BoyBrumby said:
I don't wanna go overboard (actually, that's an untruth; I do, but I'll restrain myself for the purposes of decorum & not looking a div when it all goes **** up) but I think this weekend has proved a couple of things, if nothing else:
1) Australia are still a bit underdone on this tour;
2) Australia are a team on the way down.
Now let me qualify that second point, Australia are still a magnificent team; unquestionably the best in the world & will probably have too much for us come the tests. Nevertheless there are signs of fallibility. Mainly to do with Father Time I think. Dizzy & Kasper are both palpably creaking &, as good as McGrath was today, he hasn't looked quite the bowler he was on his last visit. After them the seaming cupboard looks a little bare. As for the blonde fella sitting the ODIs out, well even Mark Waugh has said Warney isn't the bowler he was.
As for SR Waugh... well, Clarke is a good young player, but is he a Steve Waugh? Unfair to compare perhaps, but those are the shoes he is essentially being asked to fill. The little fielding slips are very un-Australian too, although there was a big improvement today.
So, to summarise: Australia to win, but we're no longer beaten before the first ball is bowled! Game on!
Agree with
most of that.
Re: Gillespie - age probably has a lot to do with his listlessness at the moment, though consistent injuries may have more to do with it. Even though most of his success is derived from his usual accuracy, a lot of it is to do with his pace. He's not lightning, but he used to be able to exceed 140km/h regularly; on this tour he's barely managed 130. His type of bowling is alot easier to play when it's 10k's slower; in any case, he hasn't been bowling with an accuracy whatsoever, and has been overdoing the slower ball.
Re: Kasprowicz - I think a lot of his recent success is due to: a) the fact that other bowlers have been performing well; and b) the novelty of his off-cutter action. I think the novelty has largely worn off (not completely - see Collingwood) and he has consistently failed when under duress (NZ, Somerset, today). Although I am a fan of his, I think his participation will diminish markedly over the next twelve months or so.
Re: McGrath - I disagree here. His success is largely due to: a) uncanny accuracy; and b) bounce. He hasn't been as accurate so far on this tour, but having seen him over the last year, I don't think he's on the decline (averaged around 18 in both forms, I think). No doubt his reputation plays a part in many of his wickets, but there's a limit on how many wickets one can get through reputation alone. I think he'll remain Australia's premier bowler until the day he retires.
Re: Warne - You're probably right, he hasn't looked all that great of late.
Re: Clarke - I rate him very highly, though that's based mainly on intuition (i.e. I can't really argue in his favour based on reason, so I won't try).
Re: England - There has been an obvious change in attitude from the last time they toured. This is largely due to Flintoff, Harmison, Pietersen, Strauss, and I guess the captain as well. As I mentioned earlier, Australia hasn't seen their potential, which is why they will likely pose a huge threat come Ashes. As you say, their attitude means that they won't be beaten before the first ball is bowled.
As for Australia's attitude: you don't get beaten by England, Somerset, Bangladesh and England again in the space of a week without suffering from a great deal of self-doubt. Still, plenty of matches to gain confidence before the Ashes start.
]
