Ashes 2006/07 = Walkover?

[FaaipDeOiad]

It's gone down a grand total of 0.21. Not worth writing home about and hardly going to have Kevin Pietersen shaking in his boots.

Misleading. Since the start of the Australian summer, which is when he started bowling a lot better, it has gone down 2 runs.

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

Anyone who saw him get flayed in the Supertest or take only two wickets and go for almost 4 an over against Bangladesh, who he should be tearing through? Even in the home series against South Africa, he took wickets rather sporadically for someone who's improved so much. Lee may have improved, but we haven't seen any consistent results.

Taking wickets against a poor West Indies team and having two half decent series' against South Africa, whilst still going at 3.5 an over more often than not, qualifies you to lead the attack these days, though?

Half-decent series? He averaged less than 20 in South Africa, and his average of 30 in the home series hardly reflected how well he bowled. Lee was excellent in both series (though he was better in the home one), and bowling like that he's most certainly capable of leading any attack. And as far as consistent results are concerned, he's not exactly had much time has he? He's played 5 series since returning to the side, one of which was the Ashes, and aside from that he's been good 3 times and fairly poor against Bangaldesh. In that time he has 50 wickets @ 26.34, and his economy rate is 3.2, and his SR less than 50. Fairly consistent year for mine, and easily Australia's best seamer in that time. I'd be more worried about Clark, if he plays.

And as far as Tait is concerned, there's simply no way you could dismiss his bowling in the ING Final if you'd seen it. He can bowl as many wides as he likes if he's also totally unplayable the rest of the time. Obviously a bowler with many flaws, but it's pretty foolish to dismiss him at this stage of his career. Regardless, it's unlikely he will have any significant role in the Ashes unless there's a bunch of injuries. He's currently the fifth choice seamer in a team that is likely to play two spinners a lot.

 

[tooextracool]

Screw the no. 8 batting position, in recent years unless you come to Australia with a world class spinner you are not going to be anything close to competitive. India are the only team that I can think of in recent years that have been competitive against Australia for the whole series and they came with two world class spinners in Kumble and Harbajhan.

England may have been able to get away with Giles filling in overs in England, but in Australia you need an attacking spinner, otherwise with pitch conditions and only quicks you are not going to have as big of an impact. Now, I haven't seen that much of Panesar, but from what I've heard, he's an attacking spinner - just what England will need in Australia.

Obviously you would like to have a decent no. 8 batsman, but it is more important for England to have an attacking spinner. I mean, Giles' record is worse than ordinary and he isn't exactly a bowling allrounder, but more of a handy tailender who holds up an end with the ball. Nothing more really.

and how many quality pace attacks have showed up in Australia? How about none. the closest one to a quality pace attack was Nel,Ntini, Pollock, Langeveldt which caused more than enough problems to the aussie batsmen and certainly competed with australia despite the result.
Yes obviously we could use an attacking spinner, but we dont exactly have them growing on trees you know. Panesar is as i said earlier not even close to attacking, infact hes even worse than Giles, and even more one dimensional and doesnt even possess an arm ball. Australia will definetly try to go after him, and we all know how poorly Panesar bowled when India went after him in Mumbai.
As far as the number 8 batsman is concerned, i think its absolutely imperative that every side at least have a somewhat competent number 8 batsman. i cant even begin to count the number of games that have been won as a result of valuable lower order partnerships(the most recent one being the 3rd test in the SL- Eng series), and its doubly important in Englands case considering they have a tailender in Geraint coming in at 7.

 

[tooextracool]

The cornerstone to beating Australia is to contain Ponting and Hayden, and score 400 in your first innings. If England can do those two things (as they did in 2005) they should retain the Ashes. With Vaughan and Jones out, their chances of achieving the above are much reduced, but still realistic.

because Vaughan was clearly setting the world alight with his batting before his injury
England will struggle to score 400 because Pietersen and co dont have half a brain. Which is a completely different story.

 

[tooextracool]

Tait on the other hand impressed in the two test he played in the ashes wihtout having fantastic figures, before that he broke Australia's domestic record for the most wickets in a season & that was made even more superb because he is form Sout Australia & had to bowl on that flat pitch for the majority of the time againts some very good domestic batsmen. Even before Australia went to SA he ran through NSW in the ING CUP FINAL & almost single handled won the game for his state when they were pretty much out of it in another exhibition of his great talent. Mahmood hasn't done anything close to that, so i dont see how you can say Tait is no better than Mahmood.

