England vs Australia - Who has the best depth?

[Richard]

you got to be kidding me.., Gilo is much better than Udal for sure. Relating to them doing well on a typical SCG pitch i doubt that very much Gilo may cause a few problems since he has proven in his career to be effective on pitches which assist him, but i'd be baffled if Udal caused much problems if any..

No, Giles has just played many, many more games in favourable conditions.

 

[aussie]

No, Giles has just played many, many more games in favourable conditions.

what do you mean?

 

[aussie]

I don't think so, somehow.
Many I'd doubt extremely ever will be Test-class.

No, Key is proven useless as a middle-order batsman, unlike Hussey.

1. Lets wait and see then..

2. Did you miss the 2004 home series vs WI or his couple innings in SA?

 

[Richard]

what do you mean?

I mean Giles has played 13 Tests on pitches which I would reasonably describe as "helpful" - Udal has played 1. Even then he barely bowled because the seam-attack around him was much stronger than that for every Test Giles has played on a turner.
Incidentally - in those 13 Tests, Giles has done well on 11 occasions, and on the 2 he didn't his calf was clearly hindering him.

 

[Richard]

2. Did you miss the 2004 home series vs WI or his couple innings in SA?

No, I didn't - he batted at three, not in the middle-order.
No coincidence that, at five and six, he averages less than 20 and in the top three he averages 38.

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

I mean Giles has played 13 Tests on pitches which I would reasonably describe as "helpful" - Udal has played 1. Even then he barely bowled because the seam-attack around him was much stronger than that for every Test Giles has played on a turner.
Incidentally - in those 13 Tests, Giles has done well on 11 occasions, and on the 2 he didn't his calf was clearly hindering him.

What about Old Trafford 2005? That wicket was turning big on the final two days, and Giles took 0/93 off 26 overs on day 5. There was a fair amount of turn around at both Edgbaston and Trent Bridge as well actually, towards the end of each match.

 

[greg]

What about Old Trafford 2005? That wicket was turning big on the final two days, and Giles took 0/93 off 26 overs on day 5. There was a fair amount of turn around at both Edgbaston and Trent Bridge as well actually, towards the end of each match.

How did Warne do?

 

[luckyeddie]

Incidentally - in those 13 Tests, Giles has done well on 11 occasions, and on the 2 he didn't his calf was clearly hindering him.

I have that trouble all the time, blooming animals following me around, getting in the way.

Mind you, I've even started making allowances for inanimate objects, but no-one else does. Disgusting, some people are.

For instance, I went to Tesco's the other day to buy a new plasma screen tv (nice) and there was a sign that said "Caution. This door is alarmed."

Well, I spoke quietly to it for a few moments and tried to reassure it, but it was a waste of time.

 

[aussie]

How did Warne do?

Warne didn't take wickets because he was bowling defensively, going around the wicket trying to keep England from scoring quickly & building a huge lead, his aim wasn't to be attacking & try to spin England out, because i'm sure if the situation was different he could have caused england MUCH problems.

 

[aussie]

No, I didn't - he batted at three, not in the middle-order.
No coincidence that, at five and six, he averages less than 20 and in the top three he averages 38.

when we refer to the middle order aren't we talking about from 3-6?, well i must be wrong then. But regardless he was't openig but he batted pretty well out of position againts WI & made a good 70 odd i remember in Jo'Burg.

 

[Richard]

What about Old Trafford 2005? That wicket was turning big on the final two days, and Giles took 0/93 off 26 overs on day 5. There was a fair amount of turn around at both Edgbaston and Trent Bridge as well actually, towards the end of each match.

There was certainly negligable turn at any point in the match at Trent Bridge.
Edgbaston and Old Trafford turned earlier on, but not later - surprisingly enough, Giles was actually pretty useful in the two first-innings'...

 

[Richard]

I have that trouble all the time, blooming animals following me around, getting in the way.

Mind you, I've even started making allowances for inanimate objects, but no-one else does. Disgusting, some people are.

For instance, I went to Tesco's the other day to buy a new plasma screen tv (nice) and there was a sign that said "Caution. This door is alarmed."

Well, I spoke quietly to it for a few moments and tried to reassure it, but it was a waste of time.

If there was supposed to be any meaning whatsoever in that (and I honestly haven't a clue) I missed it.

 

[Richard]

when we refer to the middle order aren't we talking about from 3-6?, well i must be wrong then. But regardless he was't openig but he batted pretty well out of position againts WI & made a good 70 odd i remember in Jo'Burg.

For a decent opener three isn't really out of position. Key has only ever scored many runs there and at the top - never at five and six. Butcher, too, didn't have many troubles batting at three, and he too has never been aught but an opener.
I, personally, class "middle-order" as four, five, six and seven.

 

[luckyeddie]

If there was supposed to be any meaning whatsoever in that (and I honestly haven't a clue) I missed it.

It was an attempt to inject some humour into your sad life, Richard.

Obviously I failed, possibly because it didn't include Harmison and a combine harvester.

The operative phrase I was picking you up on was "His calf clearly hindering him"

 

[cameeel]

I have that trouble all the time, blooming animals following me around, getting in the way.

Mind you, I've even started making allowances for inanimate objects, but no-one else does. Disgusting, some people are.

For instance, I went to Tesco's the other day to buy a new plasma screen tv (nice) and there was a sign that said "Caution. This door is alarmed."

Well, I spoke quietly to it for a few moments and tried to reassure it, but it was a waste of time.

 

[Richard]

It was an attempt to inject some humour into your sad life, Richard.

Obviously I failed, possibly because it didn't include Harmison and a combine harvester.

The operative phrase I was picking you up on was "His calf clearly hindering him"

Right - you might have to use something a bit more obvious next time.

 

[marc71178]

Butcher, too, didn't have many troubles batting at three, and he too has never been aught but an opener.

In spite of being so much better at 3 than opening

Still, you don't think that Langer's an opener...

 

[Richard]

In spite of being so much better at 3 than opening

In spite, actually, of being so much better 2001-2004\05 than 1997-1999\2000.

Still, you don't think that Langer's an opener...

He's not.
He does bat there for Australia, though.

 

[Nate]

Stuff LE.

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

How did Warne do?

Notice I never claimed that Warne was flawless and always successful when the pitch takes turn. The pitch turned big at the end of the OT test, Warne didn't take any second innings wickets because he bowled defensively and rather poorly. Giles didn't take any second innings wickets because he isn't much good, and Australia played him well.

Mind you, it wasn't a great pitch for spin bowling, it was rather slow, but it definitely turned.