*Official* Australia in England

[iamdavid]

It would be a fair gamble, but I think it could potentially add another dimension to the attack without notably weakening the batting, and the noises I've been hearing from Ponting/Nielsen lately, both on Tait and Smith suggest to me it's not completely out of the question.

I know Smith still has plenty of boxes to tick with the bat, but are we that sure North's a better option? North's always been a boom or bust player anyway and he's already demonstrated a tendancy to rack up strings of single figure scores so far in his test career...obviously he offers experience that Smith lacks and his technique is more orthodox...although not necessarily better.

A fair bit would have to happen between now and November for them to seriously consider it, Tait would have to demonstrate a sudden change in attitude/fitness and prove he can survive a FC game. Smith would have to play the tests against Pakistan and prove he can do a job with the ball at test level. If those things were to eventuate I reckon it could be an option worth looking at.

 

[Debris]

Genuinely shocked to see no mention of Tait being a chucker on here.

Someone thinks that Tait throws it? Bizarre

 

[Son Of Coco]

Hypothetically, if he were to get himself reasonably fit (big if), I could see Tait having an impact in the Ashes...you couldn't play him as part of a four man attack though, especially if Hauritz or Smith are there too. Becuase then they'll effectively be left with two bowlers half the time...

Time to take a gamble and take advantage of the balance that having two good allrounders in Smith and Watson can potentially offer the side.

Would rather we just stopped getting excited when Tait bowls well in an OD match, remember how he has gone in previous tests, and look at other more viable options myself.

 

[iamdavid]

Would rather we just stopped getting excited when Tait bowls well in an OD match, remember how he has gone in previous tests, and look at other more viable options myself.

Perhaps I sound a little overeager, not saying we should drop everything and try rush Tait into the test side. Just that given the impact he's had when he has been in the team (admitedly only in LO cricket) over the past year or so and the fact we have an emerging all-rounder who could allow us to play him as part of a 5 man attack without destroying the batting, it's something that should be considered...

I know he/the team have flopped when he's played tests in the past, but that's been as part of a four-man attack, and I think it's plainly obvious that Tait lacks the stamina to do a job as part of a four man attack in test cricket.
However, if Smith shows he's not out of his depth with the blade at test level (hopefully in the series against Pakistan), then I reckon the benefits of having Tait there to provide extra impact as part of a 5 man attack outweight the negative impact on the batting of leaving North out for Smith.

 

[Son Of Coco]

Perhaps I sound a little overeager, not saying we should drop everything and try rush Tait into the test side. Just that given the impact he's had when he has been in the team (admitedly only in LO cricket) over the past year or so and the fact we have an emerging all-rounder who could allow us to play him as part of a 5 man attack without destroying the batting, it's something that should be considered...

I know he/the team have flopped when he's played tests in the past, but that's been as part of a four-man attack, and I think it's plainly obvious that Tait lacks the stamina to do a job as part of a four man attack in test cricket.
However, if Smith shows he's not out of his depth with the blade at test level (hopefully in the series against Pakistan), then I reckon the benefits of having Tait there to provide extra impact as part of a 5 man attack outweight the negative impact on the batting of leaving North out for Smith.

Fair enough. If he could be used in short, sharp bursts then he could possibly add some value. As Goughy mentioned though, I'm not sure how it would affect the balance of the team.

 

[Top_Cat]

I know he/the team have flopped when he's played tests in the past, but that's been as part of a four-man attack, and I think it's plainly obvious that Tait lacks the stamina to do a job as part of a four man attack in test cricket.

Not directed at you but this idea that Tait doesn't have the stamina to bowl big overs is bogus. Did so for years with SA, regularly bowled as many or more than the other pacers and took plenty of wickets on home soil so it didn't dull his effectiveness. He was definitely not a shock weapon for SA, was very much a front-liner. Some might say this contributed to his burn-out but that's neither here nor there.

If he's to be in serious contention for a Test spot, reckon it's a cop-out to say he can't bowl long spells so he shouldn't. No, sorry, he's done it before and he needs to prove he's up to bowling 20 overs per innings before even being considered for a Test spot as far as I'm concerned. Much like England figured out Devon Malcolm was a luxury only when things were going well or they had no other choice, giving Tait 4 over spells when he contributes very little else puts too much on the backs of the other bowlers. Would rather see Dougeh/Harris/Hilf pound in all day with Johnson as a shock weapon than Tait.

 

[Matt79]

He's pretty much made it very clear that he's not at all interested in playing four and five day cricket though, hasn't he? Think until he's prepared to show he can rock up for four days in a row for SA, there's no way he should be near the Test team. He's found a great niche, and I love watching him do it, but given the options that are there for the test team anyway, I don't feel any urgency to try and force him into something he's worked out doesn't suit him at all.

 

[Debris]

The reason Tait is not being picked for the test side is not lack of stamina but lack of skill. Top order batsmen will get used to the pace and Tait does not really have a lot else if the ball is not swinging.

 

[Top_Cat]

He's pretty much made it very clear that he's not at all interested in playing four and five day cricket though, hasn't he?

