5 slick Aussie pacemen coming to Ashes 2009 in England

[Ninjaman]

Originally Posted by Rachael

Any combined England and Australia XI of recent vintage would obviously have included McGrath and Warne... with (of the turn of the century options) any two of Caddick, Gough and Gillespie taking up the next two spots. A combined second XI attack would, on the whole, have been tough: Craig White peaked briefly as a very effective bowler... but the England options would have been Bicknell (who'd probably have been the best but never got much chance to prove it) plus Cork, Defreitas and so on - uninspiring... but better by some margin than the first choice Aussie of the majority of that era (Lee). That said... I'm pretty sure the Aussies could have played better bowlers throughout most of Lee's career (not least Kasprowicz).

You already tried selling the idea that Caddick is superior than Brett Lee. It didn't find much backers

Now you are saying that Bicknell, Cork, Defreitas "and so on" are all better by some margin than Brett Lee.

On what criteria?

It would seem that the Australian selectors who have not done to badly with selecting successful sides have this huge blindspot in picking Brett Lee because they keep picking him when others so "much better" are overlooked.

You really have it in for him don't you?

[Rachael]

All I said in that post was that Australia had better options than Lee through most of Lee's own career (1999-present). Lee was never in the league of Gillespie, but fortunately, never (at least until 2005) kept him out of the side. Lee did, however, keep Kasprowicz out of the side, and Bichel, and Noffke, and (until recently) Clark.

I've nothing against Lee as a character, as a no 8 batsman and as a fielder... but his record is at best ordinary.

Lee's played 10 Tests in England and aside from getting carted at 4.22 / over his wickets have been hugely expensive - his average is 45.44! He's never even faced India or Pakistan on the subcontinent... but he did play Pakistan twice in the UAE and manage 3 wickets at an average of 40.66 - in the same matches, Bichel took 8 wickets at 13.25!

Unfortunately for Lee... he actually did far better against Pakistan in the UAE than he did in his one Test in Sri Lanka (2 wickets at 56) or in his 2 Tests in Bangladesh (2 wickets at 93).

Lee's 2001 tour of South Africa was no better: 10 wickets at 41.6 whilst being carted at 4.36 / over.

Playing outside of Austrlia... Lee has taken 98 wickets... but he's only ever had 2 good series... and they were years apart: 1999/00 in NZ and 2005/06 in SA. These account for a third of those wickets. That leaves 63 wickets he's taken at - wait for it - 41.98.

I accept that in recent times, Lee has started showing a bit more promise... but there's a huge period of his career (roughly 1/1/2001-1/1/2006) in which he was at best ordinary.

(6 ball overs)       Mat    O       R   W   BBI    BBM     Ave  Econ    SR  5 10
filtered              41 1417.1  5313 146  5/30   8/181  36.39  3.74  58.2  3  0
filtered              21  798.3  2854  85  5/30   8/181  33.57  3.57  56.3  3  0

First is all matches, second is "home" matches. Stacks of "failed" bowlers could match a record like that - even Mullally's wickets came at 31.24 and without getting carted - econ 2.40, aided by occasional spells where the batsmen might have needed steps to reach every other ball .

[flanflinger]

Originally Posted by Rachael

Does that amount to strength in depth? I'm not sure.

Not sure, but after reading that I have a headache!!

[Milo]

Bichel had his chance, in fact selected instead of Lee. What baffles me is the inclusion of De Freitas in any argument. If we are going back this far, then Fleming, Reifel and Craig McDermott are probably better than anything England have produced in the last ten years. If we are talking about recent strength in depth then Australia definitely had it, and not England with Craig White's one series purple patch.

[darksideofthemoon]

I would have Lee over Caddick any day.

[Ernest]

Originally Posted by darksideofthemoon

I would have Lee over Caddick any day.

Same here - Caddick was a specialist second innings wicket taker in any case.

[Seamer]

Originally Posted by acker

I just cant see where you are coming from suggesting the Australian pace attack is weaker "Seamer" it looks as strong if not stronger than ever to me.

I never suggested anything of the sort Acker. In fact, i think the current crop of Aussie quicks is the strongest any nation has had since the Windies teams of the 80's.

What i did say is that they (apart from Lee and Bracken) are still short on experience, and they are still a few years off being fully ripened - fast bowlers usually reach their peak in their late twenties.

Good stuff all in all. Australia have their best days ahead of them in terms of pace bowlers. And while they are relatively weak in terms of spin in the absence of Warne, not many other nations have particularly good spin attacks themselves

Look at England for example. The best they can trot out is an off-spinner in Panasar, yet is he any better in terms of skill and ability that Hauritz? No. We can match them in off-spin, but we have better options in legspin and have a quality chinaman, so in actuality, we are superior in spin to England, and probably all nations except India.

[flanflinger]

Originally Posted by Seamer

Look at England for example. The best they can trot out is an off-spinner in Panasar, yet is he any better in terms of skill and ability that Hauritz? No. We can match them in off-spin

To be pedantic, he is a left arm spinner and his figures currently are:-

20 Tests, 73 wickets at 31... which is not too shabby at all..

[Seamer]

Originally Posted by flanflinger

To be pedantic, he is a left arm spinner and his figures currently are:-

20 Tests, 73 wickets at 31... which is not too shabby at all..

No not to shabby, but hardy breathtaking either. He can throw them up above the eyeline and on his day does well, but he will rarely rip teams apart by himself. The point i am trying to make is, while there has been a fair bit of focus on Australia's apparent weakness in the spin bowling department, little has been said about the other test playing nations.

When you look at it, no one, save perhaps Sri Lanka with Muralitharan with his accursed "doosra" has a particularly fine crop of quality spin bowlers themselves. But no one has the depth of pace bowlers compared to what the Aussies have right now, which is why they should still hold a qualitative advantage overall for the foreseeable future .

[pie_chucker]

Originally Posted by Seamer

..is he any better in terms of skill and ability that Hauritz? No. We can match them in off-spin,

Thats a tad unfair and massively overrating Hauritz.

After Warnes first 20 matches he'd taken 79 wickets at 26 with 3 5-wickets hauls. Montys 73 at 30 with 3 5- wicket hauls and 1 10-wicket haul for compares well.

Note: I'm not suggesting Panesar is in Warnes class but he is a good bowler and miles better than any finger spinner the aussies have.