DIZZY - will he be dropped?

[Richard]

Depends what you mean by "achieved". Lee has twice as many test wickets and runs, and a better average in test cricket. He's had a positive influence on more test matches and more test series. In ODI cricket it's no contest whatsoever.

For instance, Kasprowicz has only taken ten wickets in a series twice, while Lee has done it 11 times. Lee has 7 five wicket hauls, while Kasprowicz has 4. Lee has a better average and strike rate both home and away. While Kasprowicz has far more first class wickets, his average in domestic first class cricket is 25.66 compared to Lee's 22.02. I could go on, really. You could say Kasprowicz has achieved less due to less opportunities, but he certainly hasn't had a more successful career than Lee.

The sum-total of Lee's achievements before the most recent season were occasionally being slightly less rubbish than he usually was.
Only last season was Lee credible as close to a Test-class bowler. Before then he was one of the worst players of the modern era to play 38 Tests, if not the worst.
So, in short, Lee has achieved one season of good performances in Tests. The "T" word which I should have mentioned and didn't.
Kasprowicz has achieved considerably more than that, even despite getting far less opportunities than most bowlers of his talent have.

 

[Richard]

Lee is also much better as a strike bowler than Kasper.

What, Lee's better at being a bowler who's best used in short spells than Kasprowicz?
What a phenominal achievement.

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

The sum-total of Lee's achievements before the most recent season were occasionally being slightly less rubbish than he usually was.
Only last season was Lee credible as close to a Test-class bowler. Before then he was one of the worst players of the modern era to play 38 Tests, if not the worst.
So, in short, Lee has achieved one season of good performances in Tests. The "T" word which I should have mentioned and didn't.
Kasprowicz has achieved considerably more than that, even despite getting far less opportunities than most bowlers of his talent have.

Admittedly, some of the things I mentioned would not have been true before this season, like Lee having the better average both home and away (though it probably would have been better away anyway), but the fact that Lee had more wickets and a comparable average, and that he had impacted on more series and tests than Kasprowicz was still true.

If you're going to measure "success" in some way other than just average, wickets per match and strike rate, (and in two of those areas Lee led, even before this summer), it would have to be the number of games and series a player plays a significant role in. And Kasprowicz throughout his career has been largely a support bowler, with a couple of exceptions. This is shown by the fact that in the 17 test series he has participated in, he has only taken 10+ wickets twice, in the 1997 Ashes and the 03/04 series in Sri Lanka. In fact, over his whole career Kasprowicz averages less than three wickets per test, which is a pretty small number for a guy with 38 test matches.

Lee averages almost 4 wickets a test, and has 10+ wickets in 11 out of 19 series. And despite the fact that his average isn't the best, his strike rate of 52.60 shows that he's been a consistent wicket taking threat, given that it is better than the likes of Gillespie have managed. Lee's certainly not been one of the best bowlers around throughout his career, at least not until the last few months, but he's never been as dismally poor as you make out. Even through the poorest patches of his career he was still threatening and still took wickets, even whilst getting hammered. Kasprowicz is a fine bowler in many ways, but he certainly hasn't been a consistent threat at test level. He has varied between being a good to a poor support bowler, but his wicket taking ability at test level has generally been questionable, despite the odd fine performance. After Lee's recent achievements in test cricket, there is no question about who the more accomplished performer at test level is. Kasprowicz has plenty of valid excuses for his average record, and Lee has certainly been given more leeway by the selectors for a number of reasons, but Lee has also been the more successful bowler.

And incidentally, the suggestion that Lee is the worst player to play 38 tests in the modern era is absurd. He isn't even the worst player to play 38 tests for Australia in the modern era, with the likes of Greg Blewett around, and the suggestion that Lee is worse than the likes of Mark Ramprakash, Grant Flower, Habibul Bashar or Mervyn Dillon is ludicrous. Indeed, even Ashley Giles.

 

[Richard]

Admittedly, some of the things I mentioned would not have been true before this season, like Lee having the better average both home and away (though it probably would have been better away anyway), but the fact that Lee had more wickets and a comparable average, and that he had impacted on more series and tests than Kasprowicz was still true.

If you're going to measure "success" in some way other than just average, wickets per match and strike rate, (and in two of those areas Lee led, even before this summer), it would have to be the number of games and series a player plays a significant role in. And Kasprowicz throughout his career has been largely a support bowler, with a couple of exceptions. This is shown by the fact that in the 17 test series he has participated in, he has only taken 10+ wickets twice, in the 1997 Ashes and the 03/04 series in Sri Lanka. In fact, over his whole career Kasprowicz averages less than three wickets per test, which is a pretty small number for a guy with 38 test matches.

