***Official*** Australia in England (The Ashes)

[Mister Wright]

Gee, if you were in the Australian team you would want Langer as a good mate...


Raw Tait not ripe to pick

 

[Top_Cat]

Tait's is worse in some respects,

How?

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

How?

The way he collapses on his front leg etc. Malinga bowls it far more round-arm than Tait does, but he is at least upright at point of delivery. Take note that I'm a big fan of Tait's and I recognise that his action works for him and everything, but in certain areas it is even more unorthodox than Malinga's, and in others not so much.

 

[Top_Cat]

The way he collapses on his front leg etc. Malinga bowls it far more round-arm than Tait does, but he is at least upright at point of delivery. Take note that I'm a big fan of Tait's and I recognise that his action works for him and everything, but in certain areas it is even more unorthodox than Malinga's, and in others not so much.

So are you arguing that his action is more unorthodox or that it's 'worse' than Malinga? Big difference. Unorthodox != worse in every case and in fact, forcing Tait to bowl in an orthodox manner would probably hurt him long-term. For example; Craig McDermott had one of the most beautifully-balanced orthodox bowling actions of any modern fast bowler yet the bane of his existance was knee trouble because his stability at the point of delivery was derived from his knees. Tait's action means that the effort in his bowling is concentrated in his upper-body rather than lower-body and if that was altered, he'd probably start to show knee troubles too. As it stands he puts the strain of bowling fast on much strong parts of his body.

Seriously, in terms of injury prevention, considering where his flexibility and core strength lies, there's actually very little wrong with Tait's action. He has an easy jog to the crease and his action is very smooth as his arm swings through the bowler's arc, most of the effort concentrated in his shoulders, arms and wrist rather than back, knees and intercostal muscles.

 

[howardj]

Just on Tait, I think the whole Jekyll 'n' Hyde portrayal of his bowling, is a little over-done. People make out that playing him is somehow a huge risk, in that he will either run through a side, or get a total shellacking and go at 8 an over. Granted, this can sometimes happen. However, the truth, as is often the case, lies somewhere in between (ie he picks up a few wickets, and doesn't go for too many runs). People make out as though he bleeds runs, whereas he only goes for 3.66 an over.

 

[honestbharani]

so Tait is a lock to play in this next test?

 

[Mister Wright]

so Tait is a lock to play in this next test?

No. It changes with the hour. Kasprowicz...Tait...Kasprowicz...Tait. We'll find out on Thursday.

 

[Eclipse]

can we really afford to have Tait and Lee in the same team?

 

[Demolition Man]

I am not a big kasper fan but I owuld have preferred him in the last test ahead of dizzy.

IMHO tait must play, kaspar has not seriously troubled the english this season, tait must be given a run just ask the guy whose head he cut open.

All this being said it will say alot about certain members of the australian hierarchy if kaspar plays and they leave tait out.

Neither of them is a lock. Although i'm not suprised to see JL stick up for the old-mans club.

 

[Demolition Man]

Northamptonshire coach Kepler Wessels, the former Australia and South Africa Test batsman, said he would have no reservations in choosing Tait.

"If they want to win I'd play him," Wessels said. "He's different. They haven't seen him before. Now is the time to blood him because it might be too hard in the last Test.

"He has an unusual action which batsmen can have trouble with if they haven't seen him before."

http://foxsports.news.com.au/story/0,8659,16347523-5000061,00.html

 

[Demolition Man]

can we really afford to have Tait and Lee in the same team?

Can we afford not to ?

 

[Demolition Man]

I think we all must keep in mind that it has not been our bowling that has us under the pump in this series , it has been our batsmen. We carried dizzy gillespie, we can carry another bowler either kasper or tait, it is our batsmen who need to lift.

 

[Mister Wright]

I think we all must keep in mind that it has not been our bowling that has us under the pump in this series , it has been our batsmen. We carried dizzy gillespie, we can carry another bowler either kasper or tait, it is our batsmen who need to lift.

They've both been poor. If we go into a game with Tait & Lee and neither of them fire, then we will have a big total imposed on us very quickly unless McGrath and Warne peg us back. It is a little less risky with Kaspa, but not unlikely. While our batsman need to lift, it isn't like our bowlers have been guilt free, Lee has bowled some terrible spells and Dizzy has been non-existent, however mainly our fielders have let the bowlers down.

 

[Demolition Man]

They've both been poor. If we go into a game with Tait & Lee and neither of them fire, then we will have a big total imposed on us very quickly unless McGrath and Warne peg us back. It is a little less risky with Kaspa, but not unlikely. While our batsman need to lift, it isn't like our bowlers have been guilt free, Lee has bowled some terrible spells and Dizzy has been non-existent, however mainly our fielders have let the bowlers down.

So who plays ??

Do we go conservative and play kasper ?
Or do we go 'Australian' and play tait. ?

IMHO they will leave it untill the 11th hour to decide who to play, FWIW the conditions that our coming out of England indicate the pitch would probably be more favourable to tait, that being said I know if kasper gets a go he will give it his all but I am concerned that he does not trouble the english batsmen much.

 

[Mister Wright]

So who plays ??

Do we go conservative and play kasper ?
Or do we go 'Australian' and play tait. ?

IMHO they will leave it untill the 11th hour to decide who to play, FWIW the conditions that our coming out of England indicate the pitch would probably be more favourable to tait, that being said I know if kasper gets a go he will give it his all but I am concerned that he does not trouble the english batsmen much.

