-
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.
Selection errors tally thread
- Thread starter Richard
- Start date
aussie
Hall of Fame Member
Added to the fact outside of height, Siddle & Clark offer far different things as bowlers.
But again this should not be Hilfenhaus vs Clark selection debate. Clark should have been playing ahead of Haurtiz.
JonnyB
Cricket Spectator
Totally agreed.. He bowled really well yesterday
Top_Cat
Request Your Custom Title Now!
aussie
Hall of Fame Member
. Ease your hermones big man, its cricketchat. I have no intentions of exciting you.Haurtiz didn't play in SA. They lost in AUS & IND because of the stupidy of picking a useless spinner as part of a 4-man attack.
aussie
Hall of Fame Member
You know what yo, just like how the american news host Keith Olberman counts down the days since Bush said "mission accomplished".I'll take that as a no.
I think you have inspired me to start up the "last time AUS played a proper bowling attack" countdown. Gotta make sure the maths on point ya digg..
Craig
World Traveller
Stuart Broad. I know he can bat, but how much has his surname helped him get where he is? I mean it is one of the most telegraphed favourite scoring area in the game ATM, but he still gives Phil Highes width outside off stump. So why continue to bowl there?
Nathan Hauritz, I know he picked up three wickets, but seriously, just say no.
Nathan Hauritz, I know he picked up three wickets, but seriously, just say no.
Richard
Cricket Web Staff Member
Broad was a poor selection in 2007/08 and 2008; however since the start of 2009 he's justified his being picked and there was no case for not playing him at the start of this series.
I've said it several times: Broad did not deserve the opening he was given and I still don't think he's much of a Test bowler and don't expect him to have any great success in this series if he bowls as he's bowled the last six months. However, as things currently stand, his selection is fair enough, unlike MSP's.
I've said it several times: Broad did not deserve the opening he was given and I still don't think he's much of a Test bowler and don't expect him to have any great success in this series if he bowls as he's bowled the last six months. However, as things currently stand, his selection is fair enough, unlike MSP's.
Richard
Cricket Web Staff Member
Hilfenhaus had shown no indication, to my mind, of bowling as well as he did in the first-innings. Therefore, to pick him was a mistake.
In bowling far better than I've ever seen him bowl to date (not to say he's never bowled this well before, obviously) Hilfenhaus himself deserves full credit. But, if fit enough, Clark had a far, far stronger case, so the selectors deserve none.
Craig
World Traveller
Still doesn't mean I think he is any good.
hitmanpaul
Cricket Spectator
alright lets be honest, ryan sidebottom should be playing instead of onions or panesar, because he poses far more of a threat than both...panesar isnt good enough to play test cricket, neither is hauritz....englands attack with sidebottom would be right arm swing bowler, right arm fast and hostile, left arm swing bowler and a mixture of swing and hostility from broad, with swann as a fairly good spinner...instead we have panesar who cant bat or field, and isnt much better with the ball
hitmanpaul
Cricket Spectator
not in the county championship i havent, but i saw him in the 20 20 against yorkshire and he looked good
Uppercut
Request Your Custom Title Now!
Yeah, he looked great in the World Twenty20 too. In a four-over burst, he's still got a lot to offer.
I saw him play in a CC game a couple of months ago, and he looked completely done. His pace was well down, he didn't seem fit, he wasn't taking wickets and he wasn't looking like he might take wickets. I suspect when the selectors went to see him play against Lancs last week they saw something similar.
It's a shame, because he was one of my favourite players in the England team, and I really rate him as a bowler. But he just isn't fit enough to play tests at the moment.
Pup Clarke
Cricketer Of The Year
Hmm..
Uppercut
Request Your Custom Title Now!
Hey, I'm not saying my sources are perfect, maybe someone else here can give us better recent knowledge. His output in CC matches hasn't improved (3 wickets @ 34 this season, he's barely even bowled) and the selectors are leaving him well alone, so I'm yet to see much to suggest that the situation has changed.
It does seem pretty likely to me that he's been left out for fitness reasons though. Because i don't think anyone doubts that he's good enough for England when his body can take it.