Ashes Squad Discussion (CLOSED)

[cammo6556]

Hughes will be fine...

Is accustomed to decks in England and their bowlers.

Will slay them

 

[Arbuckle]

Own goal? Rofl

You look like a clueless idiot.

And I'm the idiot.......................

Again, why do you people need to shower me with all this abuse - merely, apparently, for the crime of suggesting that Siddle's place in the team should be under serious scrutiny? A moderator has already asked us to calm down, and here you are trying to inflame things by implying I called you an "idiot". When I haven't done that.

What do this lot have in common?

Craig McDermott
Merv Hughes
Brett Lee
Michael Kasprowicz
Morne Morkel
James Anderson
Stuart Broad
Steve Finn
Chaminda Vaas

Umm, who knows? Just looks like a very random, eclectic list of fast bowlers to me.

Oh thats right............ they all have higher bowling averages than Peter Siddle.

And your point is? Why don't we make the following, more logical list:

Harris
Cummins
Pattinson
Hilfenhaus
Bird

Do you know what they have in common? Yes, that's right, they're all from the same country as Siddle and all playing in the same era. In every case, they also have a better Test average than Siddle - usually at least 5 runs lower; in some cases, about 12. They're also all competing with Siddle for a place, and have better claims to that place IMO.

Siddle would of gotten a game in our great side, let alone this one.

Sorry - but there's no way Siddle would/should have got a game ahead of the likes of McGrath, Gillespie or numerous others in that period. He's not as good as at least five (being kind) of his contemporaries in a much weaker era for Australia - so why you think he could have held his place in a much better team is something only you can answer.

You want to drop the only guy with genuine heart and fight in the team?

How inane. He's had countless chances to bowl Australia to victory in important matches, and hasn't come up with the goods - which doesn't suggest he has enough heart or fight (let alone skill) in him when it truly matters. In all his Test matches across all the years he has been playing, can you come up with, say, 3 series-influencing matches against good opponents where he has led us to a win?

 

[Spitz]

Sorry - but there's no way Siddle would/should have got a game ahead of the likes of McGrath, Gillespie or numerous others in that period. He's not as good as at least five (being kind) of his contemporaries in a much weaker era for Australia - so why you think he could have held his place in a much better team is something only you can answer.



How inane. He's had countless chances to bowl Australia to victory in important matches, and hasn't come up with the goods - which doesn't suggest he has enough heart or fight (let alone skill) in him when it truly matters. In all his Test matches across all the years he has been playing, can you come up with, say, 3 series-influencing matches against good opponents where he has led us to a win?

Rofl Rofl Rofl.

Absolutely hypocritical.

On one hand you say

How inane. He's had countless chances to bowl Australia to victory in important matches, and hasn't come up with the goods

Then you go and sight Hilfenhaus as the guy who should replace him? Hilarious.

Cummins is injured and Bird has 2 matches of test experience.

Harris and Pattinson will obviously play alongside him............... Hilfenhaus won't even tour, you can bookmark that.

Thanks for the own goal.

Sorry - but there's no way Siddle would/should have got a game ahead of the likes of McGrath, Gillespie or numerous others in that period. He's not as good as at least five (being kind) of his contemporaries in a much weaker era for Australia - so why you think he could have held his place in a much better team is something only you can answer.

Where did I say he would get a game ahead of McGrath and Gillespie...... obviously not.

Brett Lee and Michael Kasprowicz on the other hand.....

 

[Arbuckle]

Rofl Rofl Rofl.

Absolutely hypocritical.

On one hand you say

Then you go and sight Hilfenhaus as the guy who should replace him? Hilarious.

Actually, I'm pretty sure I didn't say Hilfenhaus should replace him in the XI at all. But well done on demonstrating that your argument is so lightweight that you need to make things up to try to help it along.

And Hilfenhaus has never been classed as the leader of the attack like Siddle repeatedly has and has played just over half the number of Tests as him, btw ... so suggesting they be held to exactly the same scrutiny is an equally poor deflection by you at trying to avoid answering my challenge to you to find just 3 examples among 41 possible options.

Are you going to come up with just 3 examples of where the 'spearhead', and 'the only guy with fight and heart in the team', has decisively led us to victory in 3 big games, or not?

 

[Spitz]

Actually, I'm pretty sure I didn't say Hilfenhaus should replace him in the XI at all. But well done on demonstrating that your argument is so lightweight that you need to make things up to try to help it along.

