*Official* Road to the 2010/11 Ashes

[social]

Can't believe the amount of people spuiking for McDonald in this thread.

At best was a stop gap measure - nothing more. The players coming through have surpassed him.

With the improvement in Watson's bowling he has no chance, absolutely none.

Are we talking about the same Watson who couldnt even walk up to the crease in India?

****ing hell, if we're relying on Shane to bowl, we might as well give up now!

 

[tooextracool]

Can't believe the amount of people spuiking for McDonald in this thread.

At best was a stop gap measure - nothing more. The players coming through have surpassed him.

With the improvement in Watson's bowling he has no chance, absolutely none.

Personally, 'Ronald' McDonald appears to be a lot like his namesake Ronald Irani. Similar records too.

 

[Bloody Hell]

Are we talking about the same Watson who couldnt even walk up to the crease in India?

****ing hell, if we're relying on Shane to bowl, we might as well give up now!

He bowled exactly the amount he needed to bowl. Are you suggesting McDonald would have done better in the conditions?

 

[Woodster]

He bowled exactly the amount he needed to bowl. Are you suggesting McDonald would have done better in the conditions?

Tbf, Watson looked like he was really struggling when he bowled in India, stiffer than usual. His batting has been a real plus for the Aussies, and of course when there is the possibility of swing in the air, and he hasn't batted or fielded for any length of time, he could be a useful fifth bowler.

 

[GIMH]

My fear is that the selectors will take them (being broader here) seriously and think that "Quick! Drop Clarke! Drop Katich! Install Smith as a 4th specialist bowler!". I mean, FFS...

And yes you are correct. Let's compare the team that walked out on the 1st day four years ago and the team that will walk out in a month's time.

Hayden, now Katich - No contest
Langer - Watson - Again, no contest
Ponting stays, but has gotten worse - mind you, he had to, the Ponting of the "live" tests of 06-07 was a sight to behold, is now just "good"
Clarke stays, has gotten better overall but like Ponting was stellar during the "live" tests (but not that stellar obviously)
Hussey stays, was also stellar during the "live" tests of 06, but unlike the above two is now genuinely poor
Martyn, now North - No contest even with Martyn at the very twilight of his career
Gilchrist, now Haddin - no contest
Warne, now Hauritz - ...
Lee, now Johnson - probably the one with the most similarity, as Lee was pretty poor IIRC for the "live" tests
Clark, now Hilfenhaus - No contest, as good as Hilf is, Clark was quite simply outstanding
McGrath, now Dougeh - No contest

So that makes 7 replacements which are definitive step downs of varying degrees, 2 players who have gotten worse, one quite drastically, one debatable and one improvement.

On the flipside...

Cook - was in much better form four years ago
Strauss - as above
Trott - similar to Bell last time, is coming off a successful series but one which didn't tell us much
Pietersen - was in much better form four years ago
Collingwood - was probs in better form back then but is a better player now
Bell - will score more runs from six than Flintoff did but obviously won't lead the attack
Prior - improvement on Read/Jones quite comfortably
Swann - miles better than Giles/Panesar
Anderson - miles better than he was four years ago, way better than mahmood
Broad -not as good as Hoggard
Finn - not as proven as Harmison but also not as proven to mess up

On paper, not a huge improvement, but Swann and Prior are key positions that make a huge difference, and the lower order is waaaaaay stronger than 06, throw in six pure bats over five last time and you can expect 100 more runs

 

[Top_Cat]

No-one thought Berry was an idiot when he wrote that article mentioning McNamara.

 

[Spark]

On the flipside...

Cook - was in much better form four years ago
Strauss - as above
Trott - similar to Bell last time, is coming off a successful series but one which didn't tell us much
Pietersen - was in much better form four years ago
Collingwood - was probs in better form back then but is a better player now
Bell - will score more runs from six than Flintoff did but obviously won't lead the attack
Prior - improvement on Read/Jones quite comfortably
Swann - miles better than Giles/Panesar
Anderson - miles better than he was four years ago, way better than mahmood
Broad -not as good as Hoggard
Finn - not as proven as Harmison but also not as proven to mess up

On paper, not a huge improvement, but Swann and Prior are key positions that make a huge difference, and the lower order is waaaaaay stronger than 06, throw in six pure bats over five last time and you can expect 100 more runs

If Ponting/Clarke/Hussey can replicate their 06-07 form then I'm struggling to see how we can be beaten in a test match tbf. Those three basically carried the batting lineup, with intermittent contributions from the rest.

 

[Spark]

I've said it before, and I'll say it again, Australia's bowling attack is fine. In fact, it's very good. They've largely been getting the job done: the 3rd Test in South Africa and the Lord's debacle are the only times where the attack has properly struggled. That's a pretty good record over 20 Tests. Since the South Africa series, their bowling attack as a unit has averaged a shade over 30, and in 17 Tests the opposition has only passed 400 6 times - two of those being a powerful Indian line up in home conditions.

It is Australia's batting that is the problem. Since they've come back from South Africa, every Test they've lost, or come close to losing, has had an epic batting collapse at some point.

Lord's: all out for 215 in the 1st innings
Oval: 160 all out
3rd Test vs West Indies: after choosing not to enforce the follow on, 2nd innings collapses to 150 all out, leaving West Indies 358 to win; they fall 35 runs short
2nd Test v Pakistan: owned on the first morning, collapse to 127 all out. Should have lost were it not for crap captaincy, and even worse batting.
2nd Test v New Zealand: Katich aside, epic rubbishness from Australia sees them 231 ao. Never close to losing, due to a poor reply from New Zealand, and piling on 500 runs in the 2nd dig.
MCC series v Pakistan: poor batting throughout, particularly at Leeds, where they collapse to 88 all out, and need Steven Smith to rescue the 2nd innings to give the bowlers something to bowl at.
Border-Gavaskar series: 2nd innings collapses in both Tests prove crucial.

That really was the most ludicrous collapse I've ever seen. Like, really.

 

[Top_Cat]

Yeah don't think there's a lot wrong with the bowling. Even in England last year when they weren't collectively at their best, they kept the Aussies in the game. This attack is rarely collared, when India threatened to roar away, they were good at taking that crucial wicket then a bunch more to clean up an innings before it got out of control.

That this team hasn't been going down by an innings is really due to the bowling and is probably masking the inconsistency of the top-order. It's not even that they've been collapsing on day 3/4 on a wearing deck, there have been a few fairly uncomfortably spectacular first-day collapses. That these inconsistent types have smashed a few scores elsewhere doesn't make it any less of a problem. When the heat is really on, they've really not been up to it if you have to assess the last 3 years as a whole..

 

[vic_orthdox]

Berry likes to make lots of big and controversial statements. At least he backs up most of them with some logic and reasoning, even if you don't agree with them.

 

[BoyBrumby]

Whilst I don't agree with dropping Johnson (erratic or not he remains the most potent wicket taker available to Oz just now), I don't think the rest of the article is that outlandish. Smith has already been picked as the nominal specialist spinner before and, whilst it might be harsh on someone who's two tests into a return from injury, Hauritz isn't pulling up too many trees at the moment. In fact I don't think his captain trusts him at all just now.

On said captain I'm of the opinion that it's only because Australia need his runs and there's the idea that former captains don't return to the ranks down under that has kept him in the gig such a long while. As Berry said, it might be a tough sale to Punter given Border, Taylor and Waugh were all carried out on their shields, but equally Ponting is their superior as a batsman and their inferior as captain. If the Laras and Sachins of the world can play on under another leader there's no intrinsic reason why the other great batsman of the age can't too.

 

[robelinda]

Its not like Taylor and Waugh didnt lose test series, when they were bowlers down they lost bad too. Taylor had no idea how to stop Sachin so I dont see the point in bashing Punter about it. Steve Waugh lost series when he had a full strength bowling attack, as Punter did in 05. I think a massive part of Taylor and Waugh's success was obviously McGrath and Warne, probably a bigger part than most people think. Punter's not the best captain, but he's a champ IMO.

 

[Spark]

Peter Roebuck: Is Clarke up for the captaincy job? | Opinion | Cricinfo Magazine | Cricinfo.com

Don't like Peter Roebuck. At all.

But there are good points here. He needs to refine and grow that spark of determination that he does have - that got him his recall, and that got him the 168.

 

[Uppercut]

On said captain I'm of the opinion that it's only because Australia need his runs and there's the idea that former captains don't return to the ranks down under that has kept him in the gig such a long while. As Berry said, it might be a tough sale to Punter given Border, Taylor and Waugh were all carried out on their shields, but equally Ponting is their superior as a batsman and their inferior as captain. If the Laras and Sachins of the world can play on under another leader there's no intrinsic reason why the other great batsman of the age can't too.

IMO Katich should have been given the captaincy ages ago, probably after Ponting used the part-timers in India a couple of years back. But if you're going to replace him now, it's going to be with Michael Clarke. Which just seems odd and probably wouldn't change a great deal.

 

[Jono]

Peter Roebuck: Is Clarke up for the captaincy job? | Opinion | Cricinfo Magazine | Cricinfo.com

Don't like Peter Roebuck. At all.

But there are good points here. He needs to refine and grow that spark of determination that he does have - that got him his recall, and that got him the 168.

Like others, I do think that Roebuck can be over the top and off the mark at times, but that is a well balanced and sensible article. He doesn't have a go at Clarke, he is just pointing out perceptions and instances which give rise to these perceptions.

Was a good read.

 

[Jono]

Berry likes to make lots of big and controversial statements. At least he backs up most of them with some logic and reasoning, even if you don't agree with them.

Exactly, that's why I am a big fan of that article (and whenever he's on SEN radio). He doesn't just make outlandish demands/statements, he justifies properly why he thinks such a change should happen.

 

[aussie]

Peter Roebuck: Is Clarke up for the captaincy job? | Opinion | Cricinfo Magazine | Cricinfo.com

Don't like Peter Roebuck. At all.

But there are good points here. He needs to refine and grow that spark of determination that he does have - that got him his recall, and that got him the 168.

Yea I'm not sure if Clarke although he has been anointed as AUS next long term captain, if he really is captaincy material as a tactical skipper or leading by example with runs skipper.

He doesn't give me that captaincy aura vybe that a oung Ponting during that 2002 ODI seres & 2004 test tour to SRI gave me as skipper. That "Pup" aura still surrounds him, maybe he needs to grow a big beard of something

Which is why like Allan Border i hope Ponting stays on a skipper until age 40 or the 2013 Ashes as he suggested he wanted to play in again.

 

[tooextracool]

For someone who is supposed to be a 100 test cap player, Ferguson has a pretty mediocre FC record.

 

[robelinda]

For someone who is supposed to be a 100 test cap player, Ferguson has a pretty mediocre FC record.

Absolutely, its only his composure in odi's that lead people to think he's a 100 test future player. Like Shaun Marsh too, he has struggled in FC cricket. Cant see him getting picked above White or Khwaja.

 

[Uppercut]

Yeah, I wouldn't consider Ferguson a terrible pick if it weren't for someone as (reportedly) good as Khawaja being available as an alternative.