Horses for courses

[LongHopCassidy]

Many on this forum believe that the best bowling attack should play every Test match, regardless of conditions. To a degree this has been followed around the world, but numerous teams (prominently Australia and Sri Lanka) select a different bowling attack for decks of different natures, e.g. Sydney and Perth. The question is, does the lack of (or discrepancy in) quality or consistency in a temporary addition outweigh the type of pitch they play on (which obviously suits them more)? Is a policy like this more effective to a team's chances?

I'd say it would be. For instance, playing an all-seam attack in India would be beyond the pale, even if your best four bowlers were pacemen. But at the same time, would the back-up spinners, should they be picked, compensate for their skill by having a more receptive wicket?

Perhaps this can be exemplified. When picking an all-time Australian XI, it's likely you'd choose a bowling attack akin to:

Miller
Warne
O'Reilly
Lillee
McGrath

Should an all-time Australian XI were to meet their English equivalent in England, on a cloudy day, with a tinge of green in the wicket and Jack Hobbs asking for centre, however, would you take the previous bowling attack or prefer an arsenal with proven records in England, such as:

Davidson
Lindwall
Warne
McGrath
Alderman

Obviously the second attack is statistically and theoretically slightly inferior. But would they harness English conditions and consequently bowl out their bath-shy conquerors more easily?

Is this a policy that should be adopted in Tests? What are other effective examples where this has been achieved (apart from Sydney)?

 

[archie mac]

Perth over the years, has seen Aust pick and all pace attack, especially when Warne has not been fit. England have used the HFC policy in the past all so.

They never seem to pick batsman depending on the pitch conditions?

 

[LongHopCassidy]

If they did, Lehmann would play in Sydney without question.

 

[Xuhaib]

My Pak team for Engish conditions.

Hanif
Muddasar
Zaheer
Yousuf
Inzi
Asif (the former all-rounder not current pacer)
Imraan
Wasim
Mushy
Fazal
Waqar.

 

[Matt79]

The answer is really "it depends", specifically on the quality of the alternatives you're proposing.

When its a 'third seemer' vs 'second spinner', unless the pitch is an absolute raging turner, you'd want to be sure that the second spinner is genuinely world-class, ie Kumble AND Singh or MacGill. I don't think we're likely to see both Giles and Pasener in the same team anytime soon, although with Flintoff fit, England could probably get away with it better than most, and if they were playing in India rather than Australia next, perhaps.

I think there are times when MacGill should have played instead of the third seemer for Australia. Whether his record would now look as good is questionable, but his record seems, to me, to have demanded it at least be tried.

I can't recall, but what was the Aussie bowling line up when both Tim May and Shane Warne were in the team?

I think past performances in specific countries would only be taken into account when the person in question was pretty close to being in the team anyway. To respond to your Australians in England question, would you pick Warne and Lillee in your eleven if you were touring India?

 

[archie mac]

I think the big thing is a quality AR which gives you many more options. England for example can play another spinner to partner Giles having Freedie in the side. Which is the reason the Aussie want Watson to develope

 

[Matt79]

Agreed, although I don't think they'd play Giles if they were going to play Monty, unless it was a excessively turning pitch, ie. I don't think they'll both play togther during the Ashes, even in Sydney.

 

[silentstriker]

Depends, if you have world class bowling or not. If you have world class bowlers, then you have to play them regardless of conditions. The reason they are world class, is because they can do damage everywhere. Even in India, if you have three world class pacemen,I have no problem with playing just a lone spinner. In the second innings, you can bring in a part timer from the other end to do whats needed.

But again, thats if you have world-class bowlers. Unless you have four world class bowlers (which teams rarely do), I don't see why you shouldn't change your attack. Spinners are an odd bunch - their averages and strike rates are higher than a similarly talented pacemen, yet they are so essential in the second innings. I don't know that you could ever justify playing no spinners (unless you have WI 1985 pace attack) though.

 

[Matt79]

The Aussies talked about playing no spinner during the 2001 tour of India didn't they? But i think sanity prevailed. For all the good it did us

 

[archie mac]

Agreed, although I don't think they'd play Giles if they were going to play Monty, unless it was a excessively turning pitch, ie. I don't think they'll both play togther during the Ashes, even in Sydney.

Sydney does not seem to be the turner it once was, and the WACA does not seem to have the pace it once had. Are they trying to make the matches last longer?

 

[Matt79]

I think they were trying to nobble South Africa at the WACA last year. Damn disgrace in my opinion. Sydney does seem to have quietened down somewhat.

It's funny, Brisbane is really the spinner's happy hunting ground these days - MacGill's got a point saying there's a case for him to play at the Gabba along with Warne.

 

[GIMH]

If we had all our bowlers available, I'd generally want us to play an attack of Flintoff-Hoggard-Harmison-Jones-Panesar, regardless of the long tail.

Jones' injury for the tours of Pakistan/India meant that we don't know what the selectors would have done, but it was strongly felt that prior to the first test in India, Hoggard was going to be dropped. He then, as is so often the case, turned in a MoTM performance.

 

[tooextracool]

Should an all-time Australian XI were to meet their English equivalent in England, on a cloudy day, with a tinge of green in the wicket and Jack Hobbs asking for centre, however, would you take the previous bowling attack or prefer an arsenal with proven records in England, such as:

and what if on the 2nd day, the pitch is baked with sunshine and dried out completely and on the fifth day there are huge cracks on it and the ball is turning square?
Test cricket is 5 days, as such a lot of pitches and match conditions vary over that period. You'd want to pick an attack so that you had bowlers for a wide range of conditions rather than picking 4 specialists for one condition and have it completely backfire against you.

 

[Great Birtannia]

Sydney does not seem to be the turner it once was, and the WACA does not seem to have the pace it once had. Are they trying to make the matches last longer?

I think the theory behind that is the use of drop-in pitches.

 

[silentstriker]

and what if on the 2nd day, the pitch is baked with sunshine and dried out completely and on the fifth day there are huge cracks on it and the ball is turning square?
Test cricket is 5 days, as such a lot of pitches and match conditions vary over that period. You'd want to pick an attack so that you had bowlers for a wide range of conditions rather than picking 4 specialists for one condition and have it completely backfire against you.

Sometimes I want to bash your face in with a fist, and other days you make complete sense.

 

[archie mac]

I think the theory behind that is the use of drop-in pitches.

Yes I agree, I have not seen one drop in pitch that has not been a batting paradise. Which is a surprise as Chappelli often talks about the drop in pitches used during WSC as the best pitches he ever played on (although he was a batsman).

 

[Matt79]

I can't recall, but what was the Aussie bowling line up when both Tim May and Shane Warne were in the team?

To answer my own question the Aussie team with May in it usually had him and Warne in the attack, and two out of Hughes, McDermott and McGrath, or rarely Reiffel, Fleming, Julian or Angel. If a third seamer was required one or sometimes both, of the Waughes would oblige. Looking this up I'm reminded what a one-sided affair the 1993 Ashes were, til the 6th test anyway. Any remember Lathwell? Exactly.

 

[Matt79]

Tom Moody was selected for the 1999 WC on the basis of his experience in England wasn't he. That worked quite well.