hoggard hasnt had success in Australia in the past, and it way very well be the same story again, but the way in which hes bowled in India and Pakistan inspires confidence. If Anderson bowls anything like he did in Mumbai i have no doubt that he will cause all sorts of problems to every Australian batsman. And how is Flintoff going to bowl? Well if he doesnt get the ball to reverse(which he hasnt since the Ashes), hes going to struggle to take too many wickets. Is this attack going to be one of quality, well if they all bowl to the best of their abilities then i have no doubt they will be.

Like I said I'm yet to see Panesar bowl at any level, and if what you say is right than he may not be an attacking bowler, but even the most stringent Giles advocator would have to admit that he is far from a test quality bowler and is more of a 'make up the numbers with a spinner type bowler'. He has never done well on any surface consistently let alone is shocking results in Australia. All I'm saying is, you can't do any worse than Giles so you may as well give someone else a bowl.

Giles was quite a handful on turners, the fact that he had a poor Ashes series will not change that. for the rest of his career, hes performed admirably whenever theres been some turn on offer, and even during the Ashes he had a few good days against what was a fairly good side against spin. Its easy to look at Giles' record and claim that hes useless, but considering that he plays a vast majority of games on surfaces that dont assist spin its not entirely surprising. And his overall record is probably as good if not better than Kumble and Harbhajans records outside the subcontinent.

 

[Top_Cat]

I dont think a drop catch is ever understandable. Much the same way in which KP's reverse sweep off murali or his hook shot of Akthar was understandable because of the fact that he got 100+ runs to his name. A mistake is a mistake irrespective of what the player has done before that.

Nah, I meant he was probably feeling the physical pinch from how much he bowled in the series. That's the understandable part. I know he still took wickets that day but he also bowled a lot more of the loose stuff and just looked tired. I know they're all supposed to be elite athletes and all that but, well, Warnie's not. Plus, Warnie is a good slipper; he's rarely one for the acrobatics but anything that comes within his range he generally snaffles. Drops of sitters by Warne are fairly rare so I put it down to the amount of overs he bowled because aside from the physical strain, there's the mental strain of being the last hope of the team having been the last hope all series. Wouldn't be easy.

 

[marc71178]

It is hard to say how well Hoggard will go on Aussie pitches, but he needs to be more than a stock bowler who takes the odd wicket like he did in 2005.

I think Hoggard is bowling far better now then he was 12 months ago to be fair.

He has never done well on any surface consistently let alone is shocking results in Australia.

6-191 in his only test over there - is that really *that* shocking?

 

[steds]

It is hard to say how well Hoggard will go on Aussie pitches, but he needs to be more than a stock bowler who takes the odd wicket like he did in 2005.

He went alright in South Africa and India

 

[Barney Rubble]

Hoggard hasn't always been horribly poor in ODI's there where time in between 2001 & 2002 when he was faster & didn't rely so much on swing that he looked capable as an ODI bowler, has he got slower & became more of a swing bowler in the last few years he has got worse as an ODI bowler but gradually become a top-class test bowler.

In Mahmood's case he has just looked horrible in every ODI game that i have seen in him, so really there is no comparison.

Wrong. Hoggard's ODI bowling average against non-minnows is more than 50. That actually makes him one of the worst ODI bowlers in the world.

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

He went alright in South Africa and India

Different conditions. When was the last time a swing bowler had significant success in Australia, particularly from a touring nation? Hoggard might do well, but you can't assume he will just because he did well in South Africa, which is pretty much a perfect place for somoene like Hoggard, and in India.

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

Well thats why i used the word 'appears'. Regardless i dont see how one good performance in an OD is supposed to prove something about how good he is especially when you consider his performances in FC cricket in the same season.

It does actually make sense if you look at the timing. Tait had a brilliant season in 04/05, injured himself after returning from the Ashes and missed a fair chunk of the season, then came back to mixed results in the Pura Cup before hitting his best again in the ING final. It's not entirely unreasonable to suggest that he was simply underdone in he early matches after coming back from his injury. It's a bit silly to say "04/05 was obviously a one off because he had a handful of average games after coming back from a serious injury the next season". I'd say the "A" series this month and the next domestic season would be a better time to judge him.

