-
Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.
You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.
nathan bracken was a better odi bowler than brett lee
- Thread starter Flem274*
- Start date
Gob
International Coach
Wtf are you people on Brett Lee was Australia's greatest ever OD bowler.
TheJediBrah
Request Your Custom Title Now!
Flem274*
123/5
could be incredible sometimes. i never really took him seriously unless he was able to bully some poor opener not up to it like papps.
he was also handy if you needed a mental weakling to meltdown and bowl a beamer.
brett lee's odi career is like the only good example spark's mad theory on odi statistics has.
TheJediBrah
Request Your Custom Title Now!
you clearly didn't see enough of him
Starfighter
Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
What is Spark's mad theory on ODI statistics?
TheJediBrah
Request Your Custom Title Now!
essentially that they are pointless, I'm guessing
trundler
Request Your Custom Title Now!
That they're absolutely pointless and don't tell you anything
stephen
Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Here is the list of Australian ODI bowlers to have taken 90+ wickets, sorted by bowling average. It's actually surprisingly close to my own rankings of the bowlers (McKay the outlier).
Quicks:
DK Lillee 103 @ 20.82
GD McGrath 380 @ 21.98
MA Starc 178 @ 22.22
B Lee 380 @ 23.36
NW Bracken 174 @ 24.36
CJ McKay 97 @ 24.37
CJ McDermott 203 @ 24.71
MG Johnson 239 @ 25.26
DW Fleming 134 @ 25.38
JN Gillespie 142 @ 25.42
PJ Cummins 105 @ 27.55
SP O'Donnell 108 @ 28.72
PR Reiffel 106 @ 29.20
JP Faulkner 96 @ 30.85
SR Watson 168 @ 31.79
SR Waugh 195 @ 34.67
Spinners:
SK Warne 291 @ 25.82
GB Hogg 156 @ 26.84
PL Taylor 97 @ 28.24
A Symonds 133 @ 37.25
It's actually a real shame that Taylor didn't get his last three wickets to crack the hundred.
Quicks:
DK Lillee 103 @ 20.82
GD McGrath 380 @ 21.98
MA Starc 178 @ 22.22
B Lee 380 @ 23.36
NW Bracken 174 @ 24.36
CJ McKay 97 @ 24.37
CJ McDermott 203 @ 24.71
MG Johnson 239 @ 25.26
DW Fleming 134 @ 25.38
JN Gillespie 142 @ 25.42
PJ Cummins 105 @ 27.55
SP O'Donnell 108 @ 28.72
PR Reiffel 106 @ 29.20
JP Faulkner 96 @ 30.85
SR Watson 168 @ 31.79
SR Waugh 195 @ 34.67
Spinners:
SK Warne 291 @ 25.82
GB Hogg 156 @ 26.84
PL Taylor 97 @ 28.24
A Symonds 133 @ 37.25
It's actually a real shame that Taylor didn't get his last three wickets to crack the hundred.
Last edited:
honestbharani
Whatever it takes!!!
I wouldn't go that far, but ODI (all LO cricket I guess for that matter) has more evolving context even around the same batting and bowling inning than a test match does.
Red
The normal awards that everyone else has
Watson
Gilchrist +
Ponting
Jones
M.Waugh
Symonds
Hussey
Warne
Starc
Bracken
McGrath
Is what I'd pick today. Would be equally happy with Lee or Lillee in place of Bracken. MWaugh or Watson can argue about who is gonna open or bat in the middle, but I'm still having Junior for the fielding (plus batting). Always gonna want Ponting, Symonds and Junior in the inner circle when fielding.
I'd actually have Watto, Roy and MWaugh share the 5th bowling duties, but still absolutely convinced Symonds is a legit option as a 5th bowler on his own.
This'll be my last comment on that topic in this thread out of respect to Flem and Nathan Bracken.
marc71178
Eyes not spreadsheets
An opinion not shared by his many captains...
Flem274*
123/5
this is a pretty fair team, and i was close to watson opening myself but ultimately don't really trust him up the order vs the best. was going to include symonds in mine until i did a count up and realised there wasn't space for both him and hussey.
jones and bevan ahead of waugh for me in the middle. bevan was the pinnacle of odi middle overs batting for his time and it seems like jones was there or thereabouts for his era as well. waugh was a very good player but ultimately i eye warner and hayden sideways more, but warner had the more consistent career. for a brief period around that 07 wc hayden was fearsome with that walk down the track to fast medium bowlers and smash.
