Should Brett Lee be selected for the Ashes?

[irfan]

Feel sorry for Lee - worked so hard to get fit and get back on track and now he's injured.

Still don't want to see Hauritz loitering around the XI - Give me some Maccas!

 

[pasag]

Worst part is we wasted 60 or so warm-up overs that could have gone to someone else.

 

[Manee]

Worst part is we wasted 60 or so warm-up overs that could have gone to someone else.

Mustn't risk Pete Siddle in a warm up lest you hand over the Ashes now.

As a side note, he is my fantasy cricket captain, he better do well. I have a distinct feeling he'll take a handful of three, four or five wicket hauls throughout the series.

 

[howardj]

Conn Slams Lee

 

[aussie]

He's had serious injuries in 2000/01, 2003/04, 2006/07 and 2008/09, with a few more minor ones in between. Stress fractures have also rendered him almost immobile at times (although they are endemic amongst quicks).

His aging body doesn't help, either.

Oh i remember 2003/04. But overall its pretty limited, compared to the problems Gillespie, Bond, Akhtat has had. Plus Lee has missed alot of test cricket, especially that 2004 year.

No doubt at 32, although he is one of the fittest fast-bowlers ever. His fitness will be seriously tested, but i have no worries.

I still would give him another 12 months before he starts dropping pace, then we'll see if he can develop any variations to his bowling.

 

[pup11]

Conn Slams Lee

Don't agree with his views one bit, Lee, despite his previous record in England or his recent test performances, is without doubt one of the best bowlers in Australia currently, he showed in the practice game, that how devastaitng he can be when he gets the ball to swing at the kind of speed he bowls.

The only thing that could have gone against him is that, he was pushing himself too hard to get fit for this series, and also get his pace back up, but I think at 32 his body probably didn't reacted all that well, to all the strenuous work he did to get himself back to full fitness.

 

[DaRick]

Oh i remember 2003/04. But overall its pretty limited, compared to the problems Gillespie, Bond, Akhtat has had. Plus Lee has missed alot of test cricket, especially that 2004 year.

Because:

1) He was injured

2) He didn't deserve to be in the Test team (with Kaspr in there).

It is true that he's been injured less than Bond, Akhtar and Gillespie from 1996-2002. However, Gillespie from 2002- had a nearly spotless record.

 

[scorpiogal]

Because:

It is true that he's been injured less than Bond, Akhtar and Gillespie from 1996-2002. However, Gillespie from 2002- had a nearly spotless record.

Wasn't Gillespie injured at the end of '03 - early '04? I think I recall Lee, Bracken and Williams being the bowlers against India in Sydney '04?

Edit: Yep, Gillespie was injured in October 2003 - March '04.

 

[DaRick]

Wasn't Gillespie injured at the end of '03 - early '04? I think I recall Lee, Bracken and Williams being the bowlers against India in Sydney '04?

Edit: Yep, Gillespie was injured in October 2003 - March '04.

I said nearly spotless. He was injured for one Test - against India in Melbourne, I believe. He played in Sydney. In fact, he was the only one who didn't embarass himself.

 

[GIMH]

So with Hauritz doing the business, when Lee's fit, will he get back in the side, and who for?

 

[frey]

So with Hauritz doing the business, when Lee's fit, will he get back in the side, and who for?

Good question. If the Aussies win today, then in the past they have tended to keep a winning side together. I believe Lee will be right for the third test, and not next week. I'd like to see Stuart Clark be considered ahead of Brett Lee. Aussies t win the secnd test. They will only require fur days of the second test to make it 2-0.

 

[scorpiogal]

I said nearly spotless. He was injured for one Test - against India in Melbourne, I believe. He played in Sydney. In fact, he was the only one who didn't embarass himself.

Nope, Dizzy didn't play a test against Zimbabwe in October, iirc.

 

[DaRick]

Nope, Dizzy didn't play a test against Zimbabwe in October, iirc.

Perth or Sydney? I don't remember, but I know that he played against India in Sydney '04. The Test series against Zimbabwe was in 2003. That makes two Tests missed through injury since 2002 - far less than Lee in the same period.

 

[Jack88]

Obviously he should be thrown in for Johnson, but Johnson is one of the golden boys for the new era so he won't get dropped unless he bombs massively. Lee is not as good batting wise, but is the batting of Johnson really going to prove to be essential in the series considering how bad England's bowling is. Also Johnson may have just have funk match, so he'll probably come into his next match.

They ain't gonna drop Hauritz either, Siddle is out when Lee returns.

 

[pasag]

Obviously he should be thrown in for Johnson

wat? The guy's been our best bowler by a long distance over the past year and is statistically the best bowler in the world (wicket-wise) in that time period.

 

[Pup Clarke]

Has he really taken the most Test wickets in the past year?

 

[pasag]

Unless my statsguru skillz are mistaken - Bowling records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | Cricinfo.com

 

[tooextracool]

Unless my statsguru skillz are mistaken - Bowling records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | Cricinfo.com

Have to say, am a bit surprised that Shakib-al Hasan is statistically (in terms of averages) one of the best bowlers over the past year. Have barely even had a look at him myself.

 

[Athlai]

Could be better than Vettori already TBH.

 

[NUFAN]

Only 5 quicks who have played more then 2 Tests in the past year average under 30.
Lee, Kallis, Steyn, Gul and Ntini.

Pretty amazing but thinking about the past year of Cricket, it's not that surprising.