Not quite his debut, but it must have felt like one, after playing so little part in his previous games. I've been confused by how Ponting's treated him up to this point, because so far his selection has had a real fifth wheel feel to it.social said:
That's an interesting point. They're of course noticably weakened if you take out the top two or three bowlers in the country, but that's true of all teams. Out of curiosity, how many nations would you say have a greater bowling depth than Australia?marc71178 said:
Yeah but that's silly isn't it, because you're removing one or two all-time great bowlers, and putting in their place promising or very good domestic bowlers. That would hurt any team at a great level, even greater if you removed any two best bowlers from other teams. Take away Vaas and Murali from SL, Harmison and Flintoff from Eng, Akhtar and Kaneria from Pak (If we're only talking ODIs, then maybe Afridi or Rana), or Harbhajan and Kumble for India. I reckon Australia are best equipped to handle their top players being rested or injured, but it is just over exaggerated because you go from absolute greats to promising.marc71178 said:
Not in this conversation. ClownSymonds just suggested that although Australia may have had the best bowling depth in the world, it wasn't THAT much - to which Marc replied that indications were that they didn't have "the depth".greg said:
Fair enough. Although if Stuart Clark is near the top of the list of reserves then i think Marc could probably make a pretty good case. The cynic would say that Australia's "depth" consists ofSlow Love™ said:
yea thats true when Pigeon & Warne go, england will with Harmy, Jones, Hoggard & Freddie , Gilo plus good youngsters i.e Plunks, Anderson, Tremlett, Harrison, Loudon, Swann, Francis(probably) & who has you said are younger than australia's should have the best bowling depth in world cricket.greg said:
