Sooda Posted January 14, 2012 Posted January 14, 2012 Good problem to have, but how/who do you choose from Cummins, Pattinson, Hilfenhaus, Harris, Siddle and Starc?! Or more to the point, who should the 3rd paceman be assuming Pattinson and Cummins when fit, will play...
Old guy Posted January 14, 2012 Posted January 14, 2012 who so ever are fit pick them.. things look promising but so did they when we toured australia last time and when england won that odi series in australia pattinson,harris, siddle for me and when it swings hilfy cummings need to work on fitness a lot and imo is little overrated!
rkt.india Posted January 14, 2012 Posted January 14, 2012 I believe Australia should mostly play with 4 pacers as they do not have any decent spinner. You must play your best bowlers and there is no point having variety just for the sake of it.
Texy Posted January 14, 2012 Posted January 14, 2012 how the hell do they keep producing fast effective bowlers and we struggle to produce one....is it the nature of our domestic pitches? training? diet?
Old guy Posted January 14, 2012 Posted January 14, 2012 @ texy they re good but trust me our batting is making them look so much better! a decent batting team which is in form would show how to handle these guys not saying they are bad bowlers but imo morkel,steyn due is by far the deadliest in the world good thing for australia is now they wont have to worry abt injuries but bad thing is harris ,cummings,pattinson all are injury prone
Old guy Posted January 14, 2012 Posted January 14, 2012 I believe Australia should mostly play with 4 pacers as they do not have any decent spinner. You must play your best bowlers and there is no point having variety just for the sake of it. agreeed
Sooda Posted January 14, 2012 Author Posted January 14, 2012 I believe Australia should mostly play with 4 pacers as they do not have any decent spinner. You must play your best bowlers and there is no point having variety just for the sake of it. Probably.. in Aus anyway I guess. a full strength team would also include Watson and his fast medium to support. The attack could use the variety a spinner brings. I have not seen much of Lyon but heard he is ok. They did a mistake ditching Hauritz. Btw 'Siddle/Hilfy' is not an answer :P Though I suppose if it swings Hilfy is the one
achilles Posted January 14, 2012 Posted January 14, 2012 At this rate, pick any 3 random players and they would still win.
Needforspeed Posted January 14, 2012 Posted January 14, 2012 @ texy they re good but trust me our batting is making them look so much better! a decent batting team which is in form would show how to handle these guys not saying they are bad bowlers but imo morkel,steyn due is by far the deadliest in the world good thing for australia is now they wont have to worry abt injuries but bad thing is harris ,cummings,pattinson all are injury prone +1. They will be tested during the Ashes. With India these guys are having to bowl only 2 or 3 sessions. You will know their real calibre when they are up against guys who can grind them down for 5-6 sessions which the English batsmen are capable of. Plus injury managment is all the more difficult when you are playing away from home. You cannot keep replacing bowlers after each match. Both the English and Aussie bowlers are overrated because of their performance against an Indian side which is playing like Bangladesh. Still I would back the England because they are bowling in home conditions + their recent track record against the Aussies.
Cricket Tragic Posted January 14, 2012 Posted January 14, 2012 If fit... Harris, Pattinson and Cummins. But that might be seen as too much of a risk.
FreakazoiD Posted January 14, 2012 Posted January 14, 2012 Siddle has to be there in the first XI. He's a decent bat as well. Hilfenhaus in swinging conditions is better than Cummins. Cummins has age on his side and may improve, but just because someone is 18 doesn't make him better.
rkt.india Posted January 14, 2012 Posted January 14, 2012 If fit... Harris, Pattinson and Cummins. But that might be seen as too much of a risk. they will play Harris has replacement only from now on as they want him to sustain his career..so Siddle or Hlfy in place of Harris will do for them.
Old guy Posted January 14, 2012 Posted January 14, 2012 +1. They will be tested during the Ashes. With India these guys are having to bowl only 2 or 3 sessions. You will know their real calibre when they are up against guys who can grind them down for 5-6 sessions which the English batsmen are capable of. Plus injury managment is all the more difficult when you are playing away from home. You cannot keep replacing bowlers after each match. Both the English and Aussie bowlers are overrated because of their performance against an Indian side which is playing like Bangladesh. Still I would back the England because they are bowling in home conditions + their recent track record against the Aussies. yes but english as a full attack are really good anderson is good bowler always get wickets when team needs it england currently is better then australia we just need to give chances to youngsters i do see bit hope.. kohli's finger might have taken more attention but look how much his batting improved .. people only note these thinga after osme one gets big one but dont u see how well he is handling short balls now? and not hitting balls hard.. jsut timing them i jsut hope he gets some runs tomorrow wold be the sliver lining of the tour lol
daryl1985 Posted January 14, 2012 Posted January 14, 2012 Harris, Siddle and Pattinson but Harris is never fit so one of Cummins or Hilfenhaus for the 3rd bowler. I think Pattinson and Siddle have earned the right to be 1st choice.
Sooda Posted January 14, 2012 Author Posted January 14, 2012 Bearing in mind he is the wrong side of 30 Harris could retire from Tests and focus on ODI's. He can carve a fine ODI career for himself. Bowling long spells on tests is probably not the best for his injury prone body, unlike the quick sharp spells in ODI cricket
Bradman99 Posted January 15, 2012 Posted January 15, 2012 I think Harris is seen as more of a back up,seeing as he is so injury prone if he plays too many matches in a row he will get injured again and that will be curtains for his career. So Australia are in a pretty luxorious position where we can rotate the bowlers and not really suffer as a result. The interesting one is Lyon, does he need to be there?
Number Posted January 15, 2012 Posted January 15, 2012 I think Harris is seen as more of a back up,seeing as he is so injury prone if he plays too many matches in a row he will get injured again and that will be curtains for his career. So Australia are in a pretty luxorious position where we can rotate the bowlers and not really suffer as a result. The interesting one is Lyon, does he need to be there? I feel it'll be harsh on him drop just because he didn't do well against India on these tracks offering nothing for spinners.
Bradman99 Posted January 15, 2012 Posted January 15, 2012 I feel it'll be harsh on him drop just because he didn't do well against India on these tracks offering nothing for spinners. I know, I like Lyon and Clarke has already said he will definately be back for the next test. But is he worth leaving one of the quickies out for is the big question. Time will tell.
Old guy Posted January 15, 2012 Posted January 15, 2012 this is good problem to have i really hope that u guys whip pom's asses! would rather see australia on top then that unitel eleven whiners
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now