Australia's Post Ashes Blueprint

[marc71178]

really? well you blokes missed the 1st test at lord's, 2nd innings at Edgbagston, 1st innings at OT, 2nd innings at TB & 2nd innings of super test then?

The odd ball here and there, you mean?

If he were that good in 4 out of 10 innings in the Ashes, how come he averaged OVER 40?

And 2nd innings of Super Test - 1-42 off 10 overs hardly screams that he bowled that well.

 

[aussie]

The odd ball here and there, you mean?

If he were that good in 4 out of 10 innings in the Ashes, how come he averaged OVER 40?

And 2nd innings of Super Test - 1-42 off 10 overs hardly screams that he bowled that well.

1. No overalll in each of those innings he bowled well, not superb but he was up to test match standard.

2. Well probably because in 6 other innings he wasn't that great..

3. Their is a perfect of example of stats dont tell the whole story, he bowled extremely well in the 2nd innings & could have well & gotten more wickets. He bowled with good pace & swung the ball on a line & lenght if you had watched that innings you would have seen that...

 

[marc71178]

If he bowls overall well in 4 innings out of 6, he can't be averaging 40 over a series.

In the Ashes he did bowl the odd good ball, even the odd good over, but he also bowled a lot of tripe.

 

[Mister Wright]

yes thats true, but Kyle instead of predicting that he'll do badly, but urge him on to do well because without doubt Lee has shown signs that he can be successful at test level...

When?

 

[Tom Halsey]

Well probably because in 6 other innings he wasn't that great..

Well there you are then - you can't get away in Test cricket with only just getting up to Test standard bowling in less than half the innings you bowl in.

 

[open365]

You gotta admit, though; he sure tried. Brett Lee's 19 wickets came at around 40 which is high but 19 wickets is a decent 5-Test series and he bowled (and batted) his guts out in every game. I certainly can't disagree that on some occasions he bowled woefully (day 1 in the second Test, vs Pietersen in the 5th, etc.) but there were occasions where he also bowled really well. He made some inroads into the England second-innings in the second Test until Flintoff did his thing and was really great in the second dig 4th Test (although admittedly some bone-headed bowling in the first innings did much to contribute to the hopeless situation there).

what do you expect him to do?

sit on the boundary all day and bowl of 2 paces?

the fact that he bowled well on some occasions makes his other performances seem even worse.
i don't get bowlers like Lee and Steve Harmison,every knows that they should bowl a fuller legnth but they don't even try to.
you would think at some point in his career he would go

'wait a minute,bowling bouncers to top class batsmen doesn't work...maybe if i don't bowl bouncers,i'll be a better bowler!!!!'

but no.

 

[luckyeddie]

i don't get bowlers like Lee and Steve Harmison,every knows that they should bowl a fuller legnth but they don't even try to.
you would think at some point in his career he would go

'wait a minute,bowling bouncers to top class batsmen doesn't work...maybe if i don't bowl bouncers,i'll be a better bowler!!!!'

but no.

I'm afraid you are somewhat out on that count. The short-pitched ball is a perfectly acceptable weapon in the armoury of the genuinely fast bowler, because it reminds the batsman that he has two feet and shouldn't just be plonking a size 11 four feet down the wicket to each delivery.

 

[open365]

^i mean bowling over after over.

i could understand if he was trying to get them on the back foot then bowl a fuller one but he very rarely does.

 

[Mister Wright]

I'm afraid you are somewhat out on that count. The short-pitched ball is a perfectly acceptable weapon in the armoury of the genuinely fast bowler, because it reminds the batsman that he has two feet and shouldn't just be plonking a size 11 four feet down the wicket to each delivery.

Not when it's a stock ball.

 

[luckyeddie]

^i mean bowling over after over.

i could understand if he was trying to get them on the back foot then bowl a fuller one but he very rarely does.

Strangely enough, two recent dismissals of Justin Langer that immediately spring to mind were of Harmison doing precisely that - and the Michael Clarke slower ball will achieve 'Legend' status in years to come.

What you argue is impossible to quantify, of course, without a fair bit of digging - and I really can't justify the time to go back and review all the dismissals attributed to both pacemen (although it would give me a chance to watch the whole series again, which is no bad thing). I will agree, though, that both Lee and Harmison tend to be unsure of the length they should be bowling quite often, and over-do the short stuff.

Taking the recent Ashes series and the (ahem) Super Series test matches as an example, Harmison took 21 wickets, of which a very high proportion were from pitched-up deliveries, and only a couple (IIRC) were from batsmen taking evasive action or fending throat balls away. Lee has a similar number of wickets, and a quick examination shows a reasonably high proportion of bowled, LBW and caught behind (not that that means a lot, going by the howls of protest at the time regarding the umpiring, of course).

 

[Tom Halsey]

Yes but he doesn't bowl very many full balls, but when he does he gets wickets with them. Does that not make him think he should pitch it up a bit more often? I think that was his point.

