That's the thing- Dale Steyn's easily the best bowler in the world. He's the only one I can think of, and plenty of people still level the "needs the ball to swing" criticism at him. Fact is, all but the all-time greats need some sort of help from conditions to take wickets. It's really not a fair criticism in the context of someone like Jimmy.
I wasn't aware people were comparing solely with the fact in mind that we were comparing players and their records in India, but overall.
Well, a lot of people don't get it. It's the selector's choice. They believe in Siddle enough to give him the go-ahead. If they do so, then a fan like me is going to expect him to perform to a standard that would justifiably keep a Clark or a Lee out. And if he can't, then it was a selection blunder that contributed to our downfall - not that England were just so uber superlative for this test series - because we HAVE those choices right now watching the game from the sidelines.
I am sure I have high expectations because of the past, but I also have it for reasons in the present. The system and the players did not just disappear. We have ready players on the sideline. Heck, I think our 2nd XI would be formidable. The only thing a lot of our players lack is experience and confidence. I am confident they have the talent - they keep showing it for mine and then lack the discipline to keep it going.
A fit Clark might be better than Anderson, just like a fast-bowling unicorn might be. Neither exist.
He's galloping on the field giving drinks FFS.
As jondavluc & f_o_s said it depends on when the Australian closure comes. Me, anything over 150 would be brown trouser time. There's a nagging doubt that we'll be chasing something like 185 off about 30 overs, have a mow, lose early wickets and have to bat time to save the test.
Watson & Clarke the keys, for me, venturing into "stating the obvious" territory as that may be. Haddin's batting is a huge miss too.
I'd agree Hilfenhaus has been probably the most consistent seamer all series, Fred & Jimmy have bowled better spells, but have both gone missing in sessions in a way Hilf hasn't.
Clarke is the big big wicket today, especially with no Haddin, who I reckon is one of your best batsmen atm.
Agreed.
Not everyone can simply watch every game and looks at scorecards. But don't even pretend it's close. His bowling average is much higher than his batting average over the last 3 years. And yet he would "walk into every team in the world".Look at what? Stats? Stick em mate, told ya, I watch cricket, not read scorecards. Go make a graph or something, i don't give a ****. I've seen every Test match Freddie has played in the last 6 or 7 years I reckon, whether live, highlights, or whatever. When he came back from injury last summer, straight away the world XI threads in CC had him in there at 8, almost unanimously.
But obviously Australia>>>World XI
If he at least offers a shot and just gets beaten I'll live with that. If he gets castled shouldering arms again I'll go ****ing berko.
Well if this is as fit as Clark's going to get, then he's not in the same league as Jimmy. If he could regain his peak, which is what I thought you meant by being fully fit, then he'd be a class above.He's galloping on the field giving drinks FFS.
Hilfenhaus's stats over the past two or three years have been more than good enough to justify his selection IIRC.
But Ikki, when he swings it he's good. You just said you think our attack is good because it will become consistently better, yet you don't concede Anderson's good when he swings it on occasionsmOr they accentuate the fact that they were NZ and WIndies.
And yes, I do expect our bowlers to try to attain the standard of a McGrath or a Warne although they won't get close. But IMO we should be churning out Jason Gillespie's.
Sure he would.
GMAFB. He is only good when he can get it swinging. Not that good, I am sorry.
Clark has barely played but a fit Clark > a fit Anderson. You are ridiculously overrating Anderson.
And in S.Africa? Give me a break. The guy bowls good when it swings, and is just average when it doesn't. Yet he is being touted as possibly the best fast bowler in the world for some English fans/comms. Even at home, his record is only made good by the beatings he gave New Zealand, Zimbabwe and WIndies. He has been at best average against the other 3 he has played (Australia, India and S.Africa).
Swing has a lot to do with conditions. When I am talking about consistency, I am talking about things one can learn to be better. Better seam position, more concentration, bowling fuller, etc.
Flintoff making the side based on what? This series? Last series? Last year? 2005? Based on what?
Alright, I'll stop arguing it. Just for youPlease promise me this discussion won't dominate the thread when play tarts, otherwise I will stick a jug element in my shower* tonight and put myself out of my misery.
*for English posterd, the shower is usually in the bathroom near the toilet. It looks like a glass-encased square little room, or has a curtain separating it from the room. Try it sometime
Thought I'd made it clear I cbf with a stats discussion tbh.Not everyone can simply watch every game and looks at scorecards. But don't even pretend it's close. His bowling average is much higher than his batting average over the last 3 years. And yet he would "walk into every team in the world".
& how is this not using stats to talk him down? FFS.
