Bracken puts a new spin on bid for Test selection.

[Prince EWS]

Might as well start concentrating on ODI and 20-20 (IPL) since he is no longer a part of Aus's test plans.

They still play four-day cricket in New South Wales, I hear. Stunning news I know.

 

[Uppercut]

I think Bracks' lack of seam movement is against him too. On pitches other than raging nightmares, he tends to just kiss the surface on the way through to the 'keeper. The perception seems to be that he takes ODI wickets at a decent clip becaus the batsmen are going after him whereas in a Test, they just have to wait for the loose one and put it away because you know it's not going to hav a lot of zip on it.

That, and he generally only swings the ball away from the right-hander so the feeling is that they can watch him go all day because he won't threaten their stumps. If he learnt to bowl around the wicket he could be a real handful in longer-form cricket anyway, but lefties never seem to like doing so.

I'd have surely had him play more tests than he has done to date, mainly because Johnson, Tait and Siddle aren't much better, but there's a lot of truth in what you say. Bracken's a rarity, a truly world-class one-day bowler unlikely to ever have any remote success in tests.

 

[Precambrian]

They still play four-day cricket in New South Wales, I hear. Stunning news I know.

Haha. Yeah, I was thinking about only International engagements.

 

[Prince EWS]

Haha. Yeah, I was thinking about only International engagements.

I disagree that he should focus on limited overs cricket just because that's his own chance of playing for his country, though. He can obviously go that way if that's what he wants but I'd personally be disappointed by such a decision.

I'd actuallytake much more pride in playing First Class cricket for New South Wales than I would in playing ODI cricket for Australia and while I realise I'm probably in a tiny minority there, I definitely don't think it's right for people to suggest players just focus on one day cricket if that is their stronger suit.

Whilst I don't think this'll actually work, I agree with Goughy in that it shows a lot of ambition, comittment and well-placed priorities. A lot of cricketers would be content being one of the best ODI bowlers in the world and earning huge money in the IPL but Bracken wants to be a Test cricketer and he's willing to put in serious work in attempting to get there: good on him.

 

[four_or_six]

Whilst I don't think this'll actually work, I agree with Goughy in that it shows a lot of ambition, comittment and well-placed priorities. A lot of cricketers would be content being one of the best ODI bowlers in the world and earning huge money in the IPL but Bracken wants to be a Test cricketer and he's willing to put in serious work in attempting to get there: good on him.

I reckon it will work, to an extent. Most of the international players who did well in the IPL had some strong first-class experience behind them, and I reckon that will continue to be the case in the forseeable future. If players like Bracken put in the hard yards in first class cricket I think other things will take care of themselves.

It's basically rubbish to suggest that players such as Watson/Marsh played well in the IPL because they are T20 specialists who just whack the ball around. They are well developed players who have a reasonable amount of first class experience as well as Australia A and U19 behind them. I still think the best way to become one of the top players in the IPL (and for that matter in international limited overs cricket) is to have a solid first class career behind you. Maybe Warner will make me eat my words but...

 

[Richard]

Can someone clarify pls why Bracken didnt play an ODI in 2004, despite averaging 13 in the previous year?

Can't recall, but imagine it must have been due to injury.

EDIT: Seemingly not looking at Cricinfo - his disappointing test debut must have been held against him, which makes little sense in retrospect

Bracken only played the ODIs he played in 2003/04 (and 2000/01) as a backup player. He wasn't yet a first-choice. And with McGrath, Gillespie, Brett Lee, Hogg, Bichel, Kasprowicz and even Ian Harvey and Shane Watson (massively inferior bowlers but capable with the bat), it's not that surprising.

Bracken's ODI break only came in the 2005/06 season. Before then he was always on the outside waiting for not just an injury but 3 or 4 of them simualtaneously.

 

[Richard]

I reckon it will work, to an extent. Most of the international players who did well in the IPL had some strong first-class experience behind them, and I reckon that will continue to be the case in the forseeable future. If players like Bracken put in the hard yards in first class cricket I think other things will take care of themselves.

It's basically rubbish to suggest that players such as Watson/Marsh played well in the IPL because they are T20 specialists who just whack the ball around. They are well developed players who have a reasonable amount of first class experience as well as Australia A and U19 behind them. I still think the best way to become one of the top players in the IPL (and for that matter in international limited overs cricket) is to have a solid first class career behind you. Maybe Warner will make me eat my words but...

I don't think the two impact on each other. Some good First-Class players are also good OD players, but ability in First-Class cricket is irrelevant to ability in OD cricket. Being a poor FC cricketer won't hold you back if your OD skills are good enough and being good at FC cricket certainly won't help you if you don't possess the essential OD skills.

 

[Richard]

That, and he generally only swings the ball away from the right-hander so the feeling is that they can watch him go all day because he won't threaten their stumps.

Bracken?

I've seen Bracken move the ball back into the right-handers plenty. It's Mitchell Johnson who struggles to do that (though he's shown enough that we know he isn't completely incapable of doing so).

 

[Uppercut]

Bracken?