I dont know what you've been watching but to call tait impressive in the Ashes is about as stupid as anything ive ever heard. He took 5 wickets at a brilliant average of 42 and was so poor that Ponting couldnt even trust him with the ball in the final innings at the Oval. Further hes had a poor season thus far in domestic cricket, and i dont see how an OD game proves too much different. Has Mahmood done anything like that? Umm Sajid has been performing consistently on A tours to India, WI and SL. Has Tait done anything like that?

 

[aussie]

I dont know what you've been watching but to call tait impressive in the Ashes is about as stupid as anything ive ever heard. He took 5 wickets at a brilliant average of 42 and was so poor that Ponting couldnt even trust him with the ball in the final innings at the Oval.

Ok maybe impressive wasn't the best term i could use but he wasn't utter rubbish either, he however did impress in various stages in the two test he played in. In the 1st innings at Trent Bridge he started like most debutants & then bowled a very impressive second spell where he accounted for Tresocthick & Bell & overall had a very encouraging 1st innings bowl in test cricket. While in the second innings when Australia where trying to bowl England out Ponting brought him on to bowl with a ``Yorker/bouncer tactic when KP & Freddie were batting, it didn't work but at least he he tried after all he did induced KP in a top edge just over Gilchrist

At the Oval like most of the Australian bowlers except Warne, but he came back superbly in the afternoon session with the older ball executing the best spell of reverse-swing bowling by any of the Australian seen on the tour. In the second innings however, he didn't bowl much but that wasn't due to him being poor as you are suggesting it was a captaincy error by Ponting not to bowl him earlier after Lee was bowling trash & due to the fact that on such an important day for Australia's chances of keeping the ashes it was obvious that Ponting would have always gone to his experienced champions of Warne & McGrath for the majority of the day.

Further hes had a poor season thus far in domestic cricket, and i dont see how an OD game proves too much different.

oh come on, he was injured after the ashes & he played less than half the matches for his state in either the Pura Cup or the ING Cup & in all of those games he wasn't fully fit because he had a shoulder injury & wasn't able to throw well & yet almost won that ING Cup final on his own. So to say he had a poor season is totally off the mark.

Has Mahmood done anything like that? Umm Sajid has been performing consistently on A tours to India, WI and SL. Has Tait done anything like that?

Yes that true but what has Mahmood done at international level other than his opening burst on his debut at lord's that has been of note?, NOTHING he has been garbage. Tait may not have done anything spectacular either but he hasn't been garbage at all, but its early days yet in his career & it would be foolish to right him off.

Australia haven't had much A-team tours in the last couple of years other than one to Pakistan just after the ashes & one in South Africa in 2002 i think, so its unfair to compare them using that idea, since Tait really started showing playing for SA in 2004 (the season where he broke the domestic record).

 

[tooextracool]

Ok maybe impressive wasn't the best term i could use but he wasn't utter rubbish either, he however did impress in various stages in the two test he played in. In the 1st innings at Trent Bridge he started like most debutants & then bowled a very impressive second spell where he accounted for Tresocthick & Bell & overall had a very encouraging 1st innings bowl in test cricket. While in the second innings when Australia where trying to bowl England out Ponting brought him on to bowl with a ``Yorker/bouncer tactic when KP & Freddie were batting, it didn't work but at least he he tried after all he did induced KP in a top edge just over Gilchrist

oh wow,he got a top edge! give him a medal. With KP trying to slog every short delivery its not entirely surprising that he mishit and top edged a few is it?

