*Official Third Test at Edgbaston

[91Jmay]

You talk about this Aussie bowling attack as if it is good. Its actually incredibly ordinary. One decent swing bowler (7/10), one workhorse (7/10), one inconsistent with matchwinning ability (8/10), crap spinner (5/10), mediocre seamer (6/10).

 

[Ikki]

You talk about this Aussie bowling attack as if it is good. Its actually incredibly ordinary. One decent swing bowler (7/10), one workhorse (7/10), one inconsistent with matchwinning ability (8/10), crap spinner (5/10), mediocre seamer (6/10).

Based on what? The last 2-3 tests? The same ordinary attack beat S.Africa at home - a team much better than yours. They are just relatively green, inexperienced and inconsistent.

 

[Prince EWS]

Based on what? The last 2-3 tests? The same ordinary attack beat S.Africa at home

Funnily enough, that's only a sample size of one more Test than you're criticising 91Jmay for using. And they got pounded in one of those Tests, too. Not to mention you judging Swann on exactly the same sample.

They are just relatively green, inexperienced and inconsistent.

Inconsistency is not a mitigating circumstance. It's a problem. Johnson's about as likely to get consistent as Broad is to start swinging the ball both ways.

 

[Redbacks]

Johnson bowling ****house has cost our team dearly. Too impatient and if he had been able to produce what we thougth he could: we would be 1-1 or 0-2 IMO.

These are more exciting times, for the last 10 years England have been a walk up victory, and there has been no need for rigorous debate about the Australian team (just certain people manipulating any statistic they could to try and discredit each team member individually against their one star player, but now I guess you could expect Australian fans to do the same in some ways, it appears human nature when supporting a sporting team).

 

[GIMH]

And Swann with a ****-eating grin, regardless of what happens.

Haha, I read this and never expected to read another 345 posts by you in the thread, but still, bitter much? Who gives a **** about his grin? Got Ponting out with a beauty, I reckon he had him out the ball before as well, but of course 'twasn't a beauty at all, just bad batting

I disagree. We have very good players and the future prospects talent-wise are fine.

We have been such a dominant side for so long and the players of yesteryear really forged their careers together. So now that most the team has changed the confidence/character is not there in a physical form anymore. It's simply reputation, one that has been earned by others. I think the likes of Siddle, Johnson, Hughes, etc, are potential superstars, but they no longer have those all-time greats to bail them out while they learn their trade. They have not forged their own identities yet and are unsure of themselves.

Confidence is an extremely underrated thing in cricket. It can make Anderson look like Akram and Hussey look like Hussain.

Nice trolling. Ignoring the irrelevant Hussain reference, underrating Anderson to me seems pretty much indicative of the predicament Australia find themselves in in this series. Now even as one of his biggest fans I am not going to sit here and tell you he's the best bowler in the world. That being said, look at his average of 33 and tell me he's **** if you want, I hope that's what your batsmen are still doing. You really think Siddle is a better bowler than Jimmy? Hilfy is having a good series, will pay that, would rather have Jimmy myself but would happily leave that one down to opinion. But on current form, your selectors would kill to have Anderson in their side, even if he is only taking wickets through confidence

That's exaggerated to be honest. I actually would pick Watson over Flintoff if he were to stay fit. And it's not like Watson is being picked as an all-rounder. The closest all-rounder we have is Johnson, and IIRC people we already had a poll on this and Johnson came ahead. And I would actually pick Hauritz over Swann even now. Look at the figures, Hauritz has done better than Swann this series.

Haha, nice revisionism there, FMD.

And those are the most contentious positions. Yes, teams will have 1-2 players here or there that can get into other sides but the Australian side is by far tougher to get into. As decent as Strauss is doing at the moment, looking at his career he would not play for Australia even long enough to accumulate those runs. Not good enough. Yet this is besides the point, because we are talking about the prospects. Neither Broad, Cook, Bopara or Bell would be near contention for the Aussie side and that's the truth.

Not sure, really not sure. You know we are talking about a guy with one of the best conversion rates in the history of Test cricket right? With sixteen centuries yeah? An average in the mid-40s after 5 years of Test cricket, one of which saw a huge slump. A guy who averages around sixty with the armband IIRC. As much as I think Watto is a very good batsman, I'd imagine you guys would have loved to have Strauss in the side right now.

