• Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

England vs Australia - Who has the best depth?


International Captain
Richard said:
And you can clearly split it into 3 parts - 47.4, 70.9 and 40.6.
Giles doesn't tend to be that economical when batsmen go after him on non-turning pitches - best demonstrated by South Africa in 2003.
You have a nasty habit of pointing out the absolute nadir of a playing period to judge a player, which you use to vindicate your point. The stats all average out in the end.

It's irrelevant unless we're discussing a player's form, which we're certainly not.


Cricket Web Staff Member
I'd say the fact that MacGill's nadir was longer in length than his good start (816.1 overs to 521.3) and the fact that the good came before the bat means quite a bit.
"Form" is a very bad word for the said periods, anyway. No-one can be "in form" for 14 games over 3 years then "out of form" for 16 over another 3.


Cricket Web Staff Member
I certainly watched MacGill in 1998\99, and I certainly watched him plenty in 2000\01, 2002\03, 2003\04 and 2005\06.
I don't actually think he ever bowled that well - certainly was IMO hugely flattered by his figures in 1998\99, England's inability to play even the worst legspin contributing far more than any superbness on his part.


International Captain
Well, Warnie returned far worse figures during that time. Do you honestly believe every side suddenly loses their talent at playing leg-spin when MacGill gets tossed the ball?

Because that seems to be your only argument to discredit his excellent figures.
Last edited:


Cricket Web Staff Member
Err, no. If you look carefully MacGill doesn't have good figures of late.
As for England in that Ashes - Warne played just 1 game, when returning from injury. As such, he bowled pretty poorly.


School Boy/Girl Captain
FaaipDeOiad said:
Yeah the captaincy depth thing is rubbish.

Regarding the bowling, Engalnd's severe lack of spin depth is a worry. They have a passable option in Giles, and a fair amount of crap behind him. Australia have MacGill who is certainly the best spinner in the world who isn't a test regular, and with Cullen, Bailey, Casson and such have a fair amount of domestic depth as well.

Cullen, Bailey and Casson, are useless at the moment basically. I would rather just let Micheal Clarke roll his arm over than bothering to play them. Cullen has potential, however he is not delivering enough at the moment, as for the other 2, have the potential to be servicable domestic spinners, but they should never play for Australia.


Hall of Fame Member
Richard said:
Err, any drop takes away from any innings - regardless of the circumstances.
Because regardless of the circumstances, an innings still wouldn't have happened but for the drop.
What if I make a chanceless 316 then get dropped as the bowler dives across the pitch to get a hand on it?