Latest mail from yesterday (http://www.cricinfo.com/england-v-australia-2010/content/story/465935.html);

"I've never come out and said I've retired from the longer form," Tait said. "I haven't thought about it. I was pretty excited to be called up to the one-day side as I haven't been in it for over 12 months. I haven't played a four-day game for a long time now. I'm in a pretty good place right now. It's the first time for a long time I've stayed on the park as well. In the last eight or nine years I've been injured in each one, apart from this season."

 

[Top_Cat]

The reason Tait is not being picked for the test side is not lack of stamina but lack of skill. Top order batsmen will get used to the pace and Tait does not really have a lot else if the ball is not swinging.

Not strictly true. The bloke found a way to average similarly to Gillespie in FC cricket (mid-20's) on Adelaide Oval, reversed the ball fairly regularly and bowled a similar number of overs to Dizzy. Was always good value at the start and end of the day and could keep it relatively quiet in the middle if needed. The last thing many Shield batters wanted to see was Tait warming up for half-an-hour to go, light fading and the ball reversing.

The problem, for mine, was that he was never just a shock bowler for SA so when picked to do that in Tests, looked all at sea. Now he does nothing but and can't bowl long spells!

So yeah, now he's doing what he was earmarked for 4 years ago but, as package, doesn't look a high-percentage selection in Tests. Can't bat, can't field, can't bowl long spells. Would require many compromises to accommodate his selection for not much return, tbh.

 

[Malleeboy]

Wouldn't Harris be in line before Tait?

What is the order of the Australian Test fast bowlers....

Johnson
Bollinger

Would be the first two picked then....

Hilfenhaus
Harris

But where does Siddle fit in the order once fit??

 

[TumTum]

Wouldn't Harris be in line before Tait?

What is the order of the Australian Test fast bowlers....

Johnson
Bollinger

Would be the first two picked then....

Hilfenhaus
Harris

But where does Siddle fit in the order once fit??

Siddle and Hilfenhaus could only get back into the team if Harris or Bollinger get injured or stop performing.

 

[Spark]

I would think Hilfenhaus would have a strong chance of getting back in...

 

[Burgey]

If all are fit, I imagine Hilenhaus and Siddle woyld both be ahead of Harris, but Johnson and Dougeh would be the first two picked.

Dougeh.

 

[Matt79]

Hilfy might not be clearly ahead of Harris until its clear that he's back in fitness and form - not sure whether he'll have much chance to demonstrate that he is prior to the Aussie summer. Both should be ahead of Siddle, much as I love the bloke.

 

[BoyBrumby]

Genuinely shocked to see no mention of Tait being a chucker on here.

Bit of a slingy action (not in the Thomson/Malinga class tho), but no complaints about the legality of it from me anyway. Looks smoother than Lee's did when Brett was straining for the top notes to my eyes.

Re Harris, surprised to see people reckon Siddle would be ahead of him in the selectors' thoughts. Sid seems a whole-hearted lad (something of a throwback, in a good way) but Harris looks much the better bowler as of now. Presume he's in line to play v Pakistan?

As a pom I'd be far happier to see Siddle play at the Gabba.

 

[Top_Cat]

With BB on this one, reckon neither Hilf nor Siddle should be a shoe-in when they become fit. Ahead of Siddle for form and fitness right now, can swing the ball almost like Hilf and at pace and is a better bat than either.

Love Siddle and reckon pre-injury he was very unlucky but not very often in the past year has he looked likely to really challenge top players consistently, has surely either been carrying a niggle or just out of form. Too few strings of good balls in a row, tended to bowl a couple of good ones then release the pressure, usually short and wide. If he knocks that out of his game, he has a better future than Harris. He moves the ball more consistently in less favourable conditions and reckon he's a bit smarter whereas Harris is more of a 'sit on a length all day' type of bowler. Both probably have similar ideal lengths but I reckon Siddle the more versatile bowler when he gets it right and will be very, very dangerous when he, much like McGrath, really develops the ball which holds its line outside off to complement his big movement back into the batter. Both will run in all day, etc.

Also depends on how swing friendly conditions are. If they're really going to hoop, Hilf might sneak past Harris for variation.

 

[treamcast34]

Said this before, Hilfenhaus would be challenging Steyn as the world's best fast bowler at present if not for injuries. If he doesn't open the bowling for them (assuming he stays fit) along with Bollinger at the Gabba this year I'll be very surprised. Johnson to be first change. The only question I have is whether they work Smith into the line up for North, or perhaps go further and turf Hauritz out for an additional quick (Harris? Siddle? Hazlewood?).

Don't think we'll be doing too much adjusting. An attack of Anderson, Broad, Swann and Onions (if fit), although I'd like to see them show some dare and start Finn in the first test. Aussies have more talent than us, but for the first time in a long time it appears we will go in with a more settled line up. As little turbulence as possible to start will be key.

 

[pasag]

I don't think people get how much Siddle (and to a lesser extent Hilfenhaus) is loved by Ponting the selectors.

 

[pasag]

Said this before, Hilfenhaus would be challenging Steyn as the world's best fast bowler at present if not for injuries.

No he wouldn't.