Are aussie totals more chaseable these days.

[brockley]

NZ Chased us down when we got 330 and nearly chased it down the previous game,then south africa chased down 440 odd.
I think our batting in one dayers is pretty spot on but worry about our bowlers bowling out sides in big run chases.
Not as confident of one day side especially watching gayle and chanderpaul smashing our bowlers the other night.
Maybe time to pick doug bollinger i think.

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

Somehow I doubt Bollinger will turn things around.

Anyway, I think Australia's bowling in ODIs has certainly been more fragile recently. Whether that's just a coincidence or not is up in the air really. I think our ODI attack when fully fit is still very good, but there's been a lot more experimentation with the lineup of late, and most of the time when we've seen teams chase down big totals against Australia it's been when the likes of Lewis, Johnson etc have been playing. At full strength Australia would play McGrath, Lee, Bracken and Hogg as our specialist bowlers, which is the best ODI bowling attack in the world quite comfortably.

It's worth remembering that Australia has had poor runs in ODIs in the past. We came last in the VB series in 01/02 for instance, and still won the World Cup a year or so later. I think the real concern will come when Australia is regularly losing matches when playing with a full strength team (give or take the odd injury).

 

[Matt79]

Pretty simple explanation - McGrath has not been in the team. There's never been a better one-day bowler. I would say that with McGrath in the team, fit and bowling well, it would be almost impossible for any team to chase a 300+ target.

To a significantly lesser extent, its also a result of Gillespie's loss of form - for a while there he was a good partner to McGrath.

 

[dinu23]

yeah, well you can't always rely on Mcgrath, Gillespie. there was talk that Australia had 1 to 1 replacements. looks like the replacements are not quit up to the mark.

 

[andyc]

I don't think it's that Australian totals have necessarily become that much more chaseable, rather that every total has become more chaseable. 280-300 is now considered more of a normal score rather than the match-winning one it was before.

 

[GIMH]

Totals in general are more easily chased as andy said. England made 300+ in the 5th ODi against Sri Lanka, and still got murdered.

 

[Johnners]

Pretty simple explanation - McGrath has not been in the team. There's never been a better one-day bowler. I would say that with McGrath in the team, fit and bowling well, it would be almost impossible for any team to chase a 300+ target.

To a significantly lesser extent, its also a result of Gillespie's loss of form - for a while there he was a good partner to McGrath.

You seem to be forgetting a certain W Akram.... despite the fact that McGrath is indeed and Australian legend, Akram was the superior ODI bowler.

In any case, in the last 2 years, the trend has been that if Brett Lee doesn't take Wickets early the rest of the bowling attack struggles. He's the main man in the ODI attack, whilst McGrath is tight, Lee has been the major wicket taker, and you don't win many ODI games by just bowling tight, you need to take wickets.

 

[andyc]

You seem to be forgetting a certain W Akram.... despite the fact that McGrath is indeed and Australian legend, Akram was the superior ODI bowler.

Give me Joel Garner over them any day.

 

[Arjun]

All totals are more chaseable these days. The Aussies don't have a full-strength bowling lineup too often now, and there is a big gap between the McGrath-Gillespie-Lee-spinner combine and the rest.

 

[Swervy]

You seem to be forgetting a certain W Akram.... despite the fact that McGrath is indeed and Australian legend, Akram was the superior ODI bowler.

Any reason why you think this?

 

[Johnners]

Any reason why you think this?

Akram always to me looked more likely to take wickets. The combination of being a lefty, and his ability to swing the ball like there was no tomorow, made him a more dangerous bowler.

McGrath is only a poofteenth behind though...if he continues to take wickets, and be as metornomic and as tight as Scrooge McDuck it wouldn't take much for him to Overhaul Akram from my point of view.

 

[Matt79]

You seem to be forgetting a certain W Akram.... despite the fact that McGrath is indeed and Australian legend, Akram was the superior ODI bowler.

In any case, in the last 2 years, the trend has been that if Brett Lee doesn't take Wickets early the rest of the bowling attack struggles. He's the main man in the ODI attack, whilst McGrath is tight, Lee has been the major wicket taker, and you don't win many ODI games by just bowling tight, you need to take wickets.

And you have facts to back up your assertion regarding Akram? If you look at McGrath's performances in the biggest of ODIs, like World Cup finals, and the economy rate he maintains, particularly in his first spells when the field has to be up, there's never been a better bowler to restrict the scoring of the opposition. He probably has a worse strike rate than some other bowlers, but if the batsman isn't scoring runs for a prolonged period that can be just as useful for your team.

As AndyC said, there's also been a general inflation in what constitutes a good score anyway, as bat's have improved, team strategies have improved and 20/20 cricket has taught players just how far they can chance their arms...

 

[deeps]

Why isn't Hogg playing now? He better not be dropped!

 

[age_master]

I don't think it's that Australian totals have necessarily become that much more chaseable, rather that every total has become more chaseable. 280-300 is now considered more of a normal score rather than the match-winning one it was before.

agreed. the pitches are far too flat.

 

[marc71178]

Are aussie totals more chaseable these days.

If Mick Lewis is playing, then yes.

 

[tooextracool]

higher totals are more chaseable these days because bowling standards have fallen dramatically while batting standards have improved dramatically as well. I think batsmen have become much more suited to the ODI format, and improvisation has improved a fair bit. Add that to the improvement in the quality of bats and smaller grounds, and you can see why we see more runs these days.

 

[andyc]

Why isn't Hogg playing now? He better not be dropped!

He's not been dropped. Just like Lee, Hussey and Symonds, he's not been playing because they've been giving younger players a run.

 

[deeps]

hmm, fair enough i guess

He's a gun, highly under rated spinner.

 

[aussie]

yes he is, if you look at the history of ODI cricket for Australia he is probably the second best spinner to play behind Warne.

 

[shortpitched713]

He's quite good with the bat too. I'd be comfortable with him at 7, allowing Aus to pick another bowler, but I don't think most would agree.