Nathan Hauritz and Jason Krejza

[KiWiNiNjA]

Double that of Vettori.

2x0=0

 

[Furball]

Hauritz is a good bowler. He's no Lyon, but he did his job. He kept things tight and chipped in with wickets. He's hardly the first spinner to get hit around by the Indians.

Wasn't a huge turner of the ball from what I saw, but he varied his flight and got a bit of drift to beat the batsmen, and he can land six consecutive balls in good spots.

Yeah, it's why I always thought Hauritz was a better bowler than Krezja. Does more in the air, which is where you beat players and induce false shots and "soft" dismissals.

 

[Uppercut]

Yeah, it's why I always thought Hauritz was a better bowler than Krezja. Does more in the air, which is where you beat players and induce false shots and "soft" dismissals.

Nah, of the two Krejza was by far the more inclined to toss the ball up. It's how he successfully induced the entire Indian lineup to bat like morons.

 

[karan316]

We weren't assuming, we were basing it on a first class career that had been totally mediocre up to that point. To go back to the man above, because Gillespie scored that double ton should we have kept him on at number 3? Of course not. The debut match is a huge, huge outlier in his entire FC career. One of the biggest ever actually. I mean at least Ajit Agarkar has a 5 wicket haul at first class level! (that could be a good thread.....)

Remember though, Krejza missed a game through injury where Hauritz came in and did a very solid job, and then Krejza had that WACA nightmare/standard performance and so it was a bit of a no brainer really.

He took 12 wickets on debut against one of the best players of spin bowling, and after that he plays just 1 more test, how can this be fair?
His FC record isn't that great, but if he was selected and he did well he, then he should have got a few more chances to prove himself.

 

[stephen]

He took 12 wickets on debut against one of the best players of spin bowling, and after that he plays just 1 more test, how can this be fair?
His FC record isn't that great, but if he was selected and he did well he, then he should have got a few more chances to prove himself.

The twelve wickets though were not exactly taken at a particularly great rate. IIRC he had 100 runs against his name before his first wicket. Krezja took the wickets in that match largely because the Indians had to get out to someone and it just happened to be Krezja, 12 times.

Hauritz should never have been dropped for Doherty but most of all, he should have been re-picked ahead of Beer after the Doherty experiment failed.

 

[karan316]

The twelve wickets though were not exactly taken at a particularly great rate. IIRC he had 100 runs against his name before his first wicket. Krezja took the wickets in that match largely because the Indians had to get out to someone and it just happened to be Krezja, 12 times.

Hauritz should never have been dropped for Doherty but most of all, he should have been re-picked ahead of Beer after the Doherty experiment failed.

Now what does this mean? you don't get easy wickets in test cricket, you are saying it as if taking 12 wickets was a piece of cake.

 

[Uppercut]

you don't get easy wickets in test cricket

 

[BoyBrumby]

An example of the racism at the heart of Australian cricket, tbh. The chaps with the foreign roots: Hauritz (Polish), Krejza (Czech), Doherty (Irish) & O'Keefe (Irish) passed over for the Anglo.

Nah, seriously I think Lyon's comfortably the best spinner, but could be persuaded that Hauritz is the better package. His batting is superior and bowls a tighter line, which might be a better match for an attack without any naturally defensive seamers.

 

[stephen]

Now what does this mean? you don't get easy wickets in test cricket, you are saying it as if taking 12 wickets was a piece of cake.

No, it wasn't a piece of cake, but Krezja bowled a lion's share of the overs and took the 12 wickets at 30 runs apiece. It wasn't like he ran through the Indians.

 

[Dan]

No, it wasn't a piece of cake, but Krezja bowled a lion's share of the overs and took the 12 wickets at 30 runs apiece. It wasn't like he ran through the Indians.

And he was in a bowling attack with Lee, Johnson, Watson and Cameron White. Not exactly a fear-inducing attack likely to rip through the Indians, given Lee's injury struggles around that time and Johnson being ****.

It was fair because Krejza leaked runs at 5 an over in both innings, and he couldn't take a wicket in the next test he played. Can't say he exactly inspired confidence in his bowling, leaking 300 runs a game.

When you take 12 wickets in your first match, after 2 games your average should not be above 40.

 

[Athlai]

The Indians didn't rate Krezja at all, they went after him hard and gifted a few wickets that way.

Definitely wasn't really the sort of bowling you'd traditionally associate with a 12fer,

 

[Kylez]

I've always believed that Jason Krejza is vastly overrated. He is commonly viewed as an attacking bowler, I don't really buy that at all. Attacking bowlers are meant to take wickets in first class cricket. Krejza has never taken a 5 wicket haul in a first class game for Tasmania, ever. He has even struggled to take 3/4 wickets an innings, he's only managed that feat about twice. His record is pretty atrocious all-round and even spinners like Doherty and Hauritz have superior records and wicket taking ability despite being labelled as 'containing' or 'defensive' bowlers.

 

[NUFAN]

Nathan Hauritz and Jason Krejza are doing well to play first class cricket at the moment with O'Keefe and Doherty pushing them constantly.

Lyon has done very well, I was critical of Clarke's handling in SA but it turns out he was probably correct in not over bowling him in those conditions.

So for me it has to be Lyon but the difficult answer to work out is who should partner him if we ever play 2 spinkers with Watson the 3rd seamer. Beer obviously has been touring lately but he really isn't anything special. I think O'Keefe would be the logical choice when fit, but it's not clear cut at all.

 

[Dan]

Nathan Hauritz and Jason Krejza are doing well to play first class cricket at the moment with O'Keefe and Doherty pushing them constantly.

Lyon has done very well, I was critical of Clarke's handling in SA but it turns out he was probably correct in not over bowling him in those conditions.

So for me it has to be Lyon but the difficult answer to work out is who should partner him if we ever play 2 spinkers with Watson the 3rd seamer. Beer obviously has been touring lately but he really isn't anything special. I think O'Keefe would be the logical choice when fit, but it's not clear cut at all.

Would have to either be a leg spinner or left arm orthodox IMO, turn the ball away from the right hander. Unfortunately rules out Hauritz.

O'Keefe the logical choice, as you say, but perhaps Boyce could fill the role if he continues to perform (obviously a few years down the track, unless he turns out like Cullen Bailey).

When's our next test series in the SC?

 

[Prince EWS]

So for me it has to be Lyon but the difficult answer to work out is who should partner him if we ever play 2 spinkers with Watson the 3rd seamer.

Should never really happen IMO.

 

[morgieb]

Would have to either be a leg spinner or left arm orthodox IMO, turn the ball away from the right hander. Unfortunately rules out Hauritz.

O'Keefe the logical choice, as you say, but perhaps Boyce could fill the role if he continues to perform (obviously a few years down the track, unless he turns out like Cullen Bailey).

When's our next test series in the SC?

India 2013 I think.

 

[Dan]

India 2013 I think.

Thanks

Gives plenty of time for guys like Boyce, SoK, Beer .etc to develop towards international standard.

Playing 2 spinners isn't overly likely to happen, although with 2 all-rounders in the side (Watson and Hussey ), you can't rule it out.

 

[Spark]

Given how our spinners have done in India for yonks I'd sooner consider four quicks (where one of the quicks is Copeland) than two spinners.

 

[Noble One]

Whilst the verdict on Lyon as a long-term Test bowler is still TBD, it shows how quickly fortunes can change. This time last year few had heard of Lyon.

 

[Spikey]

Digging the similar threads. I assume someone (probably-n-n-n-n-nand) threw out debuting Lyon in that Beer thread and we all called him an idiot. afraid of reading said thread ftr