*Official* Fourth Test at Headingley

[aussie]

Actually, they were stressing that it was as much a batting decision as a bowling one, and personally I think that even if it was a 100% batting decision you could at least make a case for it.

Yea i the decision to put him to open was solid & it was looking good until he bowled those 3 overs. So Watson OVERALL role was only 50% effective.

And yeah, he definitely bowled rubbish, but he's not the only Aussie seamer this series that's started off with three overs of rubbish.

Well at least Johnson was bowling them @ 90 mph haa

 

[Richard]

Couldn't disagree more, thank God the selectors don't make their decisions based on figures alone!!!

So you seriously believe Hoggard could still outperform just about every bowler in the country if he had declined as much as some would have us believe?

 

[Prince EWS]

Rob Key unlucky not to get the call, his recent form has been superb and his been there and done that but he's coach isn't an England selector.

Well he's playing Division 2, was as useless as **** on a bull for the first part of the season and then cashed in on a couple of flatties to bring his average up. Played particularly well in his last game, no doubt, but I think Trott's a better pick, particuarly given they don't want to move Bopara from three. It's hardly like Trott's having a poor season either, averaging 80 odd IIRC.

 

[Richard]

Headingley if my memory is correct ATM, hasn't swung since Caddick took 4 wickets vs WI in 2000. Its be very flat since.

Headingley like any ground anywhere depends not on what is at the ground but what the quality of the ball is like for whether it swings. The balls used in England between 2001 and 2006 swung far less than they should, at all grounds, but still from time to time. From 2007 onwards they've started to look like swinging properly again.

As for the deck, well, there's been a few seamers there and a few flatties since 2000. 2001 was a deck that varied from very nasty to quite easy, all game; 2002 seamed properly and England completely wasted it; 2003 ditto; 2004 was pretty similar to 2001; 2006 was a rank road; 2007 was a proper seamer of the 2000 class; 2008 was pretty similar to 2004 and 2001.

 

[four_or_six]

As I say, if there were legions of quality bowlers banging in the figures like Hoggard still is despite the cosmetic effect he may convey, then his exclusion would make sense. When he's being overlooked for Darren Pattinson, Amjad Khan and Stuart Broad, it doesn't.

And Gough has always been quicker than Hoggard. All career. Not remotely surprising to hear that. Gough simply has more talent for pace than Hoggard.

Agree with Pattinson, but not with Broad... don't have enough knowledge about Amjad Khan. And given he's now being kept out by Onions and Sidebottom, I definitely think that's fair.

Surprising that he looked fitter though, Gough was on one leg and about to retire.

 

[aussie]

Not really relevant to whether the ball swung or not though, is it?

Even if Sidebottom had somehow managed to take 0 wickets in that game bowling how he did, he still swung the ball around - it doesn't change that fact.

Yea, but as i said the surface & conditions weren't like 2000 or 2003. The swing he got was because he was a natural swing bowler.

Well thinking back to 2003. It was that seamer friendly, its just two major rain intervals on day 1 & on the last day that made it seem as a traditional leeds deck. Otherwise it was very good for batting. Weird conditions.

 

[pup11]

Indeed, and lets just throw the fact that Murali averaged over 30 when he toured the WI only a year before against a similar batting side.

No matter how many times I watch the 2 bowl, I simply cannot fathom how Hauritz has more variations than Swann. The only variation Hauritz has is throwing the ball a bit further up in the air. Swann, on the other hand, I feel spends too much time trying too many different things that he forgets about the reliability of his stock ball and sticking to the basics of line and length. This is why he bowls soo many goddamn full tosses.

I think it was social who said Hauritz > Swann, I don't agree with this, Swann is a veteran with an experience of 185 FC games behind him whereas Hauritz is still pretty much a greenhorn learning his trade, so there is no comparasion between those two as far the skill level of both of them is concerend at this point of time.

 

[TT Boy]

Well he's playing Division 2, was as useless as **** on a bull for the first part of the season and then cashed in on a couple of flatties to bring his average up. Played particularly well in his last game, no doubt, but I think Trott's a better pick, particuarly given they don't want to move Bopara from three. It's hardly like Trott's having a poor season either, averaging 80 odd IIRC.

More like 90 according to Sky Sports News, Bell like.
But his home ground, Birmingham isn't a result wicket.

Good job they got him into the mix in form - It was only two years ago when Dale Steyn was outscoring him for Warwickshire. Blows terribly hot and cold.

 

[aussie]

Headingley like any ground anywhere depends not on what is at the ground but what the quality of the ball is like for whether it swings. The balls used in England between 2001 and 2006 swung far less than they should, at all grounds, but still from time to time. From 2007 onwards they've started to look like swinging properly again.

As for the deck, well, there's been a few seamers there and a few flatties since 2000. 2001 was a deck that varied from very nasty to quite easy, all game; 2002 seamed properly and England completely wasted it; 2003 ditto; 2004 was pretty similar to 2001; 2006 was a rank road; 2007 was a proper seamer of the 2000 class; 2008 was pretty similar to 2004 and 2001.

Interesting point about the type of duke balls. Never was too ofay with that.