And Hilfenhaus has never been classed as the leader of the attack like Siddle repeatedly has and has played just over half the number of Tests as him, btw ... so suggesting they be held to exactly the same scrutiny is an equally poor deflection by you at trying to avoid answering my challenge to you to find just 3 examples among 41 possible options.

Are you going to come up with just 3 examples of where the 'spearhead', and 'the only guy with fight and heart in the team', has decisively led us to victory in 3 big games, or not?

Siddle is classed as the leader of the attack?

I'm pretty sure he's been the first change bowler for about 90% of his tests, you clearly watch closely.

 

[Arbuckle]

Siddle is classed as the leader of the attack?

I'm pretty sure he's been the first change bowler for about 90% of his tests, you clearly watch closely.

He is touted that way ad nauseum. Type in "Siddle leader of attack" or something similar into google, and I bet it gives you a stream of hype about him. And that won't even include the endless garbage we've endured for years on TV and radio about him.

Now ... on to more pressing matters ... where are those 3 examples from you? Anyone would think you're really struggling to find something that you should have been able to produce in a heartbeat if everything you've said about him was accurate.

 

[Spitz]

He is touted that way ad nauseum. Type in "Siddle leader of attack" or something similar into google, and I bet it gives you a stream of hype about him. And that won't even include the endless garbage we've endured for years on TV and radio about him.

Now ... on to more pressing matters ... where are those 3 examples from you? Anyone would think you're really struggling to find something that you should have been able to produce in a heartbeat if everything you've said about him was accurate.

Nice backtrack, some guy in the media calls him "the leader of the attack" despite nearly all of his test match cricket, bowling first change?

His 4th test - 8 wickets for the match, econ 2.06: Aus 103 run win vs Sth Africa in Sydney.
His 11 test - 6 wickets for the match, Econ 3.0, Rolled England with 5w in first innings to set up the win: Aus Innings and 80 runs, Headingly 2009
This summer (you have a short memory) - 9 wickets for the match, econ 2.0, Aus 137 run win vs Sri Lanka in Hobart.

Happy?

Game.Set.Match.

Troll.

 

[The Passenger]

Now ... on to more pressing matters ... where are those 3 examples from you? Anyone would think you're really struggling to find something that you should have been able to produce in a heartbeat if everything you've said about him was accurate.

well he's taken 7 five fors and we've won four of those games so straight up their big contributions and you can hardly blame him for defeat in this one - http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/428752.html - when we got rolled for 98 and the other 3 quicks combine for 4/300. Conversely his 5-for against Adelaide was on the back of huge innings from Ponting and Clarke.

has never conceeded more than 75 runs when taking 5 wickets in an innings so all of them have been fairly destructive performances. none of this 5/150+ which really doesn't actually do much for the team that a few other guys have picked up along the way.

Has a fairly handy list of blokes who he has dismissed 4+ times including Sehwag, Kohli, Boucher, Tendulkar, Cook, Amla, Prior and de Villiers.

not really sure what more you want from him.

Our bowling whilst very good, is not at the point when a bloke with 150 wickets @ 28.8 can be sent to the scrap heap.

Aside from the 2009 ashes hilf has been up and down, but mostly down against quality opposition. Harris should go to england but will need back up.

siddle, pattinson, bird and harris are our four clear best quicks for mine. faulkner and starc following, although i still reckon others (cutting, cummins etc,.) would do better than starc once they are given a go (or in cummins case get back on the park first)

 

[Arbuckle]

Nice backtrack, some guy in the media calls him "the leader of the attack" despite nearly all of his test match cricket, bowling first change?

"Some guy" in the media? It's widespread, and rammed down our throats, endlessly. Even Cricket Australia had him as the centrepiece of their advertising campaign this year for God's sake. Lovely reversion, after everything you've said, to now pretend he is nothing more than a first change bowler btw. Make up your mind, please.

His 4th test - 8 wickets for the match, econ 2.06: Aus 103 run win vs Sth Africa in Sydney.

Oh dear. So I ask you for a series-defining game, and you come up with this? The series was already over, mate. It was a dead rubber, and he was mauled in that series when it was on the line. So thanks, yet again, for helping my case. Not to mention that the pitch in Sydney had cracks almost as wide as the Grand Canyon, he got two top order batsmen from memory for the entire match, and had to be replaced at the end when he could barely make a guy with a broken arm even have to play at the ball. Dear God.

His 11 test - 6 wickets for the match, Econ 3.0, Rolled England with 5w in first innings to set up the win: Aus Innings and 80 runs, Headingly 2009

Got one top order batsman for the entire match, didn't he? And wasn't he slammed all over the park in the second innings? Also funny, very funny, that you've chosen a match in which Hilfenhaus had as much if not more to do with the win than Siddle.

