The End Of Australian Dominance?

[Cricketdude]

Haddin averages almost 50 in domestic cricket and its the other way around then what your saying. It's more Haddin has showed the player that he actually his after his poorish start. Every aussie knew how devastating he is, and it was great to watch him come out and show everyone when they werent expecting it.

He averages 41 in domestic cricket.

 

[jordox]

Not really. Australia have been all over South Africa in this series. We just didn't take advantage of when we were ontop. We didn't need McGrath or Warne to 'save' us, but instead just finish the job when we had South Africa locked into submission. No discredit to South Africa though, because they have played fantastically well.

Sure, you could say that... Or you could say Australia were so poor they couldn't finish the job and let a bunny get 70 odd and with it, win the series. Australia played rubbish. Symonds, Hayden and Hussey are out of form. That's 3 out of 7 batters who haven't done a thing (apart from Symonds who scored 1 50).

They also had poor bowling, Lee was rubbish, Siddle wasn't consistant and Johnson showed signs of briliance, then fell away.

Their captancy was pretty terrible. Setting a defensive field when South Africa needed 414 to win, opening with an out of form, injured bowler and wasting the new ball for Johnson.

Stop dancing around the issue everyone. Trying to do silly little comparisions between Australia and England... who cares. Australia aren't the team they were anymore. It's a new era, it's a better era and it's a more competitive era. Are they a bad team? No. Could they have beaten South Africa? Yes. Are they still the best team in the world? Nope.

I am going to enjoy the Aussie members of this forum stepping down from the clouds when they realise that there team isn't the be-all-and-end-all of cricket.

 

[ZoraxDoom]

His taken 2 5fers in his entire career.

First-class averages for spinners in Australia mean jack all. Krezja probably took more wickets in 1 Test against India then Panesar and Swann did combind in 2.

Hold on, you can use stats to say Freddie sucks, and then discredit the stats that show Krejza sucks? Since when did five-fers be the be all and end all of who the best bowler is? Shouldn't you then be admitting that Murali is the greatest bowler ever, simply cause he has the most fiver fers?

And Krejza probably conceded more runs in that one match than Panesar and Swann did combined in two...

 

[aussie_ben91]

Sure, you could say that... Or you could say Australia were so poor they couldn't finish the job and let a bunny get 70 odd and with it, win the series. Australia played rubbish. Symonds, Hayden and Hussey are out of form. That's 3 out of 7 batters who haven't done a thing (apart from Symonds who scored 1 50).

They also had poor bowling, Lee was rubbish, Siddle wasn't consistant and Johnson showed signs of briliance, then fell away.

Their captancy was pretty terrible. Setting a defensive field when South Africa needed 414 to win, opening with an out of form, injured bowler and wasting the new ball for Johnson.

Stop dancing around the issue everyone. Trying to do silly little comparisions between Australia and England... who cares. Australia aren't the team they were anymore. It's a new era, it's a better era and it's a more competitive era. Are they a bad team? No. Could they have beaten South Africa? Yes. Are they still the best team in the world? Nope.

I am going to enjoy the Aussie members of this forum stepping down from the clouds when they realise that there team isn't the be-all-and-end-all of cricket.

It's funny how the haters, such as yourself start showing up as soon as Australia starts to deteriorate. Congratulations on Australia's misfortune - I hope it makes your life just that little bit better.

Hold on, you can use stats to say Freddie sucks, and then discredit the stats that show Krejza sucks? Since when did five-fers be the be all and end all of who the best bowler is? Shouldn't you then be admitting that Murali is the greatest bowler ever, simply cause he has the most fiver fers?

And Krejza probably conceded more runs in that one match than Panesar and Swann did combined in two...

You're just taking my words and trying to twist it the wrong way. Both are completely different circumstances and different types of bowlers. I'm not going to fall into your trap but nice try.

 

[m_vaughan]

Unless they plan on cloning warne and mcgrath they won't be close to their best for a some time to come.

Australia still have the best domestic structure in the world. I see this blip as nothing but a period of transition. Neither SA or anyone else is anywhere near invincible at the moment. So Australia wont find it too hard to regain top spot back.

 

[Themer]

I really don't understand why a few of the Aussies were so upset iwth me labelling Strauss and Katich the same, don't recite his domestic career last year it doesn't give us an indication of how good he is at test level.
Strauss averages 42.37 in test matches compared to Katich's 43.37 with Strauss having 14 test centuries and 14 half centuries and Katich having 6 centuries and 11 half centuries.
I think thats pretty even with Katich having a slighty better average but Strauss has a better conversion rate.

Same goes with Prior and Haddin both have nearly exactly the same Test average with the same amount of runs with Haddin having the slightly better domestic average by two runs so I think they're pretty even again.

 

[Cricketman]

Katich is better. He brings more to the team then Strauss does. He's technichally a better batsman IMO and can bowl a bit.

But it definitely is as close as it gets.

 

[King Cricket]

The Australian team at this moment looks like a climber climbing down the Mount Everest after reaching it's peak.

 

[aussie_ben91]

Well then let's use King Pietersen's method of judging batsman. Let's compare their first-class records.

If you exclude Strauss' Test record from his first-class record then he averages under 40 with the bat. If you exclude Katich's Test record from his first-class record then he averages almost 60.

 

[ZoraxDoom]

Looks more like the climber has tripped and is free-falling all the way down if you ask me

 

[Mr.Cricket]

The era ended when Warney and Mcgrath retired. We are still a pretty good cricket team , just not invincible. We are just going through a tough phase because we have to deal with injuries , out of form players and quality opposition. Everyone is quick to write us off and thats fine. All I can say is enjoy this little period of time because we will be back , much sooner that lot of people expect.

So I guess South Africa is the best team in the world from now on. How about if we beat them in the next series ? Would they still be the best team in the world ?

 

[manee]

How you can possibly justify Stephen Harmison being better then Brett Lee is beyhond me. Harmison has been rubbish for years whilst this time last year, Lee was considered to be the best fast bowler in the world, even better then Steyn. Lee may of deteriorated but his still far better then Harmison. All I heard before the Indian series from English supporters was how Harmison was back to his best and after the series, they were all disapointed with how he performed. Some things never change, aye?

Brett Lee has recently found form and he was a good bowler early in his career, but what you seem to forget is that Harmison's strength is within England and he is a very good bowler in England whereas Lee averages 45.44 in England. Early in his career (2000-2001), Lee was a superb bowler and from the 2007/8 season until the India tour, ditto but if we look at the bulk of his career from 2002-end of 2006, we see that he has spent most of his time in mediocrity, averaging 35.57.

 

[aussie_ben91]

I reckon more batsman would prefer facing Stephen Harmison instead of Brett Lee.

 

[sohum]

The dominance has ended. The success hasn't. What you won't see is Australia white-washing their way through all and sundry. They will still be a force to be reckoned with, near invincible at home and will probably wade through teams like West Indies, Pakistan and New Zealand, in a couple of years.

Simply put, I don't see a West Indies-esque fall for Australia, even though Cricket Captain does.

 

[mattfb]

Simply put, I don't see a West Indies-esque fall for Australia, even though Cricket Captain does.

Must be made by Poms and Indians