Lee averages almost 4 wickets a test, and has 10+ wickets in 11 out of 19 series. And despite the fact that his average isn't the best, his strike rate of 52.60 shows that he's been a consistent wicket taking threat, given that it is better than the likes of Gillespie have managed. Lee's certainly not been one of the best bowlers around throughout his career, at least not until the last few months, but he's never been as dismally poor as you make out. Even through the poorest patches of his career he was still threatening and still took wickets, even whilst getting hammered. Kasprowicz is a fine bowler in many ways, but he certainly hasn't been a consistent threat at test level. He has varied between being a good to a poor support bowler, but his wicket taking ability at test level has generally been questionable, despite the odd fine performance. After Lee's recent achievements in test cricket, there is no question about who the more accomplished performer at test level is. Kasprowicz has plenty of valid excuses for his average record, and Lee has certainly been given more leeway by the selectors for a number of reasons, but Lee has also been the more successful bowler.

If Kasprowicz has always been a support-bowler (and he has, except in India in 1997\98), Lee certainly always was before 2005\06.
Nor was Lee a "consistent wicket-taking threat" between 2001 and 2005 - his SR in that time was a distinctly average 62. Yes, he did have a sensational SR in 1999\2000 and 2000\01, but that was clearly a different period.
Bearing in mind his extraordinarily limited opportunities, I'd say Kasprowicz has achieved a remarkable amount in Tests. Given the stupid amount of slack cut to Lee, I'd say he's achieved very little in comparison.

And incidentally, the suggestion that Lee is the worst player to play 38 tests in the modern era is absurd. He isn't even the worst player to play 38 tests for Australia in the modern era, with the likes of Greg Blewett around, and the suggestion that Lee is worse than the likes of Mark Ramprakash, Grant Flower, Habibul Bashar or Mervyn Dillon is ludicrous. Indeed, even Ashley Giles.

Sorry, what? Habibul Bashar has played them for Bangladesh!!!! Hence I don't credit the games as Tests!!!!
Lee before the most recent season was no better than Mervyn Dillon.
Nor can he be slightly compared with batsmen like Blewett, Ramprakash and Grant Flower.

 

[luckyeddie]

Sorry, what? Habibul Bashar has played them for Bangladesh!!!! Hence I don't credit the games as Tests!!!!
Lee before the most recent season was no better than Mervyn Dillon.
Nor can he be slightly compared with batsmen like Blewett, Ramprakash and Grant Flower.

So if they had beaten Australia, it wouldn't have counted in your eyes, I suppose?

 

[Richard]

As I've said about 1000 times - the same amount that Somerset beating them counted for, or that Hampshire beating them on the last tour did.
Incidentally - you've now replied directly to a post of mine twice in a day. Does that mean I've been (temporarily, presumably) removed from your IL?

 

[luckyeddie]

As I've said about 1000 times - the same amount that Somerset beating them counted for, or that Hampshire beating them on the last tour did.
Incidentally - you've now replied directly to a post of mine twice in a day. Does that mean I've been (temporarily, presumably) removed from your IL?

I made that perfectly plain when I said that I'd taken you off <ignore> for 5 minutes and walked liver-first straight into one of your patronising diatribes (the one about Nestle).

 

[Richard]

When Dizzy was dropped in England I stated on this website that he will be in the Australian IX for the first Ashes test in Australia later this year. This comment was met with much hilarity by many a pom on this website.

Question is - will he be selected?

Stuart Clark has just come off a man of the series effort in SA and would consider himself very unlucky if not selected.

And with Mcgrath presumably back, what will the test attack be? Will Australia continue with 5 bowlers or go back to their preferred 4 bowler attack.

Can Dizzy truly be considered as an allrounder based on one freakish effort against poor opposition?

Can he justify his selection on bowling only considering all he has done has had a good game or two with the ball against poor opposition?

Surely MacGill deserves to play but will they play 2 spinners and 3 quicks?

Is Kaspa now out of the equation.....and what about Tait?

There are a million questions and permutations but what will the sleectors do?

Will Dizzy's performance in the second test against Bangladesh go down as the greatest performance ever by a player that was then dropped?

Well it seems as though it might...