 

[open365]

Strangely enough, two recent dismissals of Justin Langer that immediately spring to mind were of Harmison doing precisely that - and the Michael Clarke slower ball will achieve 'Legend' status in years to come.

What you argue is impossible to quantify, of course, without a fair bit of digging - and I really can't justify the time to go back and review all the dismissals attributed to both pacemen (although it would give me a chance to watch the whole series again, which is no bad thing). I will agree, though, that both Lee and Harmison tend to be unsure of the length they should be bowling quite often, and over-do the short stuff.

Taking the recent Ashes series and the (ahem) Super Series test matches as an example, Harmison took 21 wickets, of which a very high proportion were from pitched-up deliveries, and only a couple (IIRC) were from batsmen taking evasive action or fending throat balls away. Lee has a similar number of wickets, and a quick examination shows a reasonably high proportion of bowled, LBW and caught behind (not that that means a lot, going by the howls of protest at the time regarding the umpiring, of course).

i was talking mainly about Lee.

I think with Harmisons height,he can bowl a lot more bouncers and not get punished like Lee does.When Harmison's bowling well like he was in that over when he got Langer out at the oval,bowling short is effective.

Lee doesn't bowls with his heart,not his head.Maybe when he gets older and can't bowl as fast he'll be a lot better bowler,i hope so.
He doesn't bowl enough slower balls either,i can only remember him bowling one all series(i didn't watch all of it mind you)and that completely bamboozled Strauss.

 

[vic_orthdox]

He doesn't bowl enough slower balls either,i can only remember him bowling one all series(i didn't watch all of it mind you)and that completely bamboozled Strauss.

Brett Lee bowled a lot of slower balls during the series, and if anything bowls too many slower balls at times.

Yes but he doesn't bowl very many full balls, but when he does he gets wickets with them.

His full balls are also the ones that tend to leak the most runs.

 

[Mister Wright]

Brett Lee bowled a lot of slower balls during the series, and if anything bowls too many slower balls at times.
His full balls are also the ones that tend to leak the most runs.

Only if they're full and wide. He's dangerous when he bowls top of offstump, but he doesn't do that enough.

 

[tooextracool]

Just back on Brett Lee, I cant understand why he hasnt performed much better than his statistics indicate. He has pace, swing, reverse swing, the abillity to drive a batsman on to the backfoot etc. He just strikes me as someone who tries to take a wicket every ball, and tries to make every ball 'special'. He needs to think about his bowling, not just show up on the day and let rip. I thought it was revealing that the best balls he bowled in England hit the top of Vaughan's off-stump - a good line, and a fantastic length, and still they were bowled at a decent pace.

does brett lee really swing the ball in test match cricket? over his entire career hes struggled to swing the red ball consistently and even in the ashes he didnt swing the ball conventionally. nor can he reverse swing it consistently, although he gets the ball to reverse more often than he gets the ball to swing conventionally.

 

[aussie]

even in the ashes he didnt swing the ball conventionally.

yea he did but hardly...

 

[tooextracool]

yea he did but hardly...

and as ive said a million times before, hardly is such a small amount that its not even worth considering.
in the ODIs of the natwest series he swung the ball almost at will, yet in the test series he could barely swing it.

 

[Eclipse]

does brett lee really swing the ball in test match cricket? over his entire career hes struggled to swing the red ball consistently and even in the ashes he didnt swing the ball conventionally. nor can he reverse swing it consistently, although he gets the ball to reverse more often than he gets the ball to swing conventionally.

For a substancial period of time (when he was still crap) he could swing the red ball extreamly well both conventional and reverse.

I was supprised how little if any swing he got during the ashes..

 

[Eclipse]

and as ive said a million times before, hardly is such a small amount that its not even worth considering.
in the ODIs of the natwest series he swung the ball almost at will, yet in the test series he could barely swing it.

I would say he swung the ball in maybe 1-2 ODI matches geniunly but even then no way near as much as I have seen him do it before.

 

[open365]

For a substancial period of time (when he was still crap) he could swing the red ball extreamly well both conventional and reverse.

I was supprised how little if any swing he got during the ashes..

he was crap,but a hell of a lot more dangerous than he is now.
i rember when he used to swing it a bit,it was amazing to watch and looked even harder to play.

When he bowls on that inbetween legnth,he's as dangerous as anyone,maybe more so with his pace,just ask Andrew Flintoff and Michael Vaughan.His problem is getting it in the right areas consistently which he doesn't do.He repeatedly bowls whole overs of half trackers that aren't very threating,then,realizing the batsman are falling asleep with boredom after the relentless bouncer attack,he decides to bowl the next over a bit fuller.

and promptly gets dispached for 3 4s in a row,so its back to the relentless bouncer attack for the next 5 overs.

As he's not very tall,he doesn't get the bounce that Harmison gets that often.His snorter to Jones at Edgbaston was lethal but it probably has more to do with the pitch than the bowler bowling it.

Lee could and should be a better test bowler than he currently is,if he bowls with his head and not his heart,he could still become a true great.

Unfortunately,i don't see that happening any time soon.