Pakistan v Australia in England, June-July 2010

[WubbaLubbaDubDub]

I think this test will go draw

 

[Num]

Because as i discussed before in this thread with most of you guys. The spinners in Hauritz & Smith (at this stage at least) is highly unlikely to run through a proper batting side on 4th & 5th day wearing track - which is the main role of a spinner in a tests.

We shouldn't be carried away by AUS performances againts woeful -in turmoil Pakistan of the last 6-8 months. Haurtiz taking a 5-wicket hauls vs them - plus North (his 6 wicket haul reminder me of Katich's 6 wicket hauls Zimbabwe in 2003) is a joke. They cant do that againts stronger batting teams. Plus even Watson who has been in piss poor bowling form since the NZ tour - suddenly taken a 5 for

Variety just for the sake of it - isn't good enough if its not quality variety. Which as a spinner Hauritz & Smith (as yet) doesn't offer. As i said they are highly unlikely to run through a side on a 4th or 5th day wearing track.

You can only play and perform against the opposition you have been presented with. Why can't Hauritz be given a decent chance against better teams with a 'proper' batting line up before having his spot challenged?

And you were proposing that Harris or Siddle could replace Hauritz. I don't see how Harris or Siddle could be more effective than Hauritz has been on a 4th and 5th day wearing track (based on their performances at Test level so far and considering that Harris seems more like the type of bowler that builds pressure and lets the bowler at the other end take wickets rather than ripping through batting line ups - his first class figures probably don't do him justice). Here's a comparison of Hauritz and Siddle in the fourth innings of Test matches (as of this post):

Hauritz:

17 wickets at an average of 21.76 with a SR of 46.2.

Siddle:

12 wickets at an average of 30.25 with a SR of 76.1.

If Australia play 4 seamers when all are fit in Hilfenhaus/Bollinger/Johnson/Harris or Sildde + Watson as back-up. In those same 4th & 5th day conditions in Hilfy & Siddle/Watson we got fast-bowlers who can reverse swing the old ball @ pace which makes up for the lack of a front line-spinner to exploit the rough patches quite well. Plus Johnson with his raw pace even on flat pitches will test batsmen always.

As angryangy said referring to Watson,

If the pitch is good for the seamers, then he comes into the equation, if not then you don't miss a trick with spin.

South Africa throughout the 1990s adopted this almost all the time with very good success.

I don't know much about this, but I don't think we have bowlers that are of Donald/Pollock calibre.

Plus ATS i'm fairly confident that the pace options AUS have, are matured enough as a bowling unit. That we wont see too much wayward/expensive spells like we saw in the Ashes last year.

How do we know that any more than we know Hauritz won't be effective against a 'proper' batting line up?

Also im not sure what you mean "by our pace attack is wayward at times and not draw much movement from the ball and/or pitch". Except Siddle, all of Bollinger, Hilfy, Watson, Harris, Johnson have proven once they get the right conditions that they can move the ball in the air - or off the pitch.

I meant that Australia's pace attack (except Hilfenhaus) can lose that ability to draw much movement from the ball and/or pitch too often to convince me that it's worth playing a 4-man pace attack.

Bowling records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | Cricinfo.com

Bowling records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | Cricinfo.com

 

[War]

You can only play and perform against the opposition you have been presented with. Why can't Hauritz be given a decent chance against better teams with a 'proper' batting line up before having his spot challenged?

He has. AUS have played South Africa, England, New Zealand, Windies in the since 08/09, outside of these Pakistan team in turnmoil.

- Cardiff 09

- Adelaide & Perth 09

- Wellington 09/10

In these respective second innings. The opposition batsmen basically sat on Hauritz & played him quite comfortably in conditions where Haurtiz really should be causing havoc if he worth his salt as test match off-spinner. But he didn't all he was was accurate, while ocassionaly getting a bit of sharp/big turn out of the rough patches. But overall he was not very penetrative in this 3 innings. Theirfore if he can't do this role effectively, then he should not have a regular place in the test side.

And you were proposing that Harris or Siddle could replace Hauritz. I don't see how Harris or Siddle could be more effective than Hauritz has been on a 4th and 5th day wearing track (based on their performances at Test level so far and considering that Harris seems more like the type of bowler that builds pressure and lets the bowler at the other end take wickets rather than ripping through batting line ups - his first class figures probably don't do him justice). Here's a comparison of Hauritz and Siddle in the fourth innings of Test matches (as of this post):

Hauritz:

17 wickets at an average of 21.76 with a SR of 46.2.