At the Oval like most of the Australian bowlers except Warne, but he came back superbly in the afternoon session with the older ball executing the best spell of reverse-swing bowling by any of the Australian seen on the tour. In the second innings however, he didn't bowl much but that wasn't due to him being poor as you are suggesting it was a captaincy error by Ponting not to bowl him earlier after Lee was bowling trash & due to the fact that on such an important day for Australia's chances of keeping the ashes it was obvious that Ponting would have always gone to his experienced champions of Warne & McGrath for the majority of the day.

despite the fact that neither of them were able to break the Pietersen-Collingwood-Giles partnership for a long time. Ponting had the chance to use Tait, he just felt that Tait was likely to be carted all over the park and would be a serious risk to bowl(which is the story of his career really-hot or cold)

oh come on, he was injured after the ashes & he played less than half the matches for his state in either the Pura Cup or the ING Cup & in all of those games he wasn't fully fit because he had a shoulder injury & wasn't able to throw well & yet almost won that ING Cup final on his own. So to say he had a poor season is totally off the mark..

I find it ironic that you mention his ING cup final performance in the same time period(which appears to be on a minefield of a pitch btw), and yet use the injury excuse to explain his poor FC performances. Tait has had one successful season of FC cricket, and i for one wouldnt be surprised if he doesnt have another good one for at least a couple of years.

Yes that true but what has Mahmood done at international level other than his opening burst on his debut at lord's that has been of note?, NOTHING he has been garbage. Tait may not have done anything spectacular either but he hasn't been garbage at all, but its early days yet in his career & it would be foolish to right him off.

im sorry explain to me the logic here. Both have played 2 tests at the international level, both were extremely wayward, both had one decent spell(both spells you have mentioned above) in international cricket, both were barely trusted by their captains and bowled less than the regular bowlers, yet somehow presumable because you happen to like tait better, it seems like one is garbage while the other was impressive on debut? You go on telling me that other than that one spell at Lords Mahmood was complete garbage and then you later tell me that Tait was impressive because of his fabulous second spell that accounted for Tresco & Bell? Let me remind you that mahmood not only has more wickets in those 2 tests but he also has them at a considerably better average.
I dont rate either of them, and i think both are complete garbage at the moment and need to improve their accuracy before they can even consider playing test match cricket.

 

[steds]

Yes that true but what has Mahmood done at international level other than his opening burst on his debut at lord's that has been of note?, NOTHING he has been garbage. Tait may not have done anything spectacular either but he hasn't been garbage at all, but its early days yet in his career & it would be foolish to right him off.

Double standards? From you? Never.

 

[howardj]

because Vaughan was clearly setting the world alight with his batting before his injury
.

..more reffering to his captaincy, and you know it.

and, i think he did ok out here in aus last time!

 

[aussie]

despite the fact that neither of them were able to break the Pietersen-Collingwood-Giles partnership for a long time. Ponting had the chance to use Tait, he just felt that Tait was likely to be carted all over the park and would be a serious risk to bowl(which is the story of his career really-hot or cold).

Exactly it was a captaincy error by Ponting, it has nothing to do with him thinking that he would be carted around the park that is your logic.

find it ironic that you mention his ING cup final performance in the same time period(which appears to be on a minefield of a pitch btw), and yet use the injury excuse to explain his poor FC performances. Tait has had one successful season of FC cricket, and i for one wouldnt be surprised if he doesnt have another good one for at least a couple of years.

How is it ironic its a fact, he had an injury after the ashes which limited the amount of matches he played for his state & yet even with that injury he was able to produce such a performance whether the pitch may have been a minefield or not. He has had one good season yes (his first & only full season) & in his second he was injury hit, if you think he wont have one for at least of couple of years that your opinion you better hope it doesn't back-fire on you.

im sorry explain to me the logic here. Both have played 2 tests at the international level, both were extremely wayward, both had one decent spell(both spells you have mentioned above) in international cricket, both were barely trusted by their captains and bowled less than the regular bowlers, yet somehow presumable because you happen to like tait better, it seems like one is garbage while the other was impressive on debut? You go on telling me that other than that one spell at Lords Mahmood was complete garbage and then you later tell me that Tait was impressive because of his fabulous second spell that accounted for Tresco & Bell?Let me remind you that mahmood not only has more wickets in those 2 tests but he also has them at a considerably better average.
I dont rate either of them, and i think both are complete garbage at the moment and need to improve their accuracy before they can even consider playing test match cricket.

You initially brought up the point on how consistently he has been bowling for a-team tours for England for a while now even thought that may be true his returns at International level hasn't been anything special, but i admit i was intially harsh on Mahmood.

