Road to the 2015 Ashes in England

[TheJediBrah]

This is painful, please stop

compelling argument

 

[Spark]

Sometimes I wonder if people really do think cricket works like a computer game, and the likelihood that a team will bowl a side out is simply based on a hidden bowling ability number buried somewhere in their soul.

 

[TheJediBrah]

If you want that attack you better hope that they've taken all the wickets with the first new ball because they'll be buggered by the time they'v reached the 2nd one. Also better hope that pattinson and Cummins doesn't break down from all the overs they have to bowl.

Yeah better to have Lyon bowl 19 overs 0/110

At least Watson would keep it quiet






semi srs

but still 4 quicks and a part-time spinner/all-rounder or 2 would be a better team in most conditions. If you don't agree then that's simply a difference of opinion and we have no more to discuss.

 

[TheJediBrah]

Sometimes I wonder if people really do think cricket works like a computer game, and the likelihood that a team will bowl a side out is simply based on a hidden bowling ability number buried somewhere in their soul.

I've played a lot of cricket. And I can tell you I'd rather face a fresh Nathan Lyon than a slightly-tired Starc/Pattinson/Hazlewood.

If we had a spinner who was in the top 30 bowlers in the country I'd feel better about picking them everywhere

 

[Spark]

Because if right arm medium fast doesn't do the job, the solution is clearly more right arm medium fast!

 

[Antihippy]

Your argument only works if he gets 0/110 all the time.

140+ batsmen beg to differ.

Is this what arguing with blocky is like?

 

[TheJediBrah]

Because if right arm medium fast doesn't do the job, the solution is clearly more right arm medium fast!

This is just a terrible post tbh. Every fast bowler is the same and having a different type of bowler is more likely to take a wicket right?

If you've already got McGrath, Gillespie and Lee in a team and your fourth bowler was between Kasprowicz or Arun Finch you'd pick Finch because he's not just another right arm fast bowler?

Come on what you're trying to argue is probably right anyway it shouldn't be that hard to come up with a compelling argument

Your argument only works if he gets 0/110 all the time.

140+ batsmen beg to differ.

Is this what arguing with blocky is like?

FYI, "srs" is short-hand for "serious". If someone says they aren't completely "srs", this is equivalent to them saying they are not being entirely "serious"

 

[Prince EWS]

Maxwell's gona keep as well i suppose

Yep, designated keeper spot from the other thread!

 

[TheJediBrah]

I'd even go so far as to say that Glenn Maxwell alone could probably be as effective as Nathan Lyon as a bowler alone.

Maxwell's First-class stats are actually marginally better, every Test he's played has been in foreign conditions when the opposition is making like 500 and still his Test average is only 4 runs higher than Lyon.















Now I've gone too far haven't I.

 

[Antihippy]

But being semi-serious means you partially think he'll be that useless, which he's not.

 

[Spark]

This is just a terrible post tbh. Every fast bowler is the same and having a different type of bowler is more likely to take a wicket right?

If you've already got McGrath, Gillespie and Lee in a team and your fourth bowler was between Kasprowicz or Arun Finch you'd pick Finch because he's not just another right arm fast bowler?

Come on what you're trying to argue is probably right anyway it shouldn't be that hard to come up with a compelling argument



FYI, "srs" is short-hand for "serious". If someone says they aren't completely "srs", this is equivalent to them saying they are not being entirely "serious"

Yes because that is a situation that has come up at least once in this history of test cricket.

Can you not see the basic logic behind variety being a good in itself? Just look at England over the last few years, they've persisted in picking lesser versions of Anderson and Broad and then being baffled when they end up adding nothing to the attack.

An attack of Johnson, Starc and Haze is as strong a core pace attack as you need, with an AR as backup. Adding Siddle to that is little more than a waste of a bowling spot. You're picking Watson without the batting (though some will claim there's no difference)

 

[TheJediBrah]

But being semi-serious means you partially think he'll be that useless, which he's not.

not useless, just not that much better than other options enough to warrant a spot

 

[TheJediBrah]

Yes because that is a situation that has come up at least once in this history of test cricket.

Can you not see the basic logic behind variety being a good in itself? Just look at England over the last few years, they've persisted in picking lesser versions of Anderson and Broad and then being baffled when they end up adding nothing to the attack.

An attack of Johnson, Starc and Haze is as strong a core pace attack as you need, with an AR as backup. Adding Siddle to that is little more than a waste of a bowling spot. You're picking Watson without the batting (though some will claim there's no difference)

Variety can be overrated. Especially if you're selected a lesser player for the sake of it. Which was the point of the exaggerated example.

Adding an extra bowler is in no way a waste. If you're best 4 bowlers or almost identical you'd still pick them most of the time simply because they're your best bowlers. (To an extent, depending on conditions etc)

 

[Spark]

Once again there is no "bowling quality" number that you can definitively assign to a player and compare. This is not mathematics.

You pick Lyon because the situations in games in which the four quicks we already have aren't doing the job are more likely to be addressed by something which is not more of the same thing that isn't working. In addition, the change in batting tempo required to adjust between raw pace and loopy offspin is more likely to induce a mistake than more of the same.

We're talking Peter Siddle ffs, not Malcolm Marshal

Edit: I hate posting on my phone

 

[Spikey]

clarke: "might play 4 seamers and bowl first"

2000 posts later

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1OfBobGWYAg

 

[TheJediBrah]

Once again there is no "bowling quality" number

Your condescension would be more bearable if what you were saying wasn't complete rubbish

Glenn McGrath was a better bowler than Aaron Finch and you don't need a "bowling quality"number to know that

 

[Spark]

Your condescension would be more bearable if what you were saying wasn't complete rubbish

Glenn McGrath was a better bowler than Aaron Finch and you don't need a "bowling quality"number to know that

Do you want a medal for this insight?

 

[TheJediBrah]

Do you want a medal for this insight?

Your posts are honestly completely useless I don't know why you are making them

Do you not realise that you are directly implying that because there is no such thing as a "bowling quality" number, then all bowlers are absolutely equal in every way. Because by replying to my post in that way, that is exactly, unambiguously what you are implying.

 

[Gob]

look jedi bro, a spinner whose name is not warne or murali is expected to do a couple of things. Keep things tight in the 1st innings if its not turning square and when it starts to turn, chip in with wickets to win the match. Lyon has a point to prove regarding the 2nd aspect and he did get in to a good start in Adelaide against the Indians so hopefully he'll continue doing that.

i really don't see anyone that you've mentioned doing either of those things honestly and if you actually believe that the big show or fawad or voges or zampa or any of those blokes could do that with out dropping the odd one short then fair enough but i dont see it. Then of course there are over rates to worry about as well.

 

[Spark]

Look, we're not the west Indies who can field 4 atg quicks. At best siddle will only provide the holding role that Lyon does now without the ability to test batsmen with the older ball.

Ffs can we stop underestimating Lyon?

It really isn't hard. Specialist offspin >>>> marginally "better" 135kmh seam when you already have two bowlers who can do that.