I've seen Bracken move the ball back into the right-handers plenty. It's Mitchell Johnson who struggles to do that (though he's shown enough that we know he isn't completely incapable of doing so).

I'm just passing on perceived knowledge based on what a lot of others have said about him. In truth i hardly see him because i watch so few ODIs.

 

[four_or_six]

I don't think the two impact on each other. Some good First-Class players are also good OD players, but ability in First-Class cricket is irrelevant to ability in OD cricket. Being a poor FC cricketer won't hold you back if your OD skills are good enough and being good at FC cricket certainly won't help you if you don't possess the essential OD skills.

Totally DWTA, but I think we've had that conversation before so I won't start it again.

 

[Richard]

It is, though. Obviously some skills are useful in both, but there's a whole load of things that help you in one form which are either useless or even a genuine hindrance in the other. For both batsmen and bowlers.

You just need to look at the number of players successful at one format and not at the other.

 

[Top_Cat]

I bet he really wishes he hadn't played those Tests, actually, as he hadn't developed properly as a bowler yet and it's still being held against him.

If Bracken hadn't been picked for Tests too early and looked completely dire I'm almost positive he'd be in the team right now.

You reckon? I don't think so. Has little to do with those Tests too, I just don't think he has the swing or seam movement to be a consistently good Test bowler. Has his moments in ODI's but he's a bowler you can sweat on a bit.

 

[Richard]

Surely, though, you'd agree that he deserves more than 2 Tests to show whether he has more than he appears based on ODIs to do?

Because as I said, that's all he's had since he ceased to be a wholly moderate bowler and became a pretty decent one. For NSW in the four-day game, that is.

 

[Top_Cat]

Surely, though, you'd agree that he deserves more than 2 Tests to show whether he has more than he appears based on ODIs to do?

Because as I said, that's all he's had since he ceased to be a wholly moderate bowler and became a pretty decent one. For NSW in the four-day game, that is.

Seriously, who would you drop right now? Johnson's been Australia's best wicket-taker for a while, Lee's just hit some form again and Clark surely isn't far away.

 

[Richard]

Oh, right now, Johnson's in for at least another 3 or 4 games. The point about Bracken was more about Johnson playing ahead of him for the last year, Tait playing ahead of him once and the frankly downright ridiculous spectre of Siddle not merely getting in squad but team ahead of him. Bollinger has perhaps had a better case than any of the previous three too - Siddle at the very least.

And that of course applies to Noffke even more than Bracken or Bollinger, as Noffke has had neither 3 Tests when he was plain poor nor 2 after becoming better.

 

[Top_Cat]

Oh, right now, Johnson's in for at least another 3 or 4 games. The point about Bracken was more about Johnson playing ahead of him for the last year, Tait playing ahead of him once and the frankly downright ridiculous spectre of Siddle not merely getting in squad but team ahead of him. Bollinger has perhaps had a better case than any of the previous three too - Siddle at the very least.

And that of course applies to Noffke even more than Bracken or Bollinger, as Noffke has had neither 3 Tests when he was plain poor nor 2 after becoming better.

Yeah but it's pretty obvious selection isn't done just on the basis of stats. You just get a sense for when a player is a big-match cricketer and there's issues of balance, which personalities seem to work best with each other, etc. Blokes like Siddle are that type which is why he got a game in India and hardly disgraced himself. That he pinged Gambhir on the helmet first ball with a bumper tells you about the sort of competitor he is. On stats, his selection wasn't warranted but he did enough in that game to enhance his chances of playing again immeasurably. For all we know, both Noffke and Bolly were arrogant ****s at training or a senior player had a word to Ponting saying "Reckon you need to have a look at Siddle, he's bowling good stuff/better than Noffke/Bolly right now" and that sealed the deal. Either that or Merv threw his weight behind a fellow aggressive Victorian fast bowler.

They erred with the treatment of White and Krezja (and spinners in general for a while now, picking Casson at all then treating him like a leper hasn't been great) so they don't get it right all the time but picking Siddle over Bolly and Noffers was an attacking move at least. It didn't pay off entirely in Mohali but probably will down the track.

 

[Smudge]

I agree with the posters on this thread who aren't impressed with Bracken's decision. I mean, how dare he even contemplate the thought of trying something different to break into the test team - a dream he obviously hasn't given up on? Who is he to do what he feels is best for himself rather than what a bunch of no-names on an internet want him to do?

 

[Precambrian]

I will be glad to see an Australian team without Bracken than an Australian team with Bracken as a spinner. Bloody gives a message to the opposition right?

 

[Smudge]

I will be glad to see an Australian team without Bracken than an Australian team with Bracken as a spinner. Bloody gives a message to the opposition right?

Oh forgive me, I must have missed the 15 paragraphs in the linked story where he said he was giving up the seam bowling totally for spin. I really must get my eyes checked.

 

[Precambrian]

How about the opening para, quoted for your convenience.

SWING bowler Nathan Bracken is trying a new pitch in an attempt to force his way back into the Australian Test squad - he's been working on his spin bowling skills.