brilliant idea

[Prince EWS]

Depends on what you call not too bad.

If your definition of "not too bad" is Australian, then you are undoubtedly correct.

Either way, that "attack" wouldn't be the best in the world.

Which attack would be better though...

Perhaps Gillespie and Kasprowicz should have been split up.

 

[age_master]

nah those combo's work nicley, Kaspa and Tait with the new ball backed by Warne and Dizzy or McGrath and Lee backed by Macgill and Bichel both solid combo's

 

[chaminda_00]

nah those combo's work nicley, Kaspa and Tait with the new ball backed by Warne and Dizzy or McGrath and Lee backed by Macgill and Bichel both solid combo's

Nah i would change it a little bit:

McGrath
Tait
Kasprawicz
MacGill

and

Gillespie
Lee
Bichel
Warne

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

Bichel, Lee, McGrath, MacGill and Watson - don't make me laugh.

Who is better? England have the second best attack in the world today, and they don't match up. Flintoff is better than Watson and Jones is probably better than Bichel, but McGrath and Lee more than match up against Hoggard and Harmison, and Macgill is better than Giles.

 

[Smudge]

Marcus Bai, ex-NRL player, actually has opened the bowling for PNG!

I just made up a PNG name... I know a lot of guys up there are called Joseph, and Marcus Bai's surname was the only one (or Lam) I could think of.

 

[Neil Pickup]

Who is better? England have the second best attack in the world today, and they don't match up. Flintoff is better than Watson and Jones is probably better than Bichel, but McGrath and Lee more than match up against Hoggard and Harmison, and Macgill is better than Giles.

So long as we're staying in the realms of Test cricket, then McGrath > Harmison > Hoggard > Lee, which makes it 1-1.

Jones v Bichel, 2-1 England - as you said - Flintoff v Watson is 3-1, and even if you give the last place to MacGill, it's 3-2 England.

 

[age_master]

the presence of McGrath or Warne in any attack automatically make it better.

 

[Neil Pickup]

the presence of McGrath or Warne in any attack automatically make it better.

1) Hampshire

2) Countered by the presence of Watson, Bichel and Lee...

 

[luckyeddie]

the presence of McGrath or Warne in any attack automatically make it better.

If Australia could engineer it that those two were bowling unchanged, it would be a phenomenal attack, and back-up bowlers would be almost unnecessary. Fortunately for those with a sense of humour, someone's already mentioned Lee, Watson etc

<quack> Brad Cheaty-Hodge?

Hush, DD. We're talking about cricketers.

 

[Prince EWS]

Nah i would change it a little bit:

McGrath
Tait
Kasprawicz
MacGill

and

Gillespie
Lee
Bichel
Warne

Problem with those is the batting IMO.

Your second team there has all the best tailenders....

 

[chaminda_00]

Problem with those is the batting IMO.

Your second team there has all the best tailenders....

Swap Tait with Lee then:

B Lee
M Kasprawicz
G McGrath
S MacGill

and

A Bichel
S Warne
J Gillespie
S Tait

Team 1 batting is slight weak but their bowling is strongeR

 

[Prince EWS]

I think swapping Bichel with Tait would make more sence....

 

[chaminda_00]

I think swapping Bichel with Tait would make more sence....

That another option but the way i looked at it was the role each bowler plays in the side, for example:
No 1 quick: McGarth/Gillespie
2nd Opener (super quick): Lee/Tait
1st Change Bowler: Bichel/Kaspra
Spin Bowler: MacGill/Warne

 

[Prince EWS]

Well then, swap Bichel for Kasprowicz.

 

[chaminda_00]

Well then, swap Bichel for Kasprowicz.

McGrath, Tait, Bichel and MacGill, now that would be a weak bowling attack.

 

[LongHopCassidy]

Yeah, can't imagine any team who'd want that....

 

[Prince EWS]

What about...

B Lee
MS Kasprowicz
GD McGrath
SCG MacGill

AJ Bichel
JN Gillespie
SK Warne
SW Tait

Its weird that we have both had this lienup before, but argued when the other had it!

 

[age_master]

1) Hampshire

your saying Hampshire would be better without Warne? lol

 

[Neil Pickup]

your saying Hampshire would be better without Warne? lol

Yes, of course that's what I'm saying... muppet.

You said the presence of Warne made any attack better than England's. Hampshire are not better than England.

 

[marc71178]

Who is better? England have the second best attack in the world today, and they don't match up. Flintoff is better than Watson and Jones is probably better than Bichel, but McGrath and Lee more than match up against Hoggard and Harmison, and Macgill is better than Giles.

Of the 10 mentioned there, McGrath is head an shoulders above any of the others mentioned, but Flintoff, Harmison and Hoggard are all better than Lee or Bichel, and without the control provided by bowling alongside 3 very good seamers, MacGill won't be anywhere near as useful.