Australia in South Africa

[James219]

Yeah I was mentioning that about how Stuart Clark would perform in Test cricket in the other thread. He gets seam movement, yet hardly any swing. He's definitely a quality bowler and has performed for many years but in the one-day arena, despite consistently getting wickets, hasn't seemed to threaten the oppostion and only prospers when the batsman makes an error of judgement. He doesn't deserve to be dropped though, however NSW could do with him

 

[aussie1st]

Seam movement is all he needs. McGrath doesn't get much swing but he does get seam movement. Since Clark is meant to be our McGrath clone thats not too bad. We need to at least give Clark a go in the test arena because ODIs are different to test matches and you don't become a legend in your first few games.

 

[MWaugh]

you don't become a legend in your first few games.

Brett Lee - Boxing day test 1999 Vs India

Lee becomes a legend

Maybe legend is too strong a word... But he burst onto the scene

 

[James219]

And then burst straight back out Well not exactly, didn't he average around 16 for his first 10 games or something along those lines?

 

[aussie1st]

This is an interesting sum up of our bowlers by Peter.

Yesterday, those teammates had another chance to impose themselves. Nathan Bracken was replaced after a single over but was not much more dangerous from the River Torrens end. Presented with heavy cloud at The Gabba or a breaking surface in Sydney, the stylish leftie can be a handful. On an easy-paced pitch he does not hit the turf hard enough or impart enough cut on the ball to worry established batsmen. Moreover, he bowls with arm as opposed to body and shoulder, so it will be hard for him to find an extra yard of pace.

Stuart Clark has been eminently respectable. As upright as a grenadier guard, he can bowl a tight line and moves the ball around off a reliable length. His removal of Sanath Jayasuriya was a reward for his persistence in cramping the style of a batsman yearning for room. His third and final spell of the day was precisely pitched and provided a telling counterpoint to Brad Hogg, whose unresolved mysteries left the batsmen as reluctant to leave their crease as a teenager is his bed. However, Clark does seem to want the extremity of pace and late movement needed to worry skilful batsmen on featherbeds.

Of those on the fringes, James Hopes has emerged as a lively all-rounder with a strong leg-side game, Mick Lewis is a bustling swinger with a lowish trajectory, Brett Dorey is tall and rhythmical but not especially swift, and Mitchell Johnson tends to spray it around. All have been worthy, none has caught the imagination.

As far as a pace is concerned, only Shaun Tait and Shane Harwood force provincial batsmen to hurry their strokes. Tait took wickets in England but can be expensive. He resembles the early Lee without the strong action and it's hard to see him improving. Harwood is also tall and hits the pitch hard. Fitness has been his problem. Moreover, he's 30. But that's not so old. Clark and Jason Gillespie count as contemporaries. Australia might need to consider Clark for 50-over matches and Harwood for the longer engagements.

The selectors might also need to turn the clock back. Apparently, Gillespie has been bowling well. At his best, he is superb. Probably Shane Watson will be fit in time for the Test series. He can open jars of marmalade with his bare hands and swung the ball around in his last appearance for his state. A strong case can be made to take them to South Africa.

http://www.smh.com.au/news/cricket/...is-to-have-bite/2006/02/10/1139542404715.html

Anyone rate this Shane Harwood? Tall and quick sounds good to me, also interesting reading Watson swing the ball in his last appearance signs of things to come I hope.

 

[MWaugh]

having seen harwood in a couple of ing games this year he does look to be a solid bowler. havent seen enough to pass a proper judgement and ing cup games are hard to guage performances, pura cup games would probably be a better indication. interesting note about tait though. i personally have the feeling that tait isnt going to be the next brett lee. lee is one of those special people that come along every couple of decades with raw pace and skill.

 

[genghis_khan]

i think that article perfectly sums up the problems facing Australian cricket, which will only worsen with the impending retirements of Warne and McGrath.

Batting is not a problem, Jaques and Cosgrove are dominating the domestic scene with both only 26 and 21 respectively. The spin-department is looking good (although replacing Warne is impossible) with the likes of Cullen, Bailey and Casson emerging this season and all under 25...it's the pace attack.

great article

 

[aussie1st]

I totally agree gk, spin and batting look covered. Just the pace.
As for what is a good guage it depends what you are looking for. A ODI player or a Test one. Cause we have seen this season what a guy that performed in Pura did in ODIs. ODIs, Tait is definitely the man for the job, how good he will become only time will tell.