Siddle:

12 wickets at an average of 30.25 with a SR of 76.1.

Well yea all true about Harris. But as i said on that hypotetical 4th or 5th day wicket - he can remain his accurate self & build pressure. Its like of Hilfy/Bollginer, Siddle/Watson who will be the ones producing the reverse swing the old ball @ pace. Which will makes up for the lack of a front line-spinner to exploit the rough patches quite well. (Siddle @ SCG 09 proved he can reverse it). Plus Johnson with his raw pace even on flat pitches will test batsmen always as he showed in India 08 when he was still a novice - imagine what he will be like now in such conditions now that he is established.

As angryangy said referring to Watson,

Thats basically my point too. I'm not advocating they all-pace attack play in every test. But rather just in more tests than they do at the moment. An all-pace attack could definately be playing in both these current tests vs PAK. They can adapt a 4-man pace attack for all tests - except when they tour the sub-continent (or home tests @ Adelaide or SCG) where having a spinenr really becomes a must.

I don't know much about this, but I don't think we have bowlers that are of Donald/Pollock calibre.

They dont have to be. They have to be test quality which as a new-ball pair Bollinger/Hilfenhaus are argubaly the best in the world currently.

But check cricinfo records on the saffies though for all tests between 1992-2000. You will see they adapted 4 & 5-man attacks alot. They hardly ever played a spinner except for really necessary circumstances in the sub-continent.

How do we know that any more than we know Hauritz won't be effective against a 'proper' batting line up?

I explained Hauritz faults above in this case.

With the fast-bowlers they all have clearly played enough test cricket ATS & have been tested & have proven themselves in most conditions. Their strenghts & weakness are fairly clear. Expensive spells have certainly been fazed out since Ashes 09.

I meant that Australia's pace attack (except Hilfenhaus) can lose that ability to draw much movement from the ball and/or pitch too often to convince me that it's worth playing a 4-man pace attack.

Bowling records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | Cricinfo.com

Bowling records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | Cricinfo.com

Bollinger gets as much movement with the new-ball especially just as Hilfy.

While all of Hilfy, Bollinger, Watson, Siddle can all reverse it.

Only Johnson & Harris fall into this category. But their strenghts (especially Johnson) are in his raw pace.


Overall as i said above, my position is straightforward. AUS can adapt a 4-man pace attack for all tests - except when they tour the sub-continent (or home tests @ Adelaide or SCG) where having a spinenr really becomes a must.

 

[TumTum]

^ The Oval 2009 and Headingley 2nd Innings 2009 might disagree with you

 

[Robelinda]

South Africa couldnt beat us with a 4 man pace attack, nor could they beat Eng in Eng, so they didnt have it right at all. I'm not sure their set up is the best example for your argument War, but all credit to you though, i do enjoy your posts mate.

 

[sifter132]

Well Aussies are batting with an unchanged team. For the Paks, Malik is in for Afridi and Kaneria keeps his spot - very sensibly IMHO.

 

[Insomniac]

Australia batting first... it could be a good toss to lose, but it probably won't be.

First half hour Pakistan will need to strike big, 2 wickets at least to get their confidence up.

 

[Insomniac]

Well, I did say the first half hour - excellent start for Pakisan, time to get Ponting, Clarke, and Hussey and we should be set.

 

[Themer]

Nice start from Pakistan they've kept it tight and with a bit of swing have got the wickets..

These two are the big two in my eyes. Get one of these out now and you're right on top.

 

[Insomniac]

Thank God Rudi is retiring, I've had enough of his nonsense umpiring since 1999.

 

[sami ullah khan]

Clark should have been out. It was so plumb. For some odd reason Pakistan is always at the wrong end of poor decisions.

 

[Howsie]

Yeah, because Pakistan are the only team in world cricket that get bad decisions go against them.

Wonderful bowling this I must say, really enjoy watching both these two bowl.

 

[Insomniac]

GULLAY, get in there!

Now get Ponting and Hussey, and we might end this losing streak.

Or pull another Sydney.

Insomniac added 8 Minutes and 55 Seconds later...

HAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA RICKYS GONE!

Pakistan?

Zindabad.

 

[HtccLegend]

watch north fail again, he never bats well when australia are in trouble

 

[King Pietersen]

Didn't Clarke and North put on a big partnership in the Ashes when Australia were in trouble?

Going well for Australia then....