• 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

inbox24

International Debutant
Can't believe people are defending McDonald. Sure if we were Bangladesh or Ireland fair enough, but we have SPECIALIST bowlers and batsman. It's not bits a pieces players who will win you the games, it's the specialists. Especially in test matches where the true quality of a player is put to the test and especially if the player is crapola.
 

Son Of Coco

Hall of Fame Member
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.
Of course they can, they can be compared on how well they perform their prospective roles. If Lee's bowling fast and short, swinging it to second slip 3 feet wide of the stumps then I'd prefer to have McDonald. If he's bowling fast and swinging it away from off stump causing the batsman problems then I'd have Lee. You have other players in the team, like Clark, Johnson, and Siddle who can perform a role in Lee's place. I'd pick McDonald bowling well over Lee bowling rubbish...and vice versa.
 

Son Of Coco

Hall of Fame Member
Can't believe people are defending McDonald. Sure if we were Bangladesh or Ireland fair enough, but we have SPECIALIST bowlers and batsman. It's not bits a pieces players who will win you the games, it's the specialists. Especially in test matches where the true quality of a player is put to the test and especially if the player is crapola.

I know you can't...proves my point:happy:
 

Son Of Coco

Hall of Fame Member
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.

Mostly down to the last test. He performed well in the first two. Did you watch them?

No one's saying he's great. But he's not **** either on his performances so far.
 

Son Of Coco

Hall of Fame Member
There's no guarantee of McDonald 'firing' either. Wait a minute...can McDonald 'fire'? Can we even apply that word to his bowling? :mellow:
There's not no...thank you for agreeing that we shouldn't pick someone who isn't in form :happy: Firing isn't just threatening the square leg umpire with 150kph deliveries. But McDonald isn't a strike bowler like Lee, no. Understanding there's more than one type of bowler helps in this situation. McDonald was the type of bowler Australia needed in SA to tie down an end for a while. He's never going to blast batsmen out though, that's not what he's there to do. If they need that again in England he'll undoubtedly get another go.
 
Last edited:

scorpiogal

U19 Debutant
Of course they can, they can be compared on how well they perform their prospective roles. If Lee's bowling fast and short, swinging it to second slip 3 feet wide of the stumps then I'd prefer to have McDonald. If he's bowling fast and swinging it away from off stump causing the batsman problems then I'd have Lee. You have other players in the team, like Clark, Johnson, and Siddle who can perform a role in Lee's place. I'd pick McDonald bowling well over Lee bowling rubbish...and vice versa.
You'd prefer having McDonald bowling medium-paced pies?:mellow:
Maybe you can compare Clark and McDonald, then. Medium paced, line and length. Compare those two.

People on here saying they'd prefer McDonald over Lee know it's a crap comparison. They have no idea what McDonald can produce in England but speak as if he's a sureshot if Lee doesn't perform. Let's be realistic, here.
 

scorpiogal

U19 Debutant
There's not no...thank you for agreeing that we shouldn't pick someone who isn't in form :happy: Firing isn't just threatening the square leg umpire with 150kph deliveries. But McDonald isn't a strike bowler like Lee, no. Understanding there's more than one type of bowler helps in this situation. McDonald was the type of bowler Australia needed in SA to tie down an end for a while. He's never going to blast batsmen out though, that's not what he's there to do. If they need that again in England he'll undoubtedly get another go.
Well then, that's where you folks can compare Clark and McDonald. Two guys who specialise in tying ends down. I honestly think they'd turn to Clark first though.
 

tooextracool

International Coach
Mostly down to the last test. He performed well in the first two. Did you watch them?

No one's saying he's great. But he's not **** either on his performances so far.
bits and pieces of them yes. Personally, McDonald is nothing more than the average run of the mill county medium pacer that we see in England. His bowling could be likened to someone like a Paul Collingwood. I cannot believe that a team like Australia would waste one of their bowling spots on someone like him. Pick 4 specialist bowlers, and no Hauritz isnt one of them.
 