Mahmood may have a better average in his two test than Tait but after seeing both the two test he played its obvious to me that his figures flatter him due to the fairly defensive style of play the SRI's it would have been interesting to see how Mahmood would have bowled to a more attacking batting side, if his performances in his ODI area anything to go by i don't think he would fair too well.

On the other hand Tait bowled to England where the batsmen where very very aggressive & under the circumstances i thought he faired well overall.

Both of them i agree have a lot of work to do if they are to become successful test match bowlers but i give Tait more of chance since he showed good signs in his 2 test even though his figures are not that great & given how impressive he has been at domestic level. Mahmood consistent horrible bowling in ODI's IMO doesn't give him much hope at test level.

 

[marc71178]

Exactly it was a captaincy error by Ponting, it has nothing to do with him thinking that he would be carted around the park that is your logic.

And how exactly do you know this?

 

[marc71178]

Mahmood consistent horrible bowling in ODI's IMO doesn't give him much hope at test level.

So Hoggard to be dropped next?

 

[aussie]

So Hoggard to be dropped next?

Hoggard hasn't always been horribly poor in ODI's there where time in between 2001 & 2002 when he was faster & didn't rely so much on swing that he looked capable as an ODI bowler, has he got slower & became more of a swing bowler in the last few years he has got worse as an ODI bowler but gradually become a top-class test bowler.

In Mahmood's case he has just looked horrible in every ODI game that i have seen in him, so really there is no comparison.

 

[aussie]

And how exactly do you know this?

Because when Lee was being smashed about the place by KP & Warne & McGrath were showing signs of tiredness Ponting didn't bring him on, & although he was expensive he still produced a beauty to get Jones.

 

[marc71178]

Hoggard hasn't always been horribly poor in ODI's there where time in between 2001 & 2002 when he was faster & didn't rely so much on swing that he looked capable as an ODI bowler, has he got slower & became more of a swing bowler in the last few years he has got worse as an ODI bowler but gradually become a top-class test bowler.

In Mahmood's case he has just looked horrible in every ODI game that i have seen in him, so really there is no comparison.

Both are horrible in ODIs - therefore there is every comparison.

 

[tooextracool]

..more reffering to his captaincy, and you know it.

and, i think he did ok out here in aus last time!

last time = 4 years ago. Since then he hasnt played anywhere near that level.
And since you were referring to the team being less likely to get 400+ scores, i thought you were talking about Vaughan's batting, unless of course you were referring to Simon Jones'

 

[tooextracool]

Exactly it was a captaincy error by Ponting, it has nothing to do with him thinking that he would be carted around the park that is your logic.

so maybe you would like to explain why Ponting didnt bowl tait then? the only logical reason is because he didnt want to take the risk.

How is it ironic its a fact, he had an injury after the ashes which limited the amount of matches he played for his state & yet even with that injury he was able to produce such a performance whether the pitch may have been a minefield or not. He has had one good season yes (his first & only full season) & in his second he was injury hit, if you think he wont have one for at least of couple of years that your opinion you better hope it doesn't back-fire on you.

its ironic because you use one of his good performances from the season and then when i point out the whole bunch of bad performances from the same season, you talk about him being injured. Theres inconsistency there. Hes had one and only one good season, he needs to do that consistently before he can get back into the side.

You initially brought up the point on how consistently he has been bowling for a-team tours for England for a while now even thought that may be true his returns at International level hasn't been anything special, but i admit i was intially harsh on Mahmood.

Mahmood may have a better average in his two test than Tait but after seeing both the two test he played its obvious to me that his figures flatter him due to the fairly defensive style of play the SRI's it would have been interesting to see how Mahmood would have bowled to a more attacking batting side, if his performances in his ODI area anything to go by i don't think he would fair too well.

ODIs are completely different from tests. If tait were to be picked in the ODI side, i guarantee that his performances would be almost as bad as Mahmoods.

On the other hand Tait bowled to England where the batsmen where very very aggressive & under the circumstances i thought he faired well overall.

I dont know what your standards are, but averaging 42 doesnt exactly qualify as bowling well for too many people

Both of them i agree have a lot of work to do if they are to become successful test match bowlers but i give Tait more of chance since he showed good signs in his 2 test even though his figures are not that great & given how impressive he has been at domestic level. Mahmood consistent horrible bowling in ODI's IMO doesn't give him much hope at test level.

i dont think either should be given more chances at the moment. Tait i mentioned from the moment i heard about his action should not have been picked in the Test side, and my opinion was only confirmed when i saw him bowl. He needs some serious work on his action if he is to be accurate in test match cricket.

 

[tooextracool]

Hoggard hasn't always been horribly poor in ODI's there where time in between 2001 & 2002 when he was faster & didn't rely so much on swing that he looked capable as an ODI bowler, has he got slower & became more of a swing bowler in the last few years he has got worse as an ODI bowler but gradually become a top-class test bowler..

yes success against the might of zimbabwe. after that hes failed in every single ODI series. and umm Hoggard was not faster back then, and he actually relied even more on conventional swing during that time.

 

[Top_Cat]

I find it ironic that you mention his ING cup final performance in the same time period(which appears to be on a minefield of a pitch btw)

You didn't see it ergo you can't comment intelligently about it.

For the record, I saw every ball and the ball was moving around a bit because the pitch had a little green and it was cloudy. Nothing outrageous. Not ideal for a OD final but nothing too great. Couple that with some VERY poor batting by SA, a couple of great balls by Aaron Bird (as an aside, that was my first look at him and he was very impressive early in his spell; zippy) and the scorecard doesn't accurately reflect what happened.

I dont know what your standards are, but averaging 42 doesnt exactly qualify as bowling well for too many people

Having played a grand total of two tour games and not having bowled in a match for ages before that, probably being told before the tour not to expect much cricket and coming in with the Ashes on the line for the first time since 1989. Again, the averages tells little but the balls he knocked over Trescothick, Bell and Freddie with do. He was on a hiding to nothing and if he'd been taken apart, people would have understood considering how under-done he was.

No doubt Tait is wild (in the same match I saw him take 11 wickets I saw him bowl two of the widest balls I've ever even heard about; if you can find a picture of the Adelaide Oval, picture a bowler running in from the Bradman Stand End bowling two balls in an over which literally didn't hit the cut portion and ran into the fence under the scoreboard) but you haven't seen enough of him to know just how well he can bowl when the radar is on. I've seen a fair bit of Tait for a while now and have seen enough of Mahmood to know that you'd have to have rocks in your head if you rate them equally. Similar type bowlers, yes, but Tait does it far more consistently.

Umm Sajid has been performing consistently on A tours to India, WI and SL. Has Tait done anything like that?

Disingenuous. Australia doesn't do A tours very often (it's been almost four years, in fact; see below) and if they do, it's usually a few OD'ers. So opportunity, not performance, is the issue here.

http://aus.cricinfo.com/db/ARCHIVE/2002-03/AUS-A_IN_RSA/

so maybe you would like to explain why Ponting didnt bowl tait then? the only logical reason is because he didnt want to take the risk.

And that was a mistake by Ponting because it put too much pressure on the other bowlers. If you pick a guy, you should bowl him. There should be no passengers in a Test side. If they wanted a boring line-and-length'er, they should have picked Kasper because it wasn't as if he was bowling THAT badly and is a far better lower-order hitter than Tait.

The fact is, they picked Tait as a shock bowler to take wickets and not worry about the runs. The Aussie selectors can't have it both ways by picking a guy who makes no secret or apologies for the fact that he's ultra-attacking and then complaining that they couldn't bowl him because they couldn't trust him to not keep it tight. By blaming HIM for being the way he is, they left him out to dry a bit for mine.

It's not as if Tait had cut back on his pace and was hitting the corridor in the one warm-up game he got before the Test just purely to get selected. He bowled as he does so if you pick a guy for that reason, you have to live with your decision and accept it. Ponting tried to appear like he was taking risk but maybe due to fear of being the captain to lose the Ashes, he wimped out when it came to the crunch. I mean, with the rain and the fact the Aussies were 2-1 down in the series, it's not as if they could afford to be frugal with the risk-taking. They needed wickets and FAST and Tait could have taken 0/100 off 10 overs and the result would have been the same OR he could have taken 5/60 off 10 and won Australia the game too.

In my opinion, it would have been sad had England not won the Ashes because they deserved them more but baulking at using Tait is a cop-out.

 

[tooextracool]

You didn't see it ergo you can't comment intelligently about it.

For the record, I saw every ball and the ball was moving around a bit because the pitch had a little green and it was cloudy. Nothing outrageous. Not ideal for a OD final but nothing too great. Couple that with some VERY poor batting by SA, a couple of great balls by Aaron Bird (as an aside, that was my first look at him and he was very impressive early in his spell; zippy) and the scorecard doesn't accurately reflect what happened..

Well thats why i used the word 'appears'. Regardless i dont see how one good performance in an OD is supposed to prove something about how good he is especially when you consider his performances in FC cricket in the same season.

Having played a grand total of two tour games and not having bowled in a match for ages before that, probably being told before the tour not to expect much cricket and coming in with the Ashes on the line for the first time since 1989. Again, the averages tells little but the balls he knocked over Trescothick, Bell and Freddie with do. He was on a hiding to nothing and if he'd been taken apart, people would have understood considering how under-done he was.

2 tests and 2 tour games should be enough to get your rhythm back, i dont think that should be an excuse. Nor would they make him go from being wayward- which hes being for most of his career to accurate.

No doubt Tait is wild (in the same match I saw him take 11 wickets I saw him bowl two of the widest balls I've ever even heard about; if you can find a picture of the Adelaide Oval, picture a bowler running in from the Bradman Stand End bowling two balls in an over which literally didn't hit the cut portion and ran into the fence under the scoreboard) but you haven't seen enough of him to know just how well he can bowl when the radar is on. I've seen a fair bit of Tait for a while now and have seen enough of Mahmood to know that you'd have to have rocks in your head if you rate them equally. Similar type bowlers, yes, but Tait does it far more consistently..

Well i think you've seen as much of Mahmood as ive seen of Tait one would think. ODIs excluded given that he should have never ben picked in that form anyways. I dont rate Mahmood but surely you cannot deny that he must have something in him to be able to take wickets in the manner in which he has in 3 different countries on A tours.

Disingenuous. Australia doesn't do A tours very often (it's been almost four years, in fact; see below) and if they do, it's usually a few OD'ers. So opportunity, not performance, is the issue here.

http://aus.cricinfo.com/db/ARCHIVE/2002-03/AUS-A_IN_RSA/

that was not my point. Aussie mentioned that Tait had performed a miraculous feat by taking 6 wickets on a helpful wicket in the ING cup and claimed that Mahmood had never done anything like that. the A tour was supposed to show that Mahmood had done something far more useful than that.

And that was a mistake by Ponting because it put too much pressure on the other bowlers. If you pick a guy, you should bowl him. There should be no passengers in a Test side. If they wanted a boring line-and-length'er, they should have picked Kasper because it wasn't as if he was bowling THAT badly and is a far better lower-order hitter than Tait.

The fact is, they picked Tait as a shock bowler to take wickets and not worry about the runs. The Aussie selectors can't have it both ways by picking a guy who makes no secret or apologies for the fact that he's ultra-attacking and then complaining that they couldn't bowl him because they couldn't trust him to not keep it tight. By blaming HIM for being the way he is, they left him out to dry a bit for mine.

It's not as if Tait had cut back on his pace and was hitting the corridor in the one warm-up game he got before the Test just purely to get selected. He bowled as he does so if you pick a guy for that reason, you have to live with your decision and accept it. Ponting tried to appear like he was taking risk but maybe due to fear of being the captain to lose the Ashes, he wimped out when it came to the crunch. I mean, with the rain and the fact the Aussies were 2-1 down in the series, it's not as if they could afford to be frugal with the risk-taking. They needed wickets and FAST and Tait could have taken 0/100 off 10 overs and the result would have been the same OR he could have taken 5/60 off 10 and won Australia the game too.

In my opinion, it would have been sad had England not won the Ashes because they deserved them more but baulking at using Tait is a cop-out.

i dont question that at the end of the day it was a poor decision on pontings part to not bowl him, but you cannot deny that Tait played some role in influencing that decision and the fact that Tait was either likely to go for 0/100 or take 5/60 was what put him off. it is of course all to convenient on hindsight to say that the result would have been the same whether tait had bowled or not, but the fact is that if Australia had taken their catches, the result might have been completely different.