Five Bowlers

[Mike114]

It might be a good idea to go with 5 bowlers considering it seems our tail end especially Lee and Warne have out batted the top order lol

But if I was a selector this would be the team I would go with:

Michael Hussey
Justin Langer
Ricky Ponting
Brad Hodge
Michael Clarke
Simon Katich
Adam Gilchrist
Shane Warne
Brett Lee
Shaun Tait
Glenn McGrath

[Jimc]

Bearing in mind its a must win situation, a batter must be dropped for a bowler. Gillie averages over 50 and must come right some time. With Warne and Lee chipping in nicely the main goal must be to get England out. What worries me is the English press stating that this wicket will suit Harmison and much is expected from him, does Australia then pick MaGill as the additional bowler or an additional seamer?

[cantplaycantalk]

If it suits Harmy that makes it hard bouncy and quick, will suit Lee as well, and Flintoff.

[The Phantom Ram]

Originally Posted by Rachael

Lee at 8 is OK though... better than Ok, really. If the three that followed were headed by Gillespie and Mcgrath then you'd say the tail was OK.... but Tait, Kasprowicz and MacGill is a bit questionable - maybe not as bad as Tuffers, Malcolm and Mullally but in serious need of McGrath's batting!!!

The worst tail I can remember is for the England 1st test against the West Indies in 1995. It went,

7. DeFreitas average 14.82 (44 tests)
8. Gough 12.57 (58)
9. Martin 8.84 (8)
10. Illingworth 18.28 (9) - This average was inflated by 7 not outs from 14 innings.
11. Malcolm 6.05 (40)

If you think at that time we still had the likes of Tufnall and Fraser in the middle of their England careers, we definitely had a high tail!

[greg]

5 bowlers will be needed in future years whatever happens in the final test tomorrow.When Mcgrath and Warne retire they will need 5 bowlers as there won't be bowlers of the same quality to replace them and like every other side around the world they will need the extra bowler.

[The Phantom Ram]

Originally Posted by greg

5 bowlers will be needed in future years whatever happens in the final test tomorrow.When Mcgrath and Warne retire they will need 5 bowlers as there won't be bowlers of the same quality to replace them and like every other side around the world they will need the extra bowler.

Agreed and in my opinion Australia have had the best all rounder in the world for the last few years, albeit a wk/batsman therefore should have been playing a 5th bowler for a while.

[Colourful Chaddi]

Australia will still not be much of a problem with 5 bowlers because the quicks havn't been that effective barring Glenn MaGrath and to some extent Brett Lee. I would include Stuart Maggil though because he will be more dangerous to England with Shane Warne. Plus Stuart Maggil and Shane Warne will be sharing most of the work load giving the pace bowlers some rest. Brett Lee will very dangerous when he bowls in short spells instead of bowling longer spells because he will be bowling as fast as possible, this is because he wouldn't need to worry about saving his energy.

[Colourful Chaddi]

Originally Posted by greg

5 bowlers will be needed in future years whatever happens in the final test tomorrow.When Mcgrath and Warne retire they will need 5 bowlers as there won't be bowlers of the same quality to replace them and like every other side around the world they will need the extra bowler.

Diffinatly, Australia will need to use 5 bowlers because they will not be able to give that quality that Shane Warne and Magrath, Austrlia can get away with this because they have a extra batsmen in Adam gilcrost-something others don't have. But how loong will Australia be able to get away from playing 5 bowlers without a all-rounder like Andrew Flintoff because Adam Gilchrist will be retiring soon and he hinted that the world cup 2007 will be his last.

All in all Australia are going to fall and they are sign of them falling at the moment also.

[Rachael]

Originally Posted by The Phantom Ram

Agreed and in my opinion Australia have had the best all rounder in the world for the last few years, albeit a wk/batsman therefore should have been playing a 5th bowler for a while.

When you've occasional bowlers like Lehman (did a good job in Sri Lanka), Clarke (reputed to be OK, bad back might be a problem though), kattich (supposedly OK) and Ponting (did nicely enough at Trent Bridge) it takes a lot of the pressure off... but only to a point: on that first day at Edgbaston not even the specialists could cope!

I'd not bet against Symonds and Watson both getting a run in the Test side before too long: that should make a difference as well.

[The Phantom Ram]

Originally Posted by Rachael

I'd not bet against Symonds and Watson both getting a run in the Test side before too long: that should make a difference as well.

Isn't Symonds early thirties though? Makes you wonder how many Test matches he'd have played if he had represented the country of his birth! (For the record I think the fact that Symonds opted for Australia is the correct one. That is where his cricket education took place, despite him being born in Birmingham.)