This summer (you have a short memory) - 9 wickets for the match, econ 2.0, Aus 137 run win vs Sri Lanka in Hobart.

You could possibly include this if you were desperate to find something, I suppose. But it was another pitch with cracks in it everywhere, and they were playing a pretty weak side at a low ebb. It struggles to meet the criteria of a big game against big opposition.

Troll.

There's no need for this or the other snide, personal nonsense in your post yet again. Poor effort all round, and if those are the 3 premium matches you can find to defend yourself, it says a lot in itself about the absence of stunning performances in Siddle's career. Basically, there's bugger all to point at even after about 5 years worth of chances for him - which has been my point all along. As I've said before, he's at his best in dead rubbers or at the end of an innings when the damage has already been done - but who bloody cares?

 

[The Passenger]

going off your criteria no australian bowler has ever put in a series/match defining performances

warne 12/120 - still lost. shit.
mcgrath 8/40 in the ashes. got spanked in the second innings. match draw. shit.
mcgrath 8/24 v pakistan. they were chasing 500+. game was already over. shit.
gillespie 5/53 in the ashes. england were 200 down on first innings. mcgrath did all the damage at the start. shit.

you're argument is just bizaare. just about any performance can be picked apart if you hate the bloke enough.

150 wickets @ 28.5 is getting picked in just about any team of any era. we may well be good enough to push siddle into the background in the near future. hopefully. that would indicate an extremely strong bowling line-up. but not yet.

 

[Spitz]

150 wickets @ 28.5 is getting picked in just about any team of any era. we may well be good enough to push siddle into the background in the near future. hopefully. that would indicate an extremely strong bowling line-up. but not yet.

This FFS ^

Has blind personal hate for the bloke for some reason, maybe he loves the weak flaky types rather than those who show genuine metal and want to win?

150 wickets @ 28.5 as first change would get him a game in just about every Australian side, including those in the 90's & 00's.

 

[Caesar]

Siddle is just one of those players where his results don't really seem to match up with his level of ability. His 5/71 in Mohali is a classic Siddle innings. He will bowl completely ordinary and unthreatening stuff for two days, then suddenly take a few wickets for no discernible reason and end up with great figures.

It seems like luck, but it can't be luck because he keeps doing it.

 

[Arbuckle]

going off your criteria no australian bowler has ever put in a series/match defining performances

Talk about over simplifying arguments, and putting words in someone else's mouth. The points I'm making with Siddle are that he's barely ever performed in anything other than bowler-friendly conditions and/or matches of little consequence.

That was the reason why I asked for even such a small sample of big games from him. I was asking for a demonstration that he'd done the job expected of a key fast bowler even once every 14 bloody games for Pete's sake. And yet got a tortured display of repeated evasion of that question before someone was even able to bring themselves to answer it (badly).

Do you honestly think it's possible to put McGrath, Warne and Gillespie in the same category as Siddle in terms of such a dearth of destructive games to choose from? I'd also point out those guys rarely played in losing series; Siddle, by contrast, has played in a stack of them. And regularly goes missing when he is needed.

Maybe you should also ask yourself why we have been such an ordinary side in so many of the bigger series over the past few years, and ask yourself who some of the common links have been?

 

[Spitz]

Talk about over simplifying arguments, and putting words in someone else's mouth. The points I'm making with Siddle are that he's barely ever performed in anything other than bowler-friendly conditions and/or matches of little consequence.

That was the reason why I asked for even such a small sample of big games from him. I was asking for a demonstration that he'd done the job expected of a key fast bowler even once every 14 bloody games for Pete's sake. And yet got a tortured display of repeated evasion of that question before someone was even able to bring themselves to answer it (badly).

Do you honestly think it's possible to put McGrath, Warne and Gillespie in the same category as Siddle in terms of such a dearth of destructive games to choose from? I'd also point out those guys rarely played in losing series; Siddle, by contrast, has played in a stack of them. And regularly goes missing when he is needed.

Maybe you should also ask yourself why we have been such an ordinary side in so many of the bigger series over the past few years, and ask yourself who some of the common links have been?

I've heard it all now.

Siddle's the reason for the demise of the Australian test team.

 

[Arbuckle]

I've heard it all now.

Siddle's the reason for the demise of the Australian test team.

Is this your usual style of debating on here? I clearly mentioned a group of underperformers in my first post, not just one.