 

[marc71178]

Different conditions. When was the last time a swing bowler had significant success in Australia, particularly from a touring nation? Hoggard might do well, but you can't assume he will just because he did well in South Africa, which is pretty much a perfect place for somoene like Hoggard, and in India.

When was the last time a swing bowler had such success in India then?

 

[steds]

Different conditions. When was the last time a swing bowler had significant success in Australia, particularly from a touring nation? Hoggard might do well, but you can't assume he will just because he did well in South Africa, which is pretty much a perfect place for somoene like Hoggard, and in India.

He's gone abroad and enjoyed success in unfamiliar and unhelpful conditions in recent history. He's proved that even when the ball doesn't swing, he can bowl well and take wickets. Why not Australia?

 

[aussie]

Wrong. Hoggard's ODI bowling average against non-minnows is more than 50. That actually makes him one of the worst ODI bowlers in the world.

yes that statistic would have generated now after all the ODI's he has played, but what i'm saying when he initially started playing ODI's he didn't look so incapable of being an ODI bowler, if you remember the 2001/02 ODI series in India you should see what i'm saying.

 

[tooextracool]

Nah, I meant he was probably feeling the physical pinch from how much he bowled in the series. That's the understandable part. I know he still took wickets that day but he also bowled a lot more of the loose stuff and just looked tired. I know they're all supposed to be elite athletes and all that but, well, Warnie's not. Plus, Warnie is a good slipper; he's rarely one for the acrobatics but anything that comes within his range he generally snaffles. Drops of sitters by Warne are fairly rare so I put it down to the amount of overs he bowled because aside from the physical strain, there's the mental strain of being the last hope of the team having been the last hope all series. Wouldn't be easy.

i dont see the connection between bowling strain and taking straight forward chances. you dont need to put too much pressure on your body to take a sitter IMO, the only thing possible is that his concentration levels were down(for whatever reason), and as i said that is no excuse for dropping the game.

 

[tooextracool]

It does actually make sense if you look at the timing. Tait had a brilliant season in 04/05, injured himself after returning from the Ashes and missed a fair chunk of the season, then came back to mixed results in the Pura Cup before hitting his best again in the ING final. It's not entirely unreasonable to suggest that he was simply underdone in he early matches after coming back from his injury. It's a bit silly to say "04/05 was obviously a one off because he had a handful of average games after coming back from a serious injury the next season". I'd say the "A" series this month and the next domestic season would be a better time to judge him.

well either way his performances in the season dont really prove that hes been bowling well and deserves another go in the aussie side.and one OD game on a helpful pitch will not change that. we'll see how he goes from there, but i suspect i already know the answer.

 

[tooextracool]

yes that statistic would have generated now after all the ODI's he has played, but what i'm saying when he initially started playing ODI's he didn't look so incapable of being an ODI bowler, if you remember the 2001/02 ODI series in India you should see what i'm saying.

because he didnt get hammered during that series? 38.20@5.62, give him a medal.

 

[aussie]

yes success against the might of zimbabwe. after that hes failed in every single ODI series. and umm Hoggard was not faster back then, and he actually relied even more on conventional swing during that time.

i'm not talking about success here, i'm saying that in the initial stages of Hoggard ODI he didn't look like an incapable ODI bowler, the ODI series in India & NZ 2001/02 comes to mind where he bowled much better than the figures he got especially in India. Yes he faster i remember many times his debut at lord's to the ashes test in sydney Hoggard bowled in the high 80s..

 

[marc71178]

yes that statistic would have generated now after all the ODI's he has played, but what i'm saying when he initially started playing ODI's he didn't look so incapable of being an ODI bowler, if you remember the 2001/02 ODI series in India you should see what i'm saying.

What the series where he had 5 wickets @ 38.20 and conceded 5.61 an over?!

He's only ever had one decent series against non-minnow opposition, suggesting he has always been incapable...

 

[tooextracool]

He's gone abroad and enjoyed success in unfamiliar and unhelpful conditions in recent history. He's proved that even when the ball doesn't swing, he can bowl well and take wickets. Why not Australia?

because Australian conditions are traditionally different from all others around the world. the bounce is even, the ball carries, and there is usually very little conventional swing on offer. Whether he can get the ball to reverse in Australia will be the key.

 

[aussie]

because he didnt get hammered during that series? 38.20@5.62, give him a medal.

figures don't tel the story & if you watched that ODI series you would remeber how unlucky he was during that series.