Even in terms of current form (meaning more than just this series)

Katich > Strauss, Clarke > Pietersen, Johnson > Flintoff and definitely Haddin > Prior.

Katich and STrauss, it's close, I'd pick Strauss but I'm English and biased, so meh, put that one to the neutrals. Clarke and Pietersen? You're kidding right? It's not beyond the realms of possiblity, I'd say you're wrong, imagine most would agree with me, but you're entitled to your own opinion. Just don't mix it up for fact, yeah? Johnson>Flintoff? Based on what mate, stats? Haddin V Prior, again, marginal really, but you seem very sure about it, why so?

er what? Watson could get into the English side as a pure bat and a pure bowler alone. If Stuart Broad is there, half the known world could. Flintoff wouldn't get into the Aussie side as either.

Just because you say it doesn't make it true. Would love to ask Ricky Ponting his thoughts on this one.

Ask Warne if Freddie should get into the Australian team. What do you think his answer would be? "Yes of course, he'd walk into our team, you complete ****ing muppet" or words to that effect. And yet you seem to know better. Ok, Richard 2.1

Gold, enough said

 

[Jungle Jumbo]

Just got back from Edgbaston and haven't had any time to read this through, so might be reopening old tins/just repeating others...

But yeah, great day. I was there the Saturday as well, shame that was a washout. I saw the last two sessions today - initially I wasn't supposed to be going but one of the party had to leave at lunch so I got his ticket. Sat virtually next to the Fanatics, who you had to feel a bit sorry for, being completely defenceless.

Moment of the day was easily Swann bowling Ponting, don't ever think I've celebrated at a cricket ground as much as that before. Flintoff was incredible. Broad's stand-and-deliver straight drives shows how much talent there is in that bat...Jimmy getting the single he needed to maintain his duckless record. I'll probably remember a few other things on Tuesday.

Tuesday, I hear you cry? Not tomorrow?

No, back at the ground tomorrow, got hold of tickets for me and a mate at the close of play.

 

[marc71178]

I have been pointing out that the difference in standard between the teams is that when a player is brought in for Australia the standard they have to attain to stay in the team is much higher than the standard the English players have to keep to stay in their side.

Remind us of Hussey's recent standards....

 

[Jamee999]

If I was picking a combined team for Friday:

Strauss
Katich
Ponting
Clarke
Collingwood
Prior+ (Based on an unfit Haddin, it can go either way though)
Flintoff
Swann
Anderson
Hilfenhaus
Onions

 

[GIMH]

If I was picking a combined team for Friday:

Strauss
Katich
Ponting
Clarke
Collingwood
Prior+ (Based on an unfit Haddin, it can go either way though)
Flintoff
Swann
Anderson
Hilfenhaus
Onions

7 of those players are ****, you'd clearly pick the following:

Watson
Katich
Ponting
Hussey
Clarke
North
Manou
Johnson
Hauritz
Siddle
Hilfenhaus

 

[Top_Cat]

**** me dead @ this thread.

 

[Prince EWS]

If I was picking a combined team for Friday:

Strauss
Katich
Ponting
Clarke
Collingwood
Prior+ (Based on an unfit Haddin, it can go either way though)
Flintoff
Swann
Anderson
Hilfenhaus
Onions

Just based on this series, or in general?

If I had to pick a combined Australia/England team, I'd still pick Clark. Such is life.

 

[Jamee999]

Based on who I'd expect to do the best in the next Test. I nearly picked Clark.

 

[Burgey]

That is just hilarious. Hauritz wouldn't be considered for an English squad either. A fully fit Flintoff >>>>>> Watson with ball and in terms of proven test ability Flintoff clearly has the edge with the bat. So Katich having nearly the same average as Strauss (infact actually lower) clearly shows how this amazing Australian team doesn't allow sub 50 averaging batsmen in. Cook is = to Katich when you consider the near 10 year age difference and Cooks superior number of 100's, runs and average. Hughes has had 5 good innings on pitches that suit him and 3 bad innings on pitches that don't - totally unrateable so far in his career (not to mention a duck on the pitches that favour him).

