• 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.

This is why Australia will lose the Ashes

tooextracool

International Coach
Can't see England bowling Australia out twice with Mcdonald at 8 and Johnson at 9. As long as the last two are Siddle and Clark I think they will have enough bowling as well. With Hauritz in the side I think they might struggle if they had Ronald as part of a 4 man attack as well.
Because McDonald is such a good batsman? Honestly, his presence in the side itself gives us a better shot of winning than without him.
I think that provided everyone is fit, our bowling attack will be the least of our worries.
 

Son Of Coco

Hall of Fame Member
I dont care how highly you rate McDonald, there is no bloody way he is better than Lee. Lee could hobble up to the crease and bowl better IMO and Im not even a Lee mark.
Nah, McDonald does what he does well. Not as explosive as Lee and not a strike bowler. I don't think he's brilliant by any means, but there's no way Lee could hobble up and bowl better. More certain of what you'll get with McDonald than Lee.
 

Top_Cat

Request Your Custom Title Now!
Nah, McDonald does what he does well. Not as explosive as Lee and not a strike bowler. I don't think he's brilliant by any means, but there's no way Lee could hobble up and bowl better. More certain of what you'll get with McDonald than Lee.
Not to mention, Lee was hobbling to the crease in Aus, barely took a wicket and went for 4+ an over whereas McDonald, in SA, took wickets and when he wasn't, went for around 2 an over.
 

scorpiogal

U19 Debutant
Not to mention, Lee was hobbling to the crease in Aus, barely took a wicket and went for 4+ an over whereas McDonald, in SA, took wickets and when he wasn't, went for around 2 an over.
Oh my God. Only an Australian would dare compare a bits and pieces player to a fast bowler! :laugh:

You'd never hear anyone else comparing those two.
 

Son Of Coco

Hall of Fame Member
Oh my God. Only an Australian would dare compare a bits and pieces player to a fast bowler! :laugh:

You'd never hear anyone else comparing those two.
I think your set up of a Brett Lee fan club means you're a little biased :happy: It wasn't an Australian who started making the comparison.
 

scorpiogal

U19 Debutant
I think your set up of a Brett Lee fan club means you're a little biased :happy: It wasn't an Australian who started making the comparison.
I am. I am. But I don't hide it.
Sorry, only an Aussie would compare them and say that particular bits and pieces player is of more worth than that quick.
 

Son Of Coco

Hall of Fame Member
I am. I am. But I don't hide it.
Sorry, only an Aussie would compare them and say that particular bits and pieces player is of more worth than that quick.
Well, it's common sense given current form. If Lee can prove he's back to his best in conditions he's never performed well in then I'd go with him. I.e: if he's capable of hitting a good line and length at pace and moving it away from the batsman. If he's not, I'd pick someone else and that might include McDonald.

Lee's not of greater worth than McDonald simply because he's Brett Lee though. :happy:
 

scorpiogal

U19 Debutant
Well, it's common sense given current form. If Lee can prove he's back to his best in conditions he's never performed well in then I'd go with him. I.e: if he's capable of hitting a good line and length at pace and moving it away from the batsman. If he's not, I'd pick someone else and that might include McDonald.
I don't think they're even considering McDonald tbh.

Lee's not of greater worth than McDonald simply because he's Brett Lee though. :happy:
I beg to differ. The simple fact that one is more recognisable/a household name says something. He's 'Brett Lee' for a reason. I didn't wake up one morning and said "I feel like starting a site about, eeerrrr...what'shisname...Brett Lee!"

You can't walk up to my father and say McDonald is better than Lee. He'd reply with a "Who is dat? McDonald? Where he from?":laugh: even though he followed Aus v RSA. i.e. nothing special.
 

tooextracool

International Coach
Well, it's common sense given current form. If Lee can prove he's back to his best in conditions he's never performed well in then I'd go with him. I.e: if he's capable of hitting a good line and length at pace and moving it away from the batsman. If he's not, I'd pick someone else and that might include McDonald.

Lee's not of greater worth than McDonald simply because he's Brett Lee though. :happy:
I seriously cannot believe that McDonald is being touted as one of the top 4 bowlers in Australia at this point in time.
 

Son Of Coco

Hall of Fame Member
I don't think they're even considering McDonald tbh.



I beg to differ. The simple fact that one is more recognisable/a household name says something. He's 'Brett Lee' for a reason. I didn't wake up one morning and said "I feel like starting a site about, eeerrrr...what'shisname...Brett Lee!"

You can't walk up to my father and say McDonald is better than Lee. He'd reply with a "Who is dat? McDonald? Where he from?":laugh: even though he followed Aus v RSA. i.e. nothing special.
I think they would be, maybe not for the first test. But I doubt he'd be there if they hadn't thought he might come in handy at some stage.

