Current pecking order?

[Richard]

^ I guess.

 

[four_or_six]

I've heard a few times Ponting/selectors saying about Watson/Symonds that their batting averages are very good for someone whose home ground is the Gabba. Is there any thought that Noffke suffers in peoples estimation for the same reason?

 

[chaminda_00]

I've heard a few times Ponting/selectors saying about Watson/Symonds that their batting averages are very good for someone whose home ground is the Gabba. Is there any thought that Noffke suffers in peoples estimation for the same reason?

Some would say that was the main reason why Bicheal and Kaspa were on the outer for so long. But then when you consider the runs that Hayden and Love were scoring around the same time, it doesn't really wash.

Horses for horse really. One of Noffke major issues is probably the fact that he didn't perform that well in Pakistan and India for Australia A, comparatively to his domestic performances. Whereas both Siddle and Bollinger showed more promise in sub continent conditions.

I think you will find our the next season or so. The selectors will go for a lot of horses for courses selection for the last couple bowling spots. Until they find some they really think the real deal. Probably unto Tait step ups IMO.

 

[Top_Cat]

M'thinks Noffke's just not rated as highly by the Aussie camp as others are. Bowls largely straight up-and-down fast-meds and I believe there are questions about his ability under pressure and whether, in taking the step up to international level, whether he'd suddenly lose his radar. It's why he had to get his batting up to get noticed.

It's part of why Bichel got ignored for so long. The perception was that playing half his games at the Gabba made him look a better bowler than he really was and when he actually was picked for Australia, it's hard to argue against that as he rarely looked like he was about to absolutely run through a side (7-fer against England in 2003 excepted where, for a 5 over spell, he was simply awesome). Kasper suffered a similar perception but to a lesser extent, probably helped by his bowling on an early tour to India. Noffke, I'd be surprised if the Gabba argument didn't come up when his name is bandied about the selection table.

 

[Richard]

It's part of why Bichel got ignored for so long. The perception was that playing half his games at the Gabba made him look a better bowler than he really was and when he actually was picked for Australia, it's hard to argue against that as he rarely looked like he was about to absolutely run through a side (7-fer against England in 2003 excepted where, for a 5 over spell, he was simply awesome).

Bichel never took a seven-for against England. Bichel in fact had just 1 very short period (5 Tests) between 2000/01 and 2002/03 where he was an effective Test bowler. 4 out of these 5 Tests came against batting units in various states of woefulness (West Indies 2000/01 and Pakistan 2002/03).

In his other 14 games Bichel averaged 39.58. This includes 3 games against England (the first 2 of which were the only ones out of his 19 Tests where he played as a first-choice) in which he took 10 wickets at 35.

I never really rated him much, despite his excellent success (at least, as far as taking wickets was concerned - he usually went for a few) in both Australian and English domestic cricket, and later on his not-inconsiderable batting skill.

 

[Prince EWS]

Bichel never took a seven-for against England.

I think he's talking about an ODI. He took seven against England in the 2003 World Cup - he backed it up by taking Australia home with the bat at #10 in support of Bevan for a partnership of 50 odd as well. Top game that was; one of my favourite ODIs.

EDIT: Link

 

[Top_Cat]

What PEWS said. That ODI match was the only time I ever saw Bichel look absolutely top shelf. His ball to get Vaughan was good enough but the ball to knock over Hussain was just unplayable.

 

[Johnners]

Bichel, what a star.

 

[Richard]

I think he's talking about an ODI. He took seven against England in the 2003 World Cup - he backed it up by taking Australia home with the bat at #10 in support of Bevan for a partnership of 50 odd as well. Top game that was; one of my favourite ODIs.

EDIT: Link

What PEWS said. That ODI match was the only time I ever saw Bichel look absolutely top shelf. His ball to get Vaughan was good enough but the ball to knock over Hussain was just unplayable.

Oh, that.

Well Bichel was damn superb that whole tournament really, for mine - and in fact had been between that Super Challenge thingy against Pakistan in 2002 and the end of it, though the Cup was his last hurrah (went for 5.51-an-over at 49.61 in his 15 ODIs thereafter) and he'd never been much good until winter 2002 (4.69-an-over at 36.26 in 27 previous games). But I thought we were on about Tests.

But yeah, I don't think Bichel's ODI superlativeness was confined exclusively to that game, there were another 14 in 2002 and 2002/03. The England game was certainly the peak of that little period though - stunning spell.

 

[Furball]

Why is Bracken so low down the pecking order. Has he been pigeon holed as an ODI performer only?

Granted, I'm of the school that ODI performances shouldn't have too much impact on selection on other forms of the game, but the fact that he's performed so well in international cricket should be a factor in my opinion.

 

[Prince EWS]

Why is Bracken so low down the pecking order. Has he been pigeon holed as an ODI performer only?

Granted, I'm of the school that ODI performances shouldn't have too much impact on selection on other forms of the game, but the fact that he's performed so well in international cricket should be a factor in my opinion.

If it was just his ODI performances, I wouldn't be in favour of picking him at all, but his First Class performances over a long period put him right up there. He doesn't have a great Test record but I think he could be really useful on the subcontinent at very least. Should be in India right now IMO - not because of his ODI performances, but because of his FC performances and ability to both swing the new ball and bowl very effective cutters with the old one.

 

[Redbacks]

You know, having just checked back on the figures, Siddle has in fact been picked for the Test squad on the back of 6 First-Class games. Because that's all he played last season, and in the 3 previous games he was very poor.