Lets look at the Australian team as a whole:
Hughes - Can't rate him yet
Katich - Above average at his best
Ponting - World Class
Hussey - Above average at best, not scored consistent test runs for his last 21 tests (averages less than 30).
Clarke - Very good player, will be World Class with a two more years of consistent scoring.
North - Technical issues seem to plague him. Not really proven at test level - worked out by any kind of swing bowling.
Haddin - Good lower order bat, but keeping leaves something to be desired.
Johnson - At his best world class, at his worst barely Test class
Hauritz - Sub-standard test spinner, shouldn't make a top test side.
Siddle - Great trier, is a decent test performer - but doesn't have the potential to ever be a top class performer.
Hilfenhaus - A good swing bowler, but was poor in South Africa. Will be a solid player for awhile though.

Don't disagree with al of this, but I would say it's a little harsh on Siddle, who I think has it in him to develop into a real quaity test bowler.

But on Ikki's post which set this debate going, I won't have Clarke > Pietersen in a month of Sundays.

 

[Prince EWS]

Based on who I'd expect to do the best in the next Test. I nearly picked Clark.

Hmm, I'd have Clark and Johnson in for Hilfenhaus and Onions. Haddin in for Prior too but yeah, pending fitness.

 

[GIMH]

If I was to try and objectively compare the teams as to series performance so far (too late and complicated for me to bother thinking about your Clarks and Harmisons ftr) I'd think about the below.

Katich v Strauss - Strauss - scoring runs for fun lately, and more so in this series than the Katman
Watson V Cook - Watson, only on the basis of one game but has looked good, and he can bowl betetr than he did today so offers that dimension over Cook too
Ponting V Bopara - Bopara haha, no, Ponting, obv
Clarke V Bell - Clarke
Hussey V Collingwood - Colly, more likely to stick around when needed, at the minute
North V Flintoff (switched around) - Flintoff, north will probs score runs but Fred offers so much more
Manou V Prior - Prior, better batsman, and keeping has been good enough to secure this berth
Johnson V Broad - both filthy with the ball, Johnson on reputation and being the better bowler in general
Hauritz V Swann - Swann, marginal, as bad as Swann was at Cardiff, he turned in a matchwinning performance at Lord's that was overshadowed by Sir Fred, and I'd back him to do the same again tomorrow
Siddle V Anderson - Jimmy, thanks
Hilfenhaus V Onions, Hilfy

 

[PhoenixFire]

Reckon that's all fair enough.

 

[Son Of Coco]

er what? Watson could get into the English side as a pure bat and a pure bowler alone. If Stuart Broad is there, half the known world could. Flintoff wouldn't get into the Aussie side as either.

I think you're clutching at straws a little there, we'd love to have Flintoff in the team as a bowler.

 

[Burgey]

Based on what? The last 2-3 tests? The same ordinary attack beat S.Africa at home - a team much better than yours. They are just relatively green, inexperienced and inconsistent.

It's not as simple as that thogh mate, just as it isn't as simple to grade the attack on what they've done (or haven't) in this series.

This attack is still in its formative stages of development. Johnson is the most experienced bowler in the side. They're raw.

I believe they can develop into a really good attack but they're not there yet because of lack of consistency.

I'd also agree that if you up and put these two sides against each other in most conditions around the world, Australia would probably (but by no means definately) shade England in most places. The reason why I say it's not definite is Australia isn't what it once was, which you'd expect.

More importantly though from the POV of this series, England'sbowlers know how to use their conditions better than our blokes do. That shouldn't really be too big a surprise given they're at home, and given the relative inexperience of our bowlers.

Likewise, if England brought this attack to Australia this coming summer, I'd back us to win quite well, because (and it'snot a slag at them, it's just the way they bowl) guys like Anderson and Onions are far less likely to find conditions conducive to their styles.

Finally, I'm really glad I went to bed at 4.30 and didn't sit through this.

 

[howardj]

Someone tell the Pommy commentators (who are otherwise very good) to STFU about Johnson and swinging it back into the right handers. They make out that unless he can do this, he's a mere club bowler. They obviously have done precious little pre-series research.

 

[Goughy]

I think someone is either drunk or on a wind up. This is no superstar Australian team. It's a very ordinary team full of unproven and inconsistent performers.

The Aussies always say it about our boys so it is nice to return the favor. This is the worst Aussie team to visit our shores since I started watching cricket.

I dont know what it says about England but it is what it is