If it wasn't for Cummins, they probably would've made ~500.
Johnson & Siddle lack potency.
Johnson & Siddle lack potency.
-
AFLW 2024 - Round 6 - Chat, game threads, injury lists, team lineups and more.
Peter Siddle
- Thread starter mcphee_is_a_gun
- Start date
- Tagged users None
What Siddle can do (at times) is bowl in a partnership. He bowled well with Cummins yesterday, tight from one end while the strike bowler was able to get wickets at the other. I know there are times when Siddle is expensive, but I think in the first innings is was due to a bit of luck, there were a lot of streaky boundries as a result of the way SA played (poorly).
Since McDermott has come on board he is bowling a lot fuller and in the main his bowling has been better. He has started to get more swing as well.
exactly right - I'd think the powers that be would've been quite satisfied (in the main) with Siddle's effort yesterday, and as a bowling unit the results came. Sadly Johnson was niether economical nor penetrating, thankfully Cummins made up for that.
YOTC
Brownlow Medallist
You know Victorians are getting desperate when they resort to the Brett Lee excuse.
He bowled rubbish yesterday.
Kyptastic
Premium Gold
Essendon Player Sponsor 2024 - Archie Perkins and Nic Martin
Veteran
Essendon Player Sponsor 2023 - Archie Perkins and Nic Martin
Essendon Player Sponsor 2022 - Anthony McDonald-Tipungwuti and Archie Perkins
Pokemon is Life
Essendon Player Sponsor 2014
Essendon Player Sponsor 2013
Essendon Player Sponsor 2012
Yeah, I know. He only had the best economy rate and bowled twice as many maidens as any of the other bowlers. What a disgraceful performance.
Another "0 for". That's the problem. They all get the odd "0 for" but Siddle does it too much to be a successful Test bowler. Too often misses out for a strike bowler. Might have had decent economy yesterday but there's simply no penetration. What's his career strike rate, about 64 with a sh1t average? If it wasn't for an 18yo kid Siddle and Johnson would still be bowling at them next week. Too often happens in the 2nd innings with these guys. Failed too often and itt costs us games. Cummins economy rate wasn't much different except he got 6 wickets.
People used to bag Brett Lee, certainly with some justification at times, but given what we have now we's kill to have him in the side. Given the crap bowlers we have we appreciate the likes of Lee more now. You sometimes never realise what you had until it's gone.
[YOUTUBE]josKHsuZfes[/YOUTUBE]
Classic McGrath bouncer. Not even particular short, but perfectly directed and rising sharply. Something Lee never figured out how to do.
So Lee was never able to bowl like McGrath, and? That bouncer was classic McGrath, it's unfair to use it against Lee in any sense.
Lee was capable of crushing bouncers at his peak, that wasn't the problem with his bowling. It was his inability to bowl enough balls on the right line consistently enough that stopped him from becoming great.
Just on that video, though. How good was Glenn's reaction? He just glances at his work for a second and turns away lol.
Lee was capable of crushing bouncers at his peak, that wasn't the problem with his bowling. It was his inability to bowl enough balls on the right line consistently enough that stopped him from becoming great.
Just on that video, though. How good was Glenn's reaction? He just glances at his work for a second and turns away lol.
sherb
Hall of Famer
Lee far too often had a very poor short ball, as I have already mentioned. Either too wide or too short, or both.
At his pace, a decent short ball (at the throat, a la the great West Indian quicks) would have been a fearsome weapon.
But he couldn't develop one. Mind you this was the bloke who couldn't overcome his no-ball problem either, so it is hardly a surprise.
I remember Lee working over Kallis in