Had to just check cricinfo for this test, because i wasn't mixing it up for the game Dravid scored 217, but looking at the scorecard. I am getting back some memories of this test & are you sure it swung much then?. I am sort of remembering a wicket similar to when Monty took 5 vs PAK in 06?

 

[Prince EWS]

More like 90 according to Sky Sports News, Bell like.
But his home ground, Birmingham isn't a result wicket.

Good job they got him into the mix in form - It was only two years ago when Dale Steyn was outscoring him for Warwickshire. Blows terribly hot and cold.

Yeah, I definitely don't see Trott as a long- or even medium-term Test option, but I don't really see Key as one either. I think he's a fair pick for this game as long as they don't read too much into whatever performance he puts in - which they probably will, mind. If he does okay they'll probably stick him in at 3 in the first-choice team and discover for themselves that he goes through shocking runs of outs, and if he fails he'll probably be blacklisted from the ODI team again.

 

[superkingdave]

Hoggard was pretty ineffective when I saw him bowl on Sunday, but then it was pretty much as flat as they come and the sun was out.

 

[BoyBrumby]

Wonder where Swann ranks in comparsion to other bowlers in the world right now.

22nd.

Murali, Harbhajan, Harris, Vettori, Shakib & Kaneria the fellow twirlers who outrank him.

Simple answer - WI

Have a look at Hauritz's fc record

Hauritz has, in both this series and against SA, shown himself to be smarter, more accurate, has more variation and spins it more than Swann

Why then does he average 40+ in fc cricket in Oz?

1. Lack of experience

2. The wickets

3. And by far the most important, Oz batsmen LOVE traditional off spinners (I.e. anyone that doesnt have a doosra and they dont have to play in the subcontinent where conditions are completely different)

I'll say now that Swann's bowling has been disappointing so far generally, but it's worth noting that on the one genuinely 5th day surface he got to bowl on he was instrumental in our win.

I don't think anyone is claiming he's Laker incarnate, but his batting and fielding have been decent and he's at worst as good as any other spinner we could stick out.

---

Nice to see Trott finally get a go. Or in the squad, anyway. In prime nick and, although he does go quite hard at the ball, if he's playing at six hopefully the shine will have gone by the time he comes out. Suspect he's more of a limited overs batsman, but equally people probably would have said the same about our last yarp convert before his debut.

 

[PhoenixFire]

TBF, he won't get his full ICC Test ranking until he takes 100 wickets or gets hit for 1000 runs, or something like that.

 

[marc71178]

Rob Key unlucky not to get the call, his recent form has been superb and his been there and done that but he's coach isn't an England selector.

Form still not as good as Trott's and outperformed by Trott in the winter and 2008.

 

[Faisal1985]

Amazing batting by Clarke, another match saving effort.........English fav. going into the next game.....

 

[tooextracool]

3. And by far the most important, Oz batsmen LOVE traditional off spinners (I.e. anyone that doesnt have a doosra and they dont have to play in the subcontinent where conditions are completely different)

Go on then, why don't you tell everyone the last time Australia murdered a traditional 'off spin' bowler who didnt bowl a doosra outside of the subcontinent? I think you'll have a hard time proving that Australia LOVE traditional off spin bowlers, because they havent played any. There are few right handed finger spinners going around in international cricket.

Your logic that Australia struggle against left arm twirlers but not right handed ones is inane given that they both bowl exactly the same thing except with a different hand. Yes, traditionally there have been more successful SLAs than RAO, but thats only because there are more right handed batsmen than left handed batsman and batsmen are more susceptible to the ball going away than the ball coming in. Considering that half of Australia's top 8 currently are left handers, there is enough for any traditional RAO to work with.

 

[grecian]

sacrilege

Must admit I want Fred rested, his bowling wasn't a patch on Lords, can only see it deteriorate more for this match. Trott and Sidebottom in for Broad and Freddie.

They'll never do it though.......

 

[tooextracool]

That happened last summer against Saffa pretty much, gloomy Friday saw them swing us out, then they racked up what felt like a thousand

At Headingley, I've always felt that you have to look at it on a session by session basis, because the conditions vary every session depending on the overhead conditions. For example, Butcher's 173* in 2001 involved periods where the ball seamed at 45 degree angles and yet there were extended periods when the ball barely moved a millimeter off the pitch.

 

[tooextracool]

Must admit I want Fred rested, his bowling wasn't a patch on Lords, can only see it deteriorate more for this match. Trott and Sidebottom in for Broad and Freddie.

They'll never do it though.......

One would think that if Flintoff misses out, that Harmison will play given that they think of him as a 'like-for-like' replacement with Broad also left out. Sidebottom IMO, is more likely to replace Broad if Flintoff actually plays and if the conditions prove to be conducive to swing and seam movement.

 

[tooextracool]

More like 90 according to Sky Sports News, Bell like.
But his home ground, Birmingham isn't a result wicket.

Good job they got him into the mix in form - It was only two years ago when Dale Steyn was outscoring him for Warwickshire. Blows terribly hot and cold.

I don't know much about Trott at all, never seen him bat even, but seems like a reasonable selection considering he had a good season last year, is currently going through a purple patch and was one of the few players to have a successful A tour to NZ. Certainly his selection has a lot going for it, even if its not as clear cut as his selection for the ODI side.