If we dropped a batsmen our bowling in ODIs would look so much better.
Watson, McGrath/Dizzy/Bracken/Clark, Lee, Tait, Hogg, Symonds and the supersub if thats still around.

Test wise we have guys that haven't been given a go like Dorey, Clark, Lewis etc so even though they may not look the best in ODIs, they may go well in test matches. Clearly one of them need to be given a go to see what they have got.
Johnson is also another quick man and I think his action is better than Tait's.

 

[genghis_khan]

The problem with Lewis, Harwood, Dorey and Clark in test cricket is that they're all around or over 30 and havent yet been exposed to the international test scene.
A guy like Gillespie has already played 69 tests and is the same age, it may take the others a few years to become fully accostimed, and by that time they're in the their twilight and we have to start searching for others again.
Thats why Gillespie should hold the ace, and guys like Tait, Watson, Johnson etc should be given the opportunity, because of their younger age.

As for ODIs, i personally am more interested in tests but i still dont think australia would win the world cup if it started next week, purely for the fact that the bowling is just too weak.

 

[aussie1st]

Fair point, Tait should definitely be given a go in test matches but Watson must be in the team. I don't want to see a repeat of what happened in the Ashes last test. Johnson right now is way too raw and hasn't got the results to show.

 

[genghis_khan]

yeh true, Johnson is a long way off an Australian test debut thats for sure...but Dennis Lillee did once say that he's a rare talent, but potential is useless in his situation...results are what he needs.

i know most other users dont agree but i quite like Ben Hilfenhaus from Tasmania, he can swing it both ways and is a fair bit quicker than Nathan Bracken. he's a bustling type, a bit like Charl Langeveldt or Matthew Hoggard...and at 22, i think he has a promising future.

 

[aussie1st]

I definitely rate him, I've been watching him progress via scorecards but still looked good. I guess the problem with him just like Bracken is what happens when there is no swing.
If Watson is true to his word we probably won't need him as Watson could swing it. But I agree one to watch out for.

 

[kodos]

From watching 1 or 2 ING games Hilfenhaus looks like a pretty decent bowler. He bowls close to the stumps (like McGrath and Pollock) and can also generate good swing. I still don't see him as Australia's replacement for McGrath. They must bring Gillespie back to add some experience in the lineup. Bracken is decent, Clark really only gets a wicket if the batsman's goes after him and Hopes really is not up to international standards.

 

[James219]

The spin department is in no way settled, however it has quite a bit of talent there to be developed. As far as batting goes, there is alor of wealth there with, as mentioned, Jaques and Cosgrove possibly the future opening pair (both left-handed again), Ferguson coming through well and plenty of others looking good.
The thing Australian Cricket will not want to do is try and replace McGrath with an exact player in their opinion, that's just stupid. If they become so pre-occupied in doing that then they will attempt in moulding every decent bowler's natural style to cater for their idea of a good person to fill the shoes. McGrath has been an outstanding bowler for a long period, but that has almost come to an end and they will have to find a new approach that will work in the new era. With Tait, yes he has a unique action and will need to find some sort of way to prevent injuries without changing the whole frame, but I don't think his action is a basis in which to be thinking about others. He's a huge talent and an aggressive bowler, there's nothing wrong with a slinging, natural action if he makes some minor adjustments, for example maybe Thomspon could work with him. There are alot of benefits to be had from an action like Tait's as well despite some negatives, and to be honest Johnson's action isn't all that great. To add to that it's landed him plenty of injuries, although it has been changed a great deal with the price of a few yards of pace.

 

[aussie1st]

Well of cause of spin deparment isn't settled, nothing is settled because none of our future players have played yet. But there is a ton of spinners where surely one of them will come through the ranks and be Australia's next spinner.

Bowling wise, Henquries looks to be really promising so we can add him to the list now.
How is Bird's action because he is meant to be quite a quick bowler and he hasn't had any injury worries. Also how quick is Bollinger because his records don't really stack up for a left arm fast bowler.