***Official*** Australian Domestic Season 2010/11

[vcs]

Agree with Social. Don't think there's anything inherently wrong in the techniques of those guys. Nothing glaring anyway.

 

[Top_Cat]

Having said that, they (Ponting, Clarke, Watto, etc) would adapt pretty quickly if they had to play a lot in seaming/swinging conditions - they're simply so talented that it defies belief that they couldnt

Whatever the technical reason, we've already seen about three years of them adjusting to more bowler-friendly conditions and the number of sub-100 scores alone doesn't make for pretty reading. Nor that the bowlers doing most of the damage in those cases were swing bowlers. Nor that the modes of dismissal were fairly similar when Australia struggled (nicking out or clean-bowled/LBW).

And regarding Viv, I would argue his technique did hurt him post-30 when his eyes went, a couple of great knocks aside.

Nope, sorry, swing bowling is a massive problem in the current Test lot and it's time for an intervention. Come out of the closet, Australia. It's ridiculous that seam-up wicket-to-wicket types like Butterworth, Faulkner and Maher can take so many wickets in a Shield season and I'm not the only one to think so.

 

[pup11]

Whatever the technical reason, we've already seen about three years of them adjusting to more bowler-friendly conditions and the number of sub-100 scores alone doesn't make for pretty reading. Nor that the bowlers doing most of the damage in those cases were swing bowlers. Nor that the modes of dismissal were fairly similar when Australia struggled (nicking out or clean-bowled/LBW).

And regarding Viv, I would argue his technique did hurt him post-30 when his eyes went, a couple of great knocks aside.

Nope, sorry, swing bowling is a massive problem in the current Test lot and it's time for an intervention. Come out of the closet, Australia. It's ridiculous that seam-up wicket-to-wicket types like Butterworth, Faulkner and Maher can take so many wickets in a Shield season and I'm not the only one to think so.

My problem with these sort of pitches is that it has virtually led the spinners to the verge of extinction in Australia and the quicks these days have simply flattering figures which is providing a pretty murky picture of things.

One might say that playing on these helpful pitches might improve batting techniques, but why go through all that pain..!?

These days one would hardly see a grassy or juiced up pitch for any international game so why are prospective international cricketers being made to play in conditions that they are very rarely likely to experience at the highest level.

The domestic pitches should be fairly similar to the ones that you have in the international arena so that bowlers and batsmen all could evolve their games accordingly, if nothing is done about this then we would have a breed of batsmen with defensive mindsets not knowing how to build a big innings and a bunch overrated seamers.

 

[vic_orthdox]

Hold up a bit, this year was a bit of a freak summer in terms of weather along the eastern seaboard. Lets give the curators a bit of slack for this year - yes, wickets were a bit more pronounced than the run makers, and maybe it's a sign of an ongoing trend, but lets not jump at shadows.

 

[GotSpin]

God forbid we make the batsmen work hard for their runs. Shouldn't it be more of a concern that no batsman crossed 1000 runs rather than providing excuses for their failings.

 

[Spark]

You don't want to see a marked disparity between the Test pitches - which are mostly flat - and the Shield pitches though. Does no one any good.

 

[GotSpin]

You don't want to see a marked disparity between the Test pitches - which are mostly flat - and the Shield pitches though. Does no one any good.

It's better for the batsmen to play on tough domestic wickets than easy wickets in preparing them for test cricket

 

[Spark]

It's not good for the bowlers though. You have to find a balance.

---

What's this about the FTP program including a Zimbabwe tour in June?

 

[HeathDavisSpeed]

Hey Aussies, would appreciate some thoughts on James Faulkner and Ryan Duffield as well as James Pattinson. Saw all three in the KFC big bash and they looked pretty good prospects. What pace would they bowl at?

If you had one space available in your team and the three guys above as your options, who would you take? I'm inclined towards Faulkner - looked quality with the ball, has had an exceptional season with the ball and can also bat.... But having not watched FC, is there anything else that I should consider?

 

[Nate]

Hey Aussies, would appreciate some thoughts on James Faulkner and Ryan Duffield as well as James Pattinson. Saw all three in the KFC big bash and they looked pretty good prospects. What pace would they bowl at?

If you had one space available in your team and the three guys above as your options, who would you take? I'm inclined towards Faulkner - looked quality with the ball, has had an exceptional season with the ball and can also bat.... But having not watched FC, is there anything else that I should consider?

Faulkner is 130s, Duffield 135s and Pattinson 140s.

I would take Pattinson every single time. He has a wonderful strong action, and it's a given that he'll play for Australia sooner rather than later. Faulkner and Duffield are pretty meh and scream 'I'M A STATE CRICKETER' imo.

 

[HeathDavisSpeed]

Hmmm. 'Tis what I thought. Though I'm not sure the world is ready for another Pattinson. What about Butterworth vs. Faulkner as an all-rounder? I guess Butterworth has more of a track record.

 

[Top_Cat]

AWTNnanden, Pattinson by heaps.

 

[Nate]

Hmmm. 'Tis what I thought. Though I'm not sure the world is ready for another Pattinson. What about Butterworth vs. Faulkner as an all-rounder? I guess Butterworth has more of a track record.

Probably Butterworth. Both very similar cricketers though.