I have my doubts you started your site about Brett Lee just because you think he's a good cricketer. He's not in cricket whites bowling fast in your avatar :happy: One is more recognisable for a start because he's played more tests. That means nothing on current form though. You don't pick a team based on who is more recognisable/has more fan sites. Otherwise Pamela Anderson would be opening the bowling for Australia.
 

Son Of Coco

Hall of Fame Member
I seriously cannot believe that McDonald is being touted as one of the top 4 bowlers in Australia at this point in time.
Look at SA. He does a job.

I'd have Johnson, Siddle, Clarke, Lee/Hilfenhaus if they were all firing personally. But there's no guarantee of that.
 

Son Of Coco

Hall of Fame Member
He's not being touted as anything. Only the guys on here are touting him as something.
Not at all, he IS being selected for Australian squads.

People that don't understand his role in the team might as well just put their hands up and say "I don't understand the concept of bowling to plans and in partnerships very well".
 
Last edited:

scorpiogal

U19 Debutant
I have my doubts you started your site about Brett Lee just because you think he's a good cricketer. He's not in cricket whites bowling fast in your avatar :happy: One is more recognisable for a start because he's played more tests. That means nothing on current form though. You don't pick a team based on who is more recognisable/has more fan sites. Otherwise Pamela Anderson would be opening the bowling for Australia.
That part's just a bonus.:happy: And Whammy doesn't have that many fansites? Does she? I wouldn't know....I guess it's just too bad McDonald's not hawt :happy:


Talking about current form.....we know nothing of McDonald's current form and it seems the selectors aren't interested either, seeing as they didn't consider him for the match today.
 

wfdu_ben91

International 12th Man
Not really. SA's bowlers underperformed because they underperformed, not because they were intimidated by the fact that a few of their batsmen sustained unfortunate injuries.
There was nothing wrong with South Africa's bowlers - Phillip Hughes just made them look poor. The South African bowlers were very much ontop of batsman whenever Hughes wasn't at the crease, barring some brilliance from Mitchell Johnson in the lower-order, who twice, made our overall totals during that series look allot better then what they should've been.

Nevertheless, McDonald contributed nothing to Australia's success - It was Mitchell Johnson and Peter Siddle who were the real destroyers. McDonald just picked up a few cheap wickets from the demolarized South African batting lineup in the first 2 Tests and got found out when Australia weren't ontop during the 3rd Test. You could even hear the groan from most Australian supporters when AB de Villiers didn't hit McDonald for 6 sixes in an over.
 

tooextracool

International Coach
Look at SA. He does a job.
He averaged nearly 40 for Christs sakes. If he was a top 7 batter I could understand the logic of bringing his bowling into consideration, but his batting is desperately hopeless to the point where even Mitchell Johnson is likely to bat above him.

FFS, give an aussie a rock, and he'll be touted as the next Bradman.
 

scorpiogal

U19 Debutant
Not at all, he IS being selected for Australian squads.

People that don't understand his role in the team might as well just put their hands up and say "I don't understand the concept of bowling to plans and in partnerships very well".
Aaah but his role and Lee's role, if either of them are chosen, would/could never be the same. Ponting stated that all he wants Lee to do is bowl fast and swing it. Are you saying that that's what they expect from McDonald? Come on, man. Therefore they can't be compared.
 

Son Of Coco

Hall of Fame Member
That part's just a bonus.:happy: And Whammy doesn't have that many fansites? Does she? I wouldn't know....I guess it's just too bad McDonald's not hawt :happy:


Talking about current form.....we know nothing of McDonald's current form and it seems the selectors aren't interested either, seeing as they didn't consider him for the match today.
We know more about McDonald's current form than Lee's given he's played recently in tests. And going by that logic the selectors aren't interested in Johnson's current form either.

Look, as I said before, if Lee can perform well then I'd certainly have him over McDonald. I don't think McDonald's a super player, but he does what he does pretty well. I don't think we'll see McDonald in the first test. But we may not see Lee either, hopefully he takes a few and goes into the first test bowling well.
 
Last edited:

scorpiogal

U19 Debutant
Look at SA. He does a job.

I'd have Johnson, Siddle, Clarke, Lee/Hilfenhaus if they were all firing personally. But there's no guarantee of that.
There's no guarantee of McDonald 'firing' either. Wait a minute...can McDonald 'fire'? Can we even apply that word to his bowling? :mellow:
 

scorpiogal

U19 Debutant
We know more about McDonald's current form than Lee's given he's played recently in tests. And going by that logic the selectors aren't interested in Johnson's current form either.
He's not playing because they know what he can do? Then why is Siddle and Hilfenhaus playing? What do they have to prove that McDonald doesn't?
 

Top