What happens when Warne finishes his suspension

[CDAK]

, Murili is always strong at home.

Even away from home.

Re India:

I'm not so sure Australia need to play pace to beat India in India, they tried it last time and it didn't work. I doubt there have been that many amazingly successfull Indian fast bowlers (Kapil Dev excluded) they have a history of great spinners, so Australia should use that to their advantage IMO.

THis is not always true. History is only history.India has/had some effective pace bowlers who were successful in indian pitches too.Srinath had more than 5 , five-wicket haul in india( who was the strike bowler after Kapil).Now Zaheer may go in the same track.Aus had won a test against india last time by the virtue of Kasperowics not by warne.
More over, since India had great spinners, they r always strong in that side.Only off spinners had got success against India.(John Bracewell ,Murali,Saqlain..
so it will be better for aus to include BradHogg in the team for the Indian tour.

 

[Salamuddin]

I disagree Mr Wright.

The Indian batsmen will absolutely love it if Australia play two spinners (presumably Warne and Mcgill) in the tests next year.
As I said, they are probably the only team in the world that relish the thought of playing Shane Warne..

India's weakness is against quality pace bowling.

 

[deeps]

India's weakness is against quality pace bowling.

true that....BUT... the indian pitches offer very very little assistance to fast bowlers, hence turning a quality fast bowler into a mediocre fast bowler... The pitches in india conduct spin very well,...and make an avg spinner into a good spinner (ala michael clarke)

So if we take a great spinner (warne) to india,technically he should be absolutely brilliant... But the indian's r good players of spin...so they kind of cancel out


it's a double edged sword...perhaps 2 spinners and 2 quicks? :O

 

[Craig]

Age_Master,

You said hussey has 3 300's and Love only 1, is that supoosed to prove something?

And they were in County Cricket.

 

[Gaijin-san]

Well, a triple-hundred is no mean feat.
3 of them is 900+ runs in 3 innings :wow:

 

[CDAK]

true that....BUT... the indian pitches offer very very little assistance to fast bowlers, hence turning a quality fast bowler into a mediocre fast bowler...

Quality pacebowlers had always done well in India(Hadlee,Akram,Pollock,McGrath,Tuffy,...).It is not necessary that a forien team can win only with spin,in India.Foreign legspinners will never do well in India.

So if we take a great spinner (warne) to india,technically he should be absolutely brilliant... But the indian's r good players of spin...so they kind of cancel out

Twice, warne had visited india(that too in his peak form time).First time he was demolished by sachin who practiced specially for warne.Second time, Laxman & Co. ...still going for warne?

 

[bennyr]

I'm thinking Australia should be very careful about playing Warne in India.

After a long break he might get some strong opposition in Sri Lanka, but then he goes off to England, where Hampshire are in Division Two of the County Championship, so he won't be encountering a hell of a lot of quality batting over there.

So to have him go to the country where he has never succeeded on that sort of preparation - I'll back the Indian batsmen at this stage.

 

[Gaijin-san]

but then he goes off to England, where Hampshire are in Division Two of the County Championship, so he won't be encountering a hell of a lot of quality batting over there.

Exactly, the only quality batting around there is a new recruit for his own team

 

[mavric41]

When Warne goes to India he will have something to prove to himself and everyone else. He won't be injured and hopefully be in form. It will be a fascinating series to watch.

 

[Richard]

India's weakness is against quality pace bowling.

Yes, but three things:
1, there is no evidence that Lee is a quality bowler. A Test average like his since February 2001 suggests otherwise.
2, typical Indian pitches mean their batsmen are able to turn bowlers who are quality on green wickets into mediocre bowlers. Yes, the like of Donald, Waqar and more than a few others have had success but there aren't many bowlers as skilled as those around ATM. Certainly Australia possess only one IMO - Matthew Inness. Shane Harwood might have potential but ATM he's far too wayward.
3, bowlers who rely purely on bowling very fast very rarely have success against any decent batsmen anywhere, except occasionally The WACA. India's weakness is against seam and swing. And most batsmen have some sort of a problem with good seam and swing, anyway, India just have more of a problem than those who face it regularly (and there aren't going to be many of them at the rate things are going).

 

[marc71178]

bowlers who rely purely on bowling very fast very rarely have success against any decent batsmen anywhere

So what Shoaib got apart from pace then?

 

[age_master]

Yes, the like of Donald, Waqar and more than a few others have had success but there aren't many bowlers as skilled as those around ATM. Certainly Australia possess only one IMO - Matthew Inness. Shane Harwood might have potential but ATM he's far too wayward.

yeah i agree, McGrath and Gillespie are rubbish:rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

as for Lee i think you will find that he swings the new ball more than most.

 

[mavric41]

So what Shoaib got apart from pace then?

A big, inswinging yorker!!

 

[Richard]

yeah i agree, McGrath and Gillespie are rubbish:rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

No, not rubbish, just they haven't too many times taken wickets at a decent rate on pitches unresponsive to seam through bowling good deliveries.

as for Lee i think you will find that he swings the new ball more than most.

No, you don't say.
Believe it or not, I had noticed that.
Yet still his average since The Ashes 2001 is over 37. Swing alone is not enough. You have to bowl in the right areas with some consistency.

 

[Richard]

So what Shoaib got apart from pace then?

First and foremost the ability to swing the ball, conventionally and reverse, into the right-hander. Second, the ability to bowl concerted spells on a good line and length. Third, nous to know what length to bowl and when.
He doesn't always use any of them, but he's done them all too many times for it to be coincidence. And the occurances of him doing them are becoming more regular and greater in length as time goes by.

 

[Tom Halsey]

...and apart from on the odd occasion, it all goes wrong and he gets clobbered in one day games, although I admit he is alright in tests

 

[age_master]

...and apart from on the odd occasion, it all goes wrong and he gets clobbered

ding! correct


so what do Gillespies strike rate of 51.2 and McGraths of 52.0 mean?

over careers of 183 wickets and 430 wickets i would say it means that they both pick up wickets at pretty regular intevals and pretty consistantly.

 

[marc71178]

First and foremost the ability to swing the ball, conventionally and reverse, into the right-hander. Second, the ability to bowl concerted spells on a good line and length. Third, nous to know what length to bowl and when.
He doesn't always use any of them, but he's done them all too many times for it to be coincidence. And the occurances of him doing them are becoming more regular and greater in length as time goes by.

Funny that, but to me that describes Brett Lee pretty well as well as Shoaib (certainly in One Day Cricket)

 

[Richard]

...and apart from on the odd occasion, it all goes wrong and he gets clobbered in one day games, although I admit he is alright in tests

I would say it's about 50\50 between good and bad, just that bad tends to be horrible for him.
Not attempting to amplify his record, just complaining about the ascertation that "apart from the odd occsion".

 

[Tom Halsey]

It sometimes goes horribly wrong for Brett Lee aswell. Any Aussies remember his 0/85 from 8 overs against England in 2001?:P