Yes, I do seem to have rather ignored the "Clark for Siddle/Hauritz" options, tbf.
If North's gone Hauritz plays, but Clark for Siddle a definite possibility. Be harsh on Siddle, but desperate times, etc.
Yeah. If I had to rank the Australian bowlers on how highly I rated them overall, I'd end up with the following in order:
Clark, Johnson, Lee, Siddle, Bollinger, Hilfenhaus, Noffke, about four or five others, McDonald, a huge long list of players, Hauritz.
As much as the depth is there, however, they're all pretty close and there are several factors bringing them all even closer and creating a huge uncertainty over the whole thing. Clark's lack of recent game-time, Johnson's poor form/lack of confidence, Siddle's inexperience, Lee's injury woes, Hilfenhaus's suitability to English conditions, McDonald's batting and Hauritz's variety all make them extremely line-ball selections. This is compounded by the fact that Hilfenhaus and Hauritz (neither of whom I actually wouldn't have picked for the first Test) have done really well and cemented their places on series performances to an extent.
Really, Clark's still the first guy I'd pick. He's Australia's best bowler IMO (and that's coming from someone who was pretty sceptical of him early on) and has both good suitability to English conditions and form in the last tour game. Whether Johnson plays or not doesn't really bother me a great deal at this stage (although I'd actually lean towards retaining him *ducks for cover from angry CW mob*) but I certainly wouldn't be playing him at the expense of Clark. Assuming Johnson does play that leaves Siddle, Hilfenhaus and Hauritz left to fill two spots and while I think Siddle's a better bowler than the other two, they both offer something different to the attack and have outperformed Siddle so far this series.
I'd honestly leave Hauritz out but I really don't think it has a snowball's chance in hell of happening so I'm hoping Siddle gets axed for Clark. As harsh as that would be, I think it's the best I can hope for.