But please keep being childish, and making others' arguments up over and over again, if that suits you. It only indicates how badly you are struggling to keep up with the grown ups.

 

[The Passenger]

<SNIP>

Of course they're not on the same level of performances. Warne and McGrath are all time greats and Gillespie isn't far behind.

hardly putting words in your mouth. just simply demonstrating how easy it is to put down someone's performances if you try hard enough, especially for bowlers because to win a test the bowlers have to come and out and perform twice.

everything i've said about those four performances above equally applies to what you have said about siddle's good performances. my arguments were stupid, just as yours were. we still lost, pitch was a minefield, someone else did all the work, didn't follow it up in the second innings.... it's just nitpicking and it's easy to do when you don't like a bloke.

in 40 tests siddle has probably put in 7 to 10 real good performances, some of which have resulted in pushing us towards victory, some not quite, whilst one was in a match in which we got totally belted but you could hardly fault him. he's also put in numerous average performances and a handful of crap performances.... that is about in line with what you'd expect from a bloke with a bowling average in the high 20's.

 

[peternorth]

hi everyone. apologies in advance if already raised and discussed.

i for one have decried the selection of bailey in T20 as captain. it was akin to picking a captain, then the team around him. wrong.

but now the test XI is faced with the possibility of no leader if clarke is injured. if CA appoint watson again as vc it suggests 2 things

1) they dont care about what transpired in india re: homework
2) if watson has a poor run the VC next to his name, and no experienced leaders in the pack, points to staying in the team

circumstantial or poor management?

 

[Badesumofu]

I've got a simple formula for success:

1- Start with your best 2 players (MC, JP)

2- Fill the rest of the side with Tasmanians and Tas representatives.

You all know it makes sense.

Cowan
Fatty Cosgrove
Doolan
Clarke
Watson
Bailey
Wade
Paine
Faulkner
Patto
Bird

Hmm, start with best couple of players in the country, then take the best side in the country... good approach. I think Butts should be in there, though and Silk. Don't need Wade in the side and Watson is no longer worth of playing for Australia or Tasmania.

Silk
Cowan
Cosgrove
Clarke
Bailey
Doolan
Paine
Faulkner
Butterworth
Pattinson
Bird

That's a good looking side.

 

[Mego Red]

.

Happy?

Game.Set.Match.

Troll.

mate, I'm not even sure I agree in any way with the other bloke - but you are obviously a dickhead. Settle down, FFS.

 

[sherb]

Hmm, start with best couple of players in the country, then take the best side in the country... good approach. I think Butts should be in there, though and Silk. Don't need Wade in the side and Watson is no longer worth of playing for Australia or Tasmania.

Silk
Cowan
Cosgrove
Clarke
Bailey
Doolan
Paine
Faulkner
Butterworth
Pattinson
Bird

That's a good looking side.

I was going to suggest we send the entire Tassie side over.

But I'm prepared to sacrifice a couple of spots for Clarke and Patto.

 

[Mr Meeseeks]

We disowned Watson, well at least I did.

Ponting in. Watson out

 

[Tyberious Funk]

Siddle may not be a world-beater, but when you break it down he's one of the best we've got. Pattinson is clearly better than him. Harris probably is too, but he's injury prone and not really in a position to bowl long, hard spells. You've then got Starc who is still young and very inconsistent (and MJ who is old and inconsistent) then Bird and Cummins who've played too few matches too really make much of a judgement.

The truth of the matter is that Siddle is probably the second bowler picked after Pattinson. Bird, Cummins or Starc might change that in the future, but it's just not the case right now.

 

[Lloyd Townsend]

People naming Silk for the Ashes really worries me - it's an awful knee-jerk reaction. The kid's obviously got talent, but let him flourish at FC level before we give him a baggy green.

Although it will never happen, Chris Rogers is deserving of another run at Test level - he's been in fine form at the rear end of the Shield season.

 

[Harmichael]

I rate Siddle on par with Merv Hughes as bowler. Feel free to interpret that whichever way you want.

Anyway, already posted this link the Shield Final thread but it's just a relevant to this one:

http://www.couriermail.com.au/sport...505dbd3c3e0e20497e5b22b9#.UVDLboZVtl4.twitter

..so expect us to select most of the same hacks given this is kind of laughable incompetence that's still going on. How does that definition of insanity go again?

 

[Harmichael]

Hughes will be fine...

Is accustomed to decks in England and their bowlers.

Will slay them

LMAO!!! Will be a walking wicket over there. Whilst away, the message on his answering machine might as well be "I am currently out - caught Cook bowled Anderson"