A Fair Swap..>

[Beny]

On the seaming, swinging english wickets... Come now... Glenn McGrath of course.

[John]

Mcgrath on balance. But it really doen't make much difference.
I think you are asking the wrong question. Its who do England need?
Which player from around the world would England take that would help make a difference.Laxman or Kallis for Thorpe.
Pollock for S. Jones.

[Leafy Seadragon]

Hi Ernest,
The thing is, if McGrath is not there, Bichel, Tait, Lee or etc will be. My money would be on England playing any of these much easier than McGrath (unless Lee magically clicks). Take out Warne and I would be willing to bet that the English wouldn't gain that much playing MacGill instead (other than the 'aura' associated with Warne). IMHO, if Warne hadn't been around, MacGill would have 350+ wickets - that's one heck of a reserve bench.

[Ernest]

Hi Leafy S,

I think that maybe you being an Australian, may be taking Warne a little to much for granted, I have seen Warne at his best, pitching leg stump, and the ball fizzing to off.
Such bowling IMHO is bound to find edges from even the best batsmen.
He may be a little past his best, because he won't have the hunger a younger player would have, but Warne playing at 80%, is still a stern prospect.
I dont know a lot about MacGill, I might have seen him play, not sure.

I think Lee, same as Harmison will be a major player, depends if he can bowl a line or not, that is another battle ground.

Should be a great series, goes on until September, so weather permitting, a nice long cricket summer for us.

[Leafy Seadragon]

Ernest,
Agree with almost everything you said - my own jury's out on Lee (although its going to be a great Ashes for the Aussies if even he fires) and I suspect your lack of exposure to MacGill is the reason you don't rate him. He's now a much bigger turner of the ball than Warne (admittedly without the same control or subtlety) and in the year of Warne's 'Mum induced absence' MacGill filled his spot capably and was the world's 2nd highest test wicket taker for that year. Admittedly MacGill's performance off the field is unlikely to ever live up to Warnie's.

[Chuck Palumbo]

Definitely Mcgrath....when he is not in the team, I don't think Gillespie,Lee or Kaspa are anywhere near as effective, because they rely on the accuracy and menace from one end which builds up pressure and they can pick up the pieces from the otherhand.

I've found some interesting figures from Lee and Gillespie when they have been without Mcgrath:

At Sydney during the 2002/03 Ashes series when Mcgrath was out injured, Gillespie had match figures of 2-132 and Brett Lee had match figures of 5-229 and England ended up beating Aus.

Now, lets go forward a year when they played India at home. Mcgrath was out for all the series and India racked up the runs. Lee had overall series figures of 8 wickets @ 59.50 and Gillespie 10 wickets @ 37.

These are very average figures and shows just how much Lee and Gillespie thrive off Mcgrath's accuracy..

[Zainub]

I think you're very, very right CP in this case, England's chances of winning the Ashes should be doubled if they are to play a Pigeon Less Australia.

[Maranello]

Originally Posted by Leafy Seadragon

IMHO, if Warne hadn't been around, MacGill would have 350+ wickets - that's one heck of a reserve bench.

Leafy Seadragon, I agree with everything you say MacGill. He definitely would have, and still would, walk into another Test side, including even India. He was hamepered by the fact that he was born in Australia in the same era as Shane Warne! MacGill now turns the ball more than Warne, and has very good variety. He lacks in control, in that there will be the odd lollipop every couple of overs, but there will also be the odd jaffa every few overs, so it evens things nicely for him.

On the topic of this thread, I believe that McGrath is the key. Remove one batsman, and they have many others who are almost as good. Remove Warne, and you have MacGill, who would be more than a handful for England. Remove Gilly, and you have Haddin, unproven yes, but also hungry and very talented. It might be controversial to say this (when did that ever stop me, eh ) but I feel Gilly's reputation as one of Australia's best batsmen is over-estimated. Out of his 13 Test centuries, only once has Gilchrist scored a century in an innings with no other century makers. So he does well when others do well too.... as they say, "a good batsman scores runs when everyone else scores runs, a great batsman scores runs when no-one else does".

However, remove McGrath and you end up with some very untested (Tait, Bracken, Williams), or tried and failed (Lee) options. The only challenge to Australia's domination in the past few years have arisen when McGrath has not played. His role in building up pressure from one end, pshyching out the batsmen, taking crucial wickets, and drying up the runs can not be over-estimated. It allows the other attacking bowlers in Australia's armoury to go ahead and attack with abandon.

[Ernest]

Interesting figures there Chuck,it backs up what I have been saying for a while, while McGrath is undesputed their best seam bowler, the England top order will have to see him off.
He can't bowl for long spells, as in truth he is getting older.
I hope England, and in particular Tresco dont try and knock him out of the attack, he is to accurate for that.

Like you say without McGraths pressure, the other seamers are ordinary, compared to him.

I still think Warne will be the big danger to Flintoff, pace does not bother him, because he sees the ball early, but is a bit sus against spin, Sarwan had him a couple of times last yeer in the Windies.

[Zainub]

Originally Posted by M

untested (Tait, Bracken, Williams),

Tait can be classed as untested, but Bracken and Williams have both played tests for Australia.

McGrath is very important member of their side, not only does he head the seam attack, but the spin attack does better when he plays (Warne and Pigeon have taken record (Australia record I mean to say)number of wickets together

His pin point accuracy creates a pressure in the form a run drought that the rest of the entire bowling attack benefits from.

All the reserve bowlers, be it Tait, Bracken, Williams, Lee or anyone else, as good or as promising or talented they are or can be, they still cannot (at leat over the short term) be in a literal sense apt replacement for one of the best fast bowlers ever.

Aus will not find it easy to fill the gap Pigoen would leave in the side IMHO. After all Pigeon's not an easy man to fill boots for, he's one of the greats. One of the legneds. You can't replace guys like that. You can only make up for them, and that too to only a certain extent.

I don't bet for money, but if Pigoen doesn't participate in the Ashes coming summer I might find it very hard no to put money on at least an Ashes draw if not victory for England. I'd be seriously tempted.