England vs Australia - Who has the best depth?

[andyc]

Because of course Dorey, Tait, Lee, MacGill and Bracken have all been so successful in Tests...?

Erm... how have Lee and MacGill not been successful in tests?

 

[andyc]

The quality of England's seamers drops off once you reach Harmison.

So you don't rate Hoggard, Jones or Flintoff, but you do rate Harmison?

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

Because of course Dorey, Tait, Lee, MacGill and Bracken have all been so successful in Tests...?

Given that MacGill has been more "successful" in tests than any spinner England has produced in the last few decades, I'd say yes. Lee hasn't had a great career, but his average has dropped almost two whole runs since the start of the Australian summer, in which time he's taken 36 wickets @ 24.50, so he's certainly doing alright recently.

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

Not really - there's not a huge difference between Giles and Udal and I'd back both on a typical SCG pitch.

I'd be floored if Giles ever had any significant success against Australia, simple as that. I'd back almost any spinner in the world to do better against Australia, in fact. Even Nicky Boje has been more threatening.

 

[GIMH]

It does seem like it's done with just a hint of bias to me, Aussie

eg you've put Mike Hussey in both the openers and middle order sections for Aus, but haven't done the same for Vaughan, who has opened plenty of times.

When discussing depth, quality is essential, none of Australia's "all rounders" come anywhere close to Flintoff in terms of being an all rounder, and Symonds doesn't convince me as a Test bowler anyhow, we might as well put Collingwood, Bell and Giles in the all-rounder section.

Still, there is no doubt that Aus have the better batting depth, but I think putting a decent bowling attack at all is a worry for them at the minute, never mind worrying about depth

Mighty England, on the other hand, go and win a Test in India missing 60% of our world feared bowling attack.

lol

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

I'm pretty confident that Panesar is as good as Cullen, Bailey and Casson. Keedy and Swann are also good, but Keedy's getting on a bit (he's still ~6 years younger than Udal, mind ) and Swann doesn't seem to feature in mad Dunc's plans.

I haven't seen Panesar bowl, so I can't really comment, but he hasn't exactly set the world alight in the tests in India. Bailey and Casson had very good seasons just recently, so they're major prospects. Both are obviously wristspinners, which helps.

About the seamers, there doesn't seem to be alot of depth in either. After Flintoff, Harmison, Inbred, Jones, and Anderson, the quality of England's seamers drops off quite dramatically, but as does Australia's when they reach Tait & co.

I'd agree with that. You'd have to say Gillespie is a bigger chance to return to test cricket successfully than any seamer outside of England's first XI, but beyond that both teams have some potential but nobody really dominating.

 

[howardj]

MIDDLE-ORDER:

8. D Hussey

If you're putting him in there, it's case closed - we don't have much depth!

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

If you're putting him in there, it's case closed - we don't have much depth!

He's a good one day player in my opinion, and if we had a bad enough run of injuries I could maybe see him as an outside shot at the world cup squad. Obviously not test material though.

 

[dontcloseyoureyes]

On David Hussey:

He needs to work on his concentration if he wants to play test cricket for Australia. The times I've seen him bat, he looks every bit as good as his brother and many others in line for test selection, but just when you think "yep, he's gonna go big here" he goes and chips one to the inner ring or misses a straight one. He's probably a little old to actually give himself a decent run, and unless there's a magical turn-around in his batting over the next Pura Cup season I can't seeing him cracking it. But I definately think he has the makings of a class batsmen, I just think he needs to get his head in order.

 

[chris.hinton]

The Aussies should start blooding Younger players for the next ashes series Clarke, Lee and Tait. Ponting, Gilcrist will all be around in the next ashes series in England will the others? i think it time to start now for them

Who Dorey?

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

Who Dorey?

Brett Dorey: http://content-aus.cricinfo.com/australia/content/player/5112.html

6 foot 8 swing bowler from Western Australia. First class average of 23. Had a shocking start to his ODI career, though.

 

[steds]

So you don't rate Hoggard, Jones or Flintoff, but you do rate Harmison?

No. He doesn't particularly rate anyone (Udal and Ealham aside), especially not Harmison.

 

[howardj]

He's a good one day player in my opinion, and if we had a bad enough run of injuries I could maybe see him as an outside shot at the world cup squad. Obviously not test material though.

Fair enough. I dont really follow the Domestic One-Day form too closely. Next in line for ODI's at the moment, though, would probably be Jacques and then Cossie.

 

[Richard]

How on earth can you say that, say, Marsh isn't test class? Have you ever even seen him play? How about Henriques? Or are you just talking crap as usual?

I'd agree that none of them are likely to have an impact on the series, but that's not really what "depth" means, is it?

Of course I've seen Daniel Marsh play - he's OK, sure, but there's no way he's Test class.

 

[Richard]

Erm... how have Lee and MacGill not been successful in tests?

This is not a success.
Nor is this.

 

[Richard]

So you don't rate Hoggard, Jones or Flintoff, but you do rate Harmison?

Other way around.
Add Anderson into the "ahead of Harmison" lot, too.

 

[Richard]

Given that MacGill has been more "successful" in tests than any spinner England has produced in the last few decades, I'd say yes. Lee hasn't had a great career, but his average has dropped almost two whole runs since the start of the Australian summer, in which time he's taken 36 wickets @ 24.50, so he's certainly doing alright recently.

You can say the same about MacGill
One handful of Tests does not prove much, especially when the figures flatter them as these do.
I don't give a damn if MacGill has been more succesful than any English spinner - that just says England don't produce quality wristspin, something that should be obvious to a goat-farmer from Ulyan Bataar.
MacGill has not been succesful enough to suggest to me that we'll have any problem with him if he's even good enough to get into the side next winter.

 

[Richard]

I'd be floored if Giles ever had any significant success against Australia, simple as that. I'd back almost any spinner in the world to do better against Australia, in fact. Even Nicky Boje has been more threatening.

Rubbish, Nico Boje and Giles are virtually the same bowler.
I can almost absolutely gurantee you that if we get a turner at The SCG, Giles is fully fit, and a Test is played, he will cause Australia problems.
You just don't seem to get the simple fact that some bowlers are not the same; some bowlers vary according to conditions.
As such, you vastly underestimate Giles.
As such it will increase further my satisfaction at seeing him tying Australian batsmen in knots if such a thing happens at The SCG next winter.

 

[Richard]

I haven't seen Panesar bowl, so I can't really comment, but he hasn't exactly set the world alight in the tests in India. Bailey and Casson had very good seasons just recently, so they're major prospects. Both are obviously wristspinners, which helps.

Err, sorry? Casson whose First-Class average for 2005\06 was over 40 (well over 50 in the Pura Cup)? And Bailey whose was nearly 50?

 

[Richard]

No. He doesn't particularly rate anyone (Udal and Ealham aside), especially not Harmison.

Err, what?
It's hard to tell if you're being ironic there or not.