Richard
Cricket Web Staff Member
Looks more like a squad to me...
-
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.
Australian Prelimanary squad of 30
- Thread starter mikeW
- Start date
Richard
Cricket Web Staff Member
If White really is going to fill a front-line bowler's role I think England and New Zealand can safely see-off McGrath and Clark!
age_master
Hall of Fame Member
How is Hoggy an awful ODI bowler, surely 110 wickst at 27.67 would suggest to you that he is a at least pretty reasonable ODI bowler if not a good one...
that said if you take away his best 40 or 50 games his record might look pretty poor
age_master
Hall of Fame Member
They might not be up to standard but an ODI side is an ODI side. Records against those teams do count, and they count for everyone, if you take everyones performances out against the lower sides im sure most peoples averages would go up a little.
Richard
Cricket Web Staff Member
Most would, but not everyone's records would go from looking pretty good to pretty poor.
Therefore, you get rid of them for everyone and you get the fair picture for everyone.
They count only for what the individual is prepared to count them for - and there are plenty on this board who are sensible enough to realise that, in terms of ODI-cricket, what they count for is precisely nothing.
If anyone is foolish enough to refute that, lots of arguments will ensue.
Therefore, you get rid of them for everyone and you get the fair picture for everyone.
They count only for what the individual is prepared to count them for - and there are plenty on this board who are sensible enough to realise that, in terms of ODI-cricket, what they count for is precisely nothing.
If anyone is foolish enough to refute that, lots of arguments will ensue.
FaaipDeOiad
Hall of Fame Member
Hogg is comfortably in the top 5 ODI spinners in the world. Only a complete idiot could imagine he was "awful". He is in fact quite underrated, and comfortably Australia's best ever ODI spinner after Warne.
Anyway, there's no way White should be picked as an actual spinner at this point in his career. White will play a similar role to Watson, though probably bowling less overs. Hogg is a front line bowler and would be picked at the expense of one of the seamers, presumably giving an attack of McGrath, Lee, Bracken, Hogg/Johnson/Clark and Watson/White, with Symonds and Clarke as support. The best balance an Australian ODI attack has had in a very long time.
Anyway, there's no way White should be picked as an actual spinner at this point in his career. White will play a similar role to Watson, though probably bowling less overs. Hogg is a front line bowler and would be picked at the expense of one of the seamers, presumably giving an attack of McGrath, Lee, Bracken, Hogg/Johnson/Clark and Watson/White, with Symonds and Clarke as support. The best balance an Australian ODI attack has had in a very long time.
Richard
Cricket Web Staff Member
And how many specialist spinners have been picked since the turn of the 1990s...?
Virtually none during Warne's career - Hogg got in regularly only when Warne's ODI career was over (that, of course, was before his scheduled retirement).
So therefore it's not surprising that he's Australia's 2nd-best ODI spinner after Warne - someone had to be.
OK, maybe "awful"'s a bit of an exaggeration, but the fact that he's in the top 5 ODI spinners in the last 4 years (probably 4th, ATC, the incomperable Murali and the brilliant Harbhajan and the not-too-dissimilar Vettori the only ones better than him) just says that spin isn't really something that's too suited to ODIs.
Nonetheless, the fact that fools consider Bangladesh and the like ODI-standard teams makes him look much better than he is.
age_master
Hall of Fame Member
why though, everyone does well against those countries, unless players play alot of games against them. Hogg has played 8 games against Bangladesh which isn't an overly large percentage.
If you look at Murali his averages against various teams varies alot - 30.5 vs Australia, 28.4 vs India, 25.4 vs Pakistan and 27.1 vs the WI.
take his better averages which are against the lower sides - 3 vs Canada, 3.8 vs Netherlands, 8.7 vs Kenya, 7 vs UAE, 17.8 vs Zim, 17.9 vs Bangladesh, 19.6 vs NZ and 21.3 vs England.
The stats count for their career so why bother taking, unless there is a very high preportion of games against a particular lower country, taking them out to determine if you think they are 'good' or not?
age_master
Hall of Fame Member
Shane Warne
Gavin Robertson
Brad Hogg
Brad Young
Stuart Macgill
Nathan Hauritz
Cameron White
Dan Cullen
Obviously Warne and Hogg have played alot of the games, but when you have a spinner like Warne or Hogg who do a good job, why would you want anyone else?
Richard
Cricket Web Staff Member
However many games there are, they almost always make some sort of difference. Some more than others. And given that you can't pick-and-choose, these games must go for every player.
What, BTW, has Murali's case got to do with anything? Who mentioned Murali? Why does what he's done change the calibre of Bangladesh and the like?
age_master
Hall of Fame Member
it was just an example of someone else who has some wickets against Bangladesh.
I think you should put it to cricinfo to provide their stats for players for the current ones, and the ones that dont include games against Bangladesh and see what they say.
I think you should put it to cricinfo to provide their stats for players for the current ones, and the ones that dont include games against Bangladesh and see what they say.
Richard
Cricket Web Staff Member
Well, it wasn't really neccessary, everyone who's played them is likely to have some wickets against them - and not one of them should have a single one counted as ODI wickets.
Given that they have StatsGuru which can do just that I hardly see that they'd be keen on the idea.
Something I would like is a StatsGuru that can remove more than 1 team - right now the "not playing against" is limited to one team, and IMO it'd be a far better tool if it had the option to pick from all opponents.