He removed the well settled Trescothick, removed Bell early and found pace and bounce to remove Jones. With playing both Tait and Lee you are playing impact bowlers and don't really have the extra bowler to bowl long spells, which means McGrath & Warne have to bowl a lot more overs than usual which could nulify their effect. Australia lacks the opportunity to have an allrounder fill in with overs, and especially now that Clarke will probably never bowl again if we are struggling to take wickets, I'd rather have Kasprowicz bounding in then Katich - and I know who the England batsman would rather face.

 

[Demolition Man]

He removed the well settled Trescothick, removed Bell early and found pace and bounce to remove Jones. With playing both Tait and Lee you are playing impact bowlers and don't really have the extra bowler to bowl long spells, which means McGrath & Warne have to bowl a lot more overs than usual which could nulify their effect. Australia lacks the opportunity to have an allrounder fill in with overs, and especially now that Clarke will probably never bowl again if we are struggling to take wickets, I'd rather have Kasprowicz bounding in then Katich - and I know who the England batsman would rather face.

Yeah I agree to a certain extent, but I feel it is a risk they have to take.
Kapser gets alot of his wickets with the batsmen going after him, as oppossed to mcgrath who dominates the batsmen. As we do not have an all-rounder we will suffer in the longer innings, we realistically only have 4 bowlers going into this match, england have 5, this being said I do not see why lee and tait can't up their spells by a couple of overs or so.

FWIW Kasper was destroyed in the last innings he bowled to the poms.

 

[Demolition Man]

If gerant jones couldn't bat it would be slightly more even in terms of all-rounders

ie england have 4 bowlers + flintoff
aussies have 4 bowlers + gilchrist

Gilchrist has not peformed this series, he is the aussies all-rounder and must a big score soon.

Does katich bowl more of his dinky chinamen ??? He says he has been perfecting them to give the aussies the same sort of thing that Wheelie-bin provides for the english.

If all of our bowlers do not produce we need half-decent allrounder, the pitch will not turn so we are screwed unless we played watson (who is not setting the world on fire).

SO with all that misconjucted sentences in mind the aussies need 4 bowlers to peform, not trundle in and hope for the best and nullify damage. Although we do need nullifyers but is warne and pigeon enough ??

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

so Tait is a lock to play in this next test?

Definately not. As things stand, I would still be very surprised if he was picked. This buildup is exactly like the one seen before the first test in New Zealand, and the selectors stayed conservative and picked Kasprowicz over Lee. Australian selectors in general have a reputation for being ruthless and trying things, but it's worth remembering that this particular group of selectors hasn't done much together before, and aside from going with the no-brainer and picking Lee over Kasprowicz at the start of the Ashes, they've done nothing out of the ordinary so far. I expect Kasprowicz will go in, and Tait will wait in the wings until someone gets injured, retires or has a complete horror run of form like Gillespie. It's the same thing with Hayden and Hussey/Jaques. There are two other openers who have mounted simply huge cases against Hayden, Jaques with his average in the mid 50s in both Australia and England and his youth, and Hussey with his experience, years of domination in English conditions and his phenomenal ODI career to date, yet Hayden has been persisted with. I expect this will be the trend of Australian selections in the near future, and even if Australia gets mauled in the next two tests and loses 3-1 I doubt you will see wholesale changes before the next series, with maybe 1 or 2 players going at most excluding forced changes.

 

[Demolition Man]

Every time I think we should 'play it safe' and go with Kasper, I see this picture in my head and think 1 down 11 more English(including 2 south africans, 1 welshman and a PNGuineanian to go.

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

If gerant jones couldn't bat it would be slightly more even in terms of all-rounders

ie england have 4 bowlers + flintoff
aussies have 4 bowlers + gilchrist

Gilchrist has not peformed this series, he is the aussies all-rounder and must a big score soon.

Does katich bowl more of his dinky chinamen ??? He says he has been perfecting them to give the aussies the same sort of thing that Wheelie-bin provides for the english.

If all of our bowlers do not produce we need half-decent allrounder, the pitch will not turn so we are screwed unless we played watson (who is not setting the world on fire).

SO with all that misconjucted sentences in mind the aussies need 4 bowlers to peform, not trundle in and hope for the best and nullify damage. Although we do need nullifyers but is warne and pigeon enough ??

Why does Australia need 5 bowlers? That's like saying Australia needs reverse swing to win, or any of the other things Australia has never needed in the past. Australia hasn't had a world class all-rounder since the Davidson and Benaud days in the 50s and 60s, and even then they often only picked 4 bowlers. Even when they didn't have a reliable spinner, Australia played 4 quicks. All through the 90s with Warne, Australia supported him with 3 quicks. Why is it that just because England have Flintoff Australia suddenly desperately need a 5th bowler?

Having Clarke able to bowl would be handy, but really it doesn't matter. If McGrath, Warne and Kasprowicz play as well as they did all of last year and Lee plays like he has this series and Australia hold most of their catches, Australia will do well with the ball anyway. Having a fifth bowler would have helped with hiding Gillespie, but it's not a necessity, which is why Australia has done it about 3 times in the last decade while dominating more comprehensively than any team ever has before.

The real problem is batting, right now. If Australia bat first and make a big score, the rest will sort itself out as it usually does when you have two all-time greats in the team.