This Krejza kid

[Jakester1288]

Jeeves > Krezja

Geeves is quite a bowler. If Hilfenhaus and himself fire, I think Tasmania will go well, in both forms of the game.

Woops, wrong Geeves.

 

[_Ed_]

Different Jeeves I think.

 

[Athlai]

 

[chaminda_00]

Right now Australia only have one spinner that FC standard, let alone Test standard. That is McGain and he is injuried right. You can hype up the likes of Casson, Cullen, Hauritz all you want, cus they weren't completely useless when they made their Test debuts.

But they have proven at FC level time and time again they aren't FC standard and more often then not only make sides to add variety to FC attack or cus they can hold a bat and aren't useless at No 7. I just don't understand why you would pick guys that barely FC standard in Test sides just for variety. It is bad enough they get picked purely for variety at FC level.

Pick White at 6 and play him as batting all rounder and let him and Clarke do the spinning. It might mean Watson doesn't play. But anything better then playing a grade spinner in a Test match, for variety.

 

[pup11]

Australia's spinning stock isn't as dire as everyone is making out, and there are plenty of 'pure' spinners if we're talking about guys who make the side on their bowling alone.
Australia are ignoring former internationals in Nathan Hauritz and Cullen Bailey, while Bryce McGain was a shoo-in to play before being injured, not to mention Cassons sudden departure after WIndies.

I guess I'm one of the few people on this board who actually rates Nathan Hauritz. Unfortunately for Australia, he moved to NSW and has thus played a handful of of FC matches in the last couple of seasons.

Yes the current crop of Australian spinners have ordinary records, and yes the two that are in the test squad are hardly good but I don't think there are absolutely no spinners at all in Australia who aren't of a decent skill level.

Though whether or not one should be picked for the sake of playing a spinner in India is another matter. In this case, I think one is deserved a shot in at least one test, and he should be the best spinner available bar injuries. Otherwise I think Australia could try and win it with pure seamers and part time spinners.

I certainly rate Nathan Hauritz, i think he is just unlucky that things haven't worked out for him as well they could have, after his test debut in India things just kept on going downhill for him, he has also had limited chances of playing FC cricket at NSW, but he still he bowled pretty well in the OD games.

He should be picked in the Aussie Odi side instead of someone like White, as not only is he a very good OD bowler, but he is a more than handy lower order batsman.

As far as longer version of the game is concerned McGain is the best short-term fix, but Casson is the best bet imo to fill the role of the test spinner in the future.

Of course their is no spinner of calibre of Warne, MacGill or even Hogg atm in Australia, but there are still decent enough spinners in state cricket who can certainly do a decent job for Australia, but Krejza certainly isn't one of them.

 

[NZTailender]

Well Hauritz is one of the worst bowlers I've ever seen IMO, and if he, Cullen, Casson and the like are honestly better than the Krejzas, Whites etc. then it begs the question of why they're not putting in performances which suggest that.

Much as I'd love to see Hauritz play more Tests so his bowling-average went up, I don't see that there's any sense in picking Krejza ahead of either Jaques or the likes of Noffke. If McGain was fit he'd probably deserve some sort of shot, but he's not and hence I don't see any point playing a specialist spinner purely because "you should play four bowlers because that's the way everyone's done it historically".

How much have you seen? I didn't get a chance to watch him in his Indian test, but I remember seeing him quite a few times in Domestic cricket (albeit List A) and he was able to get a lot of flight, speed variation, drift and spin. Not MASSIVE amounts of spin but he's not one of the worst bowlers going around

For some reason a lot of people wrote him off after he was outbowled by Clarke in that one test, which is unfair imo.

Another thing to remember is that apart from McGain, most of the spinners knocking around in domestic cricket are really quite young and not hit their peak yet. Not to mention the quality of Australian domestic batsmen and the flatness of the pitches.

 

[iamdavid]

To be honest the best fit spinner Australia have at the moment will be in the side anyway, batting at number 5. There was some logic behind playing a specialist spinner when McGain was in the frame as there is a possibility he would've had some impact or atleast been able to keep things quiet, however selecting Krejza would be ridiculous as he's just demonstrated he's not even close to the required standard.

One of Doherty, Heal, Cullen, Steve Smith, Casson or *gulp* even Hauritz or Doran would've been slightly more capable, however I recall it's the fact Krejza bowls a bit quicker which would suit the slower Indian wickets which got him picked.

I would go with four quicks and Clarke as the frontline spinner, Katich to back him up, as Clarke is quite clearly the best spinner on the tour now and I dont suspect Katich is actually any worse than Krejza or White, infact when he was bowling more often back in 2003 he was more than useful.

 

[pasag]

How much have you seen? I didn't get a chance to watch him in his Indian test, but I remember seeing him quite a few times in Domestic cricket (albeit List A) and he was able to get a lot of flight, speed variation, drift and spin. Not MASSIVE amounts of spin but he's not one of the worst bowlers going around

For some reason a lot of people wrote him off after he was outbowled by Clarke in that one test, which is unfair imo.

Another thing to remember is that apart from McGain, most of the spinners knocking around in domestic cricket are really quite young and not hit their peak yet. Not to mention the quality of Australian domestic batsmen and the flatness of the pitches.

Yeah Hauritz has impressed whenever I've seen him recently in one-dayers though we don't really need him in the ODI side. Bowling there is fine.

 

[NZTailender]

How can Clarke be the best spinner on the tour when he hasn't taken a wicket while Krejza has taken 3? Both got absolutely tonked in the second tour match.