Son Of Coco

Hall of Fame Member
You'd prefer having McDonald bowling medium-paced pies?:mellow:
Maybe you can compare Clark and McDonald, then. Medium paced, line and length. Compare those two.

People on here saying they'd prefer McDonald over Lee know it's a crap comparison. They have no idea what McDonald can produce in England but speak as if he's a sureshot if Lee doesn't perform. Let's be realistic, here.
If they're straight and tie down an end I'd prefer that over 150kph 4 balls to be honest. I think I said McDonald performing well I'd take over Lee not performing well. Never said it was certain, and we won't know until they all play.

You pick your bowlers to bowl...if you had 4 bowlers like McDonald in your team there'd be a problem, but Australia won't have that without Lee. You don't need Lee there if he's not bowling well. You could then have Johnson, Siddle, Clark, McDonald or Johnson, Siddle, Clark, Hilfenhaus and you wouldn't lose anything. Lee might bowl brilliantly though and then you'd have him there for sure. In that case I wouldn't be keeping McDonald :happy:
 

Son Of Coco

Hall of Fame Member
bits and pieces of them yes. Personally, McDonald is nothing more than the average run of the mill county medium pacer that we see in England. His bowling could be likened to someone like a Paul Collingwood. I cannot believe that a team like Australia would waste one of their bowling spots on someone like him. Pick 4 specialist bowlers, and no Hauritz isnt one of them.
He was what Australia needed and they used him quite well. What any bowling attack needs is 4/5 bowlers bowling well and doing their job.
 

scorpiogal

U19 Debutant
If they're straight and tie down an end I'd prefer that over 150kph 4 balls to be honest. I think I said McDonald performing well I'd take over Lee not performing well. Never said it was certain, and we won't know until they all play.

You pick your bowlers to bowl...if you had 4 bowlers like McDonald in your team there'd be a problem, but Australia won't have that without Lee. You don't need Lee there if he's not bowling well. You could then have Johnson, Siddle, Clark, McDonald or Johnson, Siddle, Clark, Hilfenhaus and you wouldn't lose anything. Lee might bowl brilliantly though and then you'd have him there for sure. In that case I wouldn't be keeping McDonald :happy:
Clark and Siddle ain't a certainty either, though.
 

Son Of Coco

Hall of Fame Member
Well then, that's where you folks can compare Clark and McDonald. Two guys who specialise in tying ends down. I honestly think they'd turn to Clark first though.
They will, if Clark's bowling well. I'd say McDonald will only really be in competition with Hauritz for a spot when needed...but if other bowlers are bowling badly he'll get a look in for sure.

The only person who is a certainty is Johnson...I'd lean towards Siddle because he's bowled well recently but it'd depend on how he comes back from injury. McDonald could get a spot if the three guys who haven't played for a while can't hit the pitch. :happy:
 
Last edited:

social

Hall of Fame Member
You'd prefer having McDonald bowling medium-paced pies?:mellow:
Maybe you can compare Clark and McDonald, then. Medium paced, line and length. Compare those two.

People on here saying they'd prefer McDonald over Lee know it's a crap comparison. They have no idea what McDonald can produce in England but speak as if he's a sureshot if Lee doesn't perform. Let's be realistic, here.
Reality

Lee has been woeful for 7/8 last tests, hasnt played in months and has been an abject failure in Eng

McDonald was an important part of Oz's victory in SA and POTENTIALLY will be suited by Eng conditions

BTW, people are comparing McD and Lee because both, AT BEST, will be the fourth choice bowler
 
Last edited:

scorpiogal

U19 Debutant
Reality

Lee has been woeful for 7/8 last tests, hasnt played in months and has been an abject failure in Eng

McDonald was an important part of Oz's victory in SA and POTENTIALLY will be suited by Eng conditions

BTW, people are comparing McD and Lee because both, AT BEST, will be the fourth choice bowler
Potentially. Of course we won't know, cos he wasn't given the chance. Seems he isn't in the plans atm.

Lee, AT BEST > McDonald 8-)
Lee, AT BEST > Hilfenhaus
 

Top