6 games is funnily enough the exact same number of games Darren Pattinson had played in 2008 prior to his Test selection.

Horses for courses

 

[Richard]

You'd struggle to see why anyone but a batsman would be picked as a hourse for this corse of a pitch, ITBT.

 

[Redbacks]

Was more a slight dig at the Pattinson selection. It was quite funny to hear Atherton's opinion when he was selected. "I've got no idea who he is"

Has anyone else noticed how Aus bowlers who go for runs in a ODI and we lose as a result, will almost invariably be dropped from the team, bar the untouchables?

Lewis after the SA game
Kaspa after going for 15odd v NZ
Stuart Clark suffered a similar fait IIRC

 

[Richard]

Was more a slight dig at the Pattinson selection. It was quite funny to hear Atherton's opinion when he was selected. "I've got no idea who he is"

Aye, and the point I'm kinda making is that Siddle's selection here deserves something of a similar opprobrium. At least he's got some amount of rep as an up-and-coming bowler, rather than being a Brit who's been playing mostly club cricket up to his 29th birthday. But even so, 6 First-Class matches (however impressive) and you're into the Test squad when there are better-qualified candidates? It's very poor.

 

[pup11]

1. Brett Lee
2. Stuart Clark
3. Doug Bollinger
4. Nathan Bracken
5. Mark Cameron
6. Mosies Henriques
7. Grant Lambert
8. Shane Watson

For a moment i thought you were naming down the NSW pecking order, Watto just broke the sequence, i think you could have named Dominic Thornely ahead of Watto...

 

[Redbacks]

Agree, It's almost ridiculous to pick him with his record to date. However,

I get the feel that he will be given the chance to sink or swim, by the media in Australia, or in maybe as with Michael Clark given an oxygen supply for his stay under water. Victoria will be happy he got picked just to keep up the feudal tensions that still plaugue Australia

The best the Aus media could offer us regarding both Siddle's and White's selections were a 'comparision trap' showing how Warne faired in his first test match and then look what happened......

 

[Matt79]

Aye, and the point I'm kinda making is that Siddle's selection here deserves something of a similar opprobrium. At least he's got some amount of rep as an up-and-coming bowler, rather than being a Brit who's been playing mostly club cricket up to his 29th birthday. But even so, 6 First-Class matches (however impressive) and you're into the Test squad when there are better-qualified candidates? It's very poor.

Fairly different situation actually. a) he's someone who's come up through his country's own system, rather than parachuting in via a parent's passport or whatever, having failed to crack it in his 'own' country. b) he's, as you say, an up-and-comer, being a 23 year old in the early stages of his FC career, rather than a 29 year old journeyman, so there's at least some logic about testing him as a potential long term prospect and some prospect that the seasoning he'll gain will pay dividends. and c) I think Siddle's shown more than Pattison in the last couple of seasons.

He did enough to earn a spot on the squad, and maybe his youth helped in that regard, with the selectors having an eye to the future. Once on the squad, he did enough to impress the selectors and captain that he was a better bet in the conditions than the alternatives, so its hard to say that it's an appalling decision.

Siddle is a much more reasonable selection than White, in terms of records justifying selection, although in White's case the selectors' hands were somewhat forced by the amount of injuries, thin-ness of the spinnings ranks, and Kresja's poor showing in the tour match coupled with his equally average record.

 

[pup11]

I don't think there is any pecking order as such in terms of Australian fast bowling ranks atm, Clark, Lee and Johnson are the top three prefered options for test cricket atm, but other than it seems selectors are picking blokes on current form, or sometimes on bit of gut feeling, otherwise we wouldn't be seeing Siddle playing test cricket ahead of likes of Noffke and Bollinger.

 

[Richard]

Fairly different situation actually. a) he's someone who's come up through his country's own system, rather than parachuting in via a parent's passport or whatever, having failed to crack it in his 'own' country. b) he's, as you say, an up-and-comer, being a 23 year old in the early stages of his FC career, rather than a 29 year old journeyman, so there's at least some logic about testing him as a potential long term prospect and some prospect that the seasoning he'll gain will pay dividends. and c) I think Siddle's shown more than Pattison in the last couple of seasons.

I realise - indeed mentioned - that. But one thing remains: he's been selected on the back of 6 First-Class games. That is simply nowhere near enough unless there literally is no-one else performing, which there isn't.

He did enough to earn a spot on the squad, and maybe his youth helped in that regard, with the selectors having an eye to the future. Once on the squad, he did enough to impress the selectors and captain that he was a better bet in the conditions than the alternatives, so its hard to say that it's an appalling decision.

I don't think it is. Bollinger's done better than him (in the middle - and we all know this counts for more than in the nets) on the tour; and as I say, Noffke has done far more beforehand.

Unless your resources are obscenely thin, you've no excuse to go picking people based on 6 First-Class games.

And quite why it's supposed to be an advantage to Siddle to be in over his head before he's ready is a mystery to me. Playing before your time has come never did anyone any good, and will always remain a taint on your record to those (and you know full well they are many) who insist that games played which should not have been played are the same as games played that should have been.

Siddle is a much more reasonable selection than White, in terms of records justifying selection, although in White's case the selectors' hands were somewhat forced by the amount of injuries, thin-ness of the spinnings ranks, and Kresja's poor showing in the tour match coupled with his equally average record.

They weren't forced at all - there are many better-qualified candidates to play Test cricket for Australia as bowlers. Forget spinners - there is no rule that a specialist spinner has to play Test cricket. Picking Krejza and White is poor, neither of them deserve to come anywhere near international level.