Red
The normal awards that everyone else has
I’ve showed you comprehensively in another thread that he was used, and was perfectly good, as a 5th bowler.
Last edited:
stephen
Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Jones over Bevan in the middle order is controversial tstl. I'd have Chappell in the middle ahead of Jones and Bevan ahead of Chappell.
Watson really wasn't good enough to displace Hayden or Gilchrist as opener until after the former retired. At opener he accomplished less than Waugh, Hayden or Warner. The only thing which makes him an option is his bowling. IMO that leaves him to bat at 7.
The locks in the Australian batting lineup in my mind are
Gilchrist, Ponting, Bevan, Symonds and Hussey in that order.
Gilchrist is the most valuable because he keeps as well.
Ponting because he's easily the best number 3 Australia have had.
Bevan because he's at the very worst, the third best finisher in the history of the game.
Symonds because not only did he average and strike at modern rates a decade and a half ago but because he brings so much to the table in every area of the game - batting, bowling and fielding.
And Hussey because, like Bevan he was an excellent finisher and wasn't a bad fielder either.
The number 7 spot is Watson's. He can bowl roughly 7 overs and Symonds can cover the other 3. He also could hit out decently as well.
The second opener spot is a three way contest between Waugh, Hayden and Warner. All three were terrific fielders but Waugh edges it by doing it sooner and acting as the prototype. He also could bowl as well if needed.
This leaves a batting lineup of
Gilchrist
Waugh
Ponting
Bevan
Symonds
Hussey
Watson
Warne
Starc
Lillee
McGrath
Jones unlucky but he's the number 3 in the second XI. Personally I think number 3 is as much a specialty position as opener is in ODI cricket.
These are the roles of an ideal top 7, although in recent years this probably isn't quite the case:
1 Aggressive opener
2 Anchoring opener
3 Good against the newish ball and capable of big innings
4 Team anchor
5 Versatility pick - capable of rescue or late overs blasting
6 Hitter and tail shepherd
7 Big hitter, accelerates from ball 1
Of these roles I think the only one that doesn't quite fit is Watson at 7. Watto liked to build an innings but he's still Australia's best player for that role.
Watson really wasn't good enough to displace Hayden or Gilchrist as opener until after the former retired. At opener he accomplished less than Waugh, Hayden or Warner. The only thing which makes him an option is his bowling. IMO that leaves him to bat at 7.
The locks in the Australian batting lineup in my mind are
Gilchrist, Ponting, Bevan, Symonds and Hussey in that order.
Gilchrist is the most valuable because he keeps as well.
Ponting because he's easily the best number 3 Australia have had.
Bevan because he's at the very worst, the third best finisher in the history of the game.
Symonds because not only did he average and strike at modern rates a decade and a half ago but because he brings so much to the table in every area of the game - batting, bowling and fielding.
And Hussey because, like Bevan he was an excellent finisher and wasn't a bad fielder either.
The number 7 spot is Watson's. He can bowl roughly 7 overs and Symonds can cover the other 3. He also could hit out decently as well.
The second opener spot is a three way contest between Waugh, Hayden and Warner. All three were terrific fielders but Waugh edges it by doing it sooner and acting as the prototype. He also could bowl as well if needed.
This leaves a batting lineup of
Gilchrist
Waugh
Ponting
Bevan
Symonds
Hussey
Watson
Warne
Starc
Lillee
McGrath
Jones unlucky but he's the number 3 in the second XI. Personally I think number 3 is as much a specialty position as opener is in ODI cricket.
These are the roles of an ideal top 7, although in recent years this probably isn't quite the case:
1 Aggressive opener
2 Anchoring opener
3 Good against the newish ball and capable of big innings
4 Team anchor
5 Versatility pick - capable of rescue or late overs blasting
6 Hitter and tail shepherd
7 Big hitter, accelerates from ball 1
Of these roles I think the only one that doesn't quite fit is Watson at 7. Watto liked to build an innings but he's still Australia's best player for that role.