Clarke clearly overrated by a lot of people here.

 

[pup11]

Yeah Hauritz has impressed whenever I've seen him recently in one-dayers though we don't really need him in the ODI side. Bowling there is fine.

Well White playing in ODI side as a leg spining all-rounder is an absolute joke, i would have Hauritz in there as a bowling all-rounder over him on any given day, he would be much more useful than White in my opinion.

 

[Nate]

Clarke clearly overrated by a lot of people here.

awta

 

[pup11]

How can Clarke be the best spinner on the tour when he hasn't taken a wicket while Krejza has taken 3? Both got absolutely tonked in the second tour match.



Clarke clearly overrated by a lot of people here.

Clarke is a good part-timer and can chip in with a few useful overs, but he just isn't good enough to bowl long spells and be successful, because at the end of the day he is just a part-timer.

 

[pasag]

Well White playing in ODI side as a leg spining all-rounder is an absolute joke, i would have Hauritz in there as a bowling all-rounder over him on any given day, he would be much more useful than White in my opinion.

Obv.

 

[Richard]

How much have you seen? I didn't get a chance to watch him in his Indian test, but I remember seeing him quite a few times in Domestic cricket (albeit List A) and he was able to get a lot of flight, speed variation, drift and spin. Not MASSIVE amounts of spin but he's not one of the worst bowlers going around

For some reason a lot of people wrote him off after he was outbowled by Clarke in that one test, which is unfair imo.

Nah, that didn't have that much to do with it for mine - but going for as many runs as he did was certainly a very poor performance. Was more the ODIs in SA in 2001/02 and somewhere else that I can't quite remember (says a fair bit about the bowling). And yeah that was a while ago, but the fact his domestic figures have generally been roundly woeful (and yes, at FC level - but his OD ones are hardly outstanding either), without change, I don't see anything to change my mind about that early impression.

Another thing to remember is that apart from McGain, most of the spinners knocking around in domestic cricket are really quite young and not hit their peak yet. Not to mention the quality of Australian domestic batsmen and the flatness of the pitches.

That's not something that's going to alter a great deal at international level. OK, you'll get the odd Faisal Iqbal, but most international batsmen are high-quality, and certainly there's not been an abundance of seam or spin-friendly pitches these last 7 years.

 

[Richard]

Clarke is a good part-timer and can chip in with a few useful overs, but he just isn't good enough to bowl long spells and be successful, because at the end of the day he is just a part-timer.

Isn't short successful spells preferable to long ineffective spells?

And surely all you need to do to bowl long spells is be asked to bowl them? There's not some sort of limit on the number of overs someone is allowed to bowl if their selectors have selected them as a front-line batsman.

Clarke for mine is no less likely to be effective with the ball than Krejza.

 

[Richard]

Geeves is quite a bowler. If Hilfenhaus and himself fire, I think Tasmania will go well, in both forms of the game.

Brett Geeves =| Jeetan "Jeeves" Patel.

 

[pup11]

To be honest the best fit spinner Australia have at the moment will be in the side anyway, batting at number 5. There was some logic behind playing a specialist spinner when McGain was in the frame as there is a possibility he would've had some impact or atleast been able to keep things quiet, however selecting Krejza would be ridiculous as he's just demonstrated he's not even close to the required standard.

One of Doherty, Heal, Cullen, Steve Smith, Casson or *gulp* even Hauritz or Doran would've been slightly more capable, however I recall it's the fact Krejza bowls a bit quicker which would suit the slower Indian wickets which got him picked.

I think Aussie selectors need to understand that due to the nature of tracks in Australia it won't be very easy for young rookie spin bowlers too have eye-catching records, so they would have to pick spinners on basis of talent and a bit of gut feeling.

They probably even did that in Krejza' case but obviously their gut feel has gone horribly wrong this time around.

 

[pup11]

Isn't short successful spells preferable to long ineffective spells?

And surely all you need to do to bowl long spells is be asked to bowl them? There's not some sort of limit on the number of overs someone is allowed to bowl if their selectors have selected them as a front-line batsman.

Clarke for mine is no less likely to be effective with the ball than Krejza.

But he is only going to come up with spells like those once in a long while, and as it was pretty eveident from the tour game he will get blown away once Indian batsmen decide to attack him, and of course there is no limit on how many overs a front-line batsman can bowl, but Clarke has a back problem which restricts him from bowling too much.

 

[Richard]

But he is only going to come up with spells like those once in a long while, and as it was pretty eveident from the tour game he will get blown away once Indian batsmen decide to attack him

But really, that's no different to Krejza. The only thing is Clarke isn't wasting a position that could be occupied by a batsman or a seamer by playing. Everything Krejza gives you, Clarke also gives you, but Clarke gives you more.

and of course there is no limit on how many overs a front-line batsman can bowl, but Clarke has a back problem which restricts him from bowling too much.

That's true (though it seems to me to be very on-and-off) but injuries restricting a part-timer is different from purely the line of thinking of "he's a front-line batsman so he can't be a front-line bowler too".

 

[Richard]

I think Aussie selectors need to understand that due to the nature of tracks in Australia it won't be very easy for young rookie spin bowlers too have eye-catching records, so they would have to pick spinners on basis of talent and a bit of gut feeling.

They probably even did that in Krejza' case but obviously their gut feel has gone horribly wrong this time around.

Gut feel goes wrong far more often than not really.

Frankly, though, there's just no need to pick spinners if there's none with good records. Just pick better bowlers, seamers.