• 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.

*Official* First Test at Swalec Stadium, Cardiff

Burgey

Request Your Custom Title Now!
yea ur right. strauss and cook early wickets will be vital for oz. they are the type that look to get in and settle for a long time but are also subject to low scores. you could have some luck with strauss there possibly.

a aussie opening bowlers wayward, wow your team really must have gone downhill. out of the whole of cricket mad australia you must have some good opening bowlers that know how to keep a line?
Yep, we don't have any. Ask Graeme Smith.
 

pup11

International Coach
Clark-Lee or Lee-Johnson for me. Not that I neccessarily expect either.
I would give the new ball to Siddle and Johnson to start with, but if Johnson fails to swing the new ball, then my choice would be Clark-Siddle, both bowlers are pretty likely to make the batsmen play at most of the deliveries, hence making optimum use of the new ball
 

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
Of the four, Siddle strikes me as the man with least going for him as far as new-ball use is concerned.
 

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
8-) Surprise surprise.

Honestly, someone should put it to Hilditch that he's wasting a place. Probably a bit unkind to Hauritz I suppose to actually say that in a press-conference or wherever, but that's essentially what he's doing.

Hauritz as a bowler offers nothing that North (and Clarke if fit) doesn't. All he does is makes sure Australia's side fits a template, because convention demands that a specialist spinner is picked.

Yet, just a few months back, Australia picked four seamers and won two Tests. Simply beyond belief.
 

aussie

Hall of Fame Member
8-) Surprise surprise.

Honestly, someone should put it to Hilditch that he's wasting a place. Probably a bit unkind to Hauritz I suppose to actually say that in a press-conference or wherever, but that's essentially what he's doing.

Hauritz as a bowler offers nothing that North (and Clarke if fit) doesn't. All he does is makes sure Australia's side fits a template, because convention demands that a specialist spinner is picked.

Yet, just a few months back, Australia picked four seamers and won two Tests. Simply beyond belief.
Correction 3 seamers & nonsense.
 

Matt79

Hall of Fame Member
As a side note, hate the term 'Bunsen' - one of the lamest and on CW overused pieces of slang.

After the tour matches, my Aussie team going in would be
Katich
Hughes
Ponting
Clarke
Hussey
North
Haddin
Johnson
McDonald
Lee
Siddle
12th: Clark

Don't know that Clark has demonstrated he's regained his edge after his injury woes and he was woeful without that edge when last he played.
 

Matt79

Hall of Fame Member
Correction 3 seamers & nonsense.
The guy took wickets at 20-odd and did everything asked of him, and the attack looked balanced for the first time since Warne retired. Your prejudice against McDonald is what is a nonsense.
 

aussie

Hall of Fame Member
The guy took wickets at 20-odd and did everything asked of him, and the attack looked balanced for the first time since Warne retired.
No way, the attack was by no means balanced. AUS haven't had a balance attack since Warne retired. SRI & IND 07/08 was the closest they came to that.

To get a balanced attack AUS need to play 4 quicks, because thats the obvious bowling strenght. But for some stupid reason it seems like the selectors, Neilsen & possibly even Ponting are struggling to grasp that idea.


Your prejudice against McDonald is what is a nonsense.
No, it has never been prejudice. I have given very solid irregovocable arguments to why he was a useless selection in the Should Brett Lee be selected for the Ashes thread. So for i am yet to hear any proper defense to why he was selected in the last 4 test or the Ashes squad.

Theirfore to date rather, all who have defended McDonald are living in denial.
 

inbox24

International Debutant
Seriously, if McDonald is picked for the first test I will stop supporting Australia.
 

Matt79

Hall of Fame Member
I'm sure he won't be, but I'm sure he'll play on the later tests after Ponting and the proposed all quick attack comes badly unstuck at some point. And we'll play better with him in the team.
 

Son Of Coco

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
The guy took wickets at 20-odd and did everything asked of him, and the attack looked balanced for the first time since Warne retired. Your prejudice against McDonald is what is a nonsense.
Exactly, but we should never let what actually happened get in the way of stupidity.
 

Son Of Coco

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
No way, the attack was by no means balanced. AUS haven't had a balance attack since Warne retired. SRI & IND 07/08 was the closest they came to that.

To get a balanced attack AUS need to play 4 quicks, because thats the obvious bowling strenght. But for some stupid reason it seems like the selectors, Neilsen & possibly even Ponting are struggling to grasp that idea.




No, it has never been prejudice. I have given very solid irregovocable arguments to why he was a useless selection in the Should Brett Lee be selected for the Ashes thread. So for i am yet to hear any proper defense to why he was selected in the last 4 test or the Ashes squad.

Theirfore to date rather, all who have defended McDonald are living in denial.
You need to pick your best bowling team available at the time to have a balanced attack. We did that and won against SA. Simply really.

You only consider your arguments 'irregovocable' because you conveniently ignore bits and pieces of the replies. If your ears weren't painted on and you displayed even a minute understanding of the game you'd possibly have recognised why he was selected.

Therefore, to date, you've displayed nothing but an ignorance of what bowling actually involves and what seems like a bias against someone because you don't like their style of play. As has been said before, the guy's not a world-beater but he's not terrible either.

It's easy to say 'I haven't heard any solid arguments' when you've got your fingers in your ears going 'LALALALALALALA'.
 

pasag

RTDAS
Lee, Clark, Siddle and Johnson might not work, but it has a hell of a lot more chance of working compared to anything with Hauritz or McDonald in it.
 

wpdavid

Hall of Fame Member
England squad have been announced. Harmison's not in, but Panesar is and will play ahead of Onions if the pitch suits. Bell's in as cover if any of the batters get injured.
 

wpdavid

Hall of Fame Member
Lee, Clark, Siddle and Johnson might not work, but it has a hell of a lot more chance of working compared to anything with Hauritz or McDonald in it.
It's almost certainly the attack that England would least want to face. And if one of them breaks down after Aus have won the first couple of tests, they won't worry too much.
 

King Pietersen

International Captain
Eughhh. The England selectors have screwed us over again. Panesar has done nothing to deserve being picked for the 13, let alone the XI. I'm just hoping that the Cardiff pitch looks green come Wednesday and they go in with Onions. Panesar couldn't get wickets against Glamorgan at Cardiff, what chance is he going to have at getting the Australian Test side out? They should have gone in with 12 and picked Samit Patel, he offers more with bat and ball combined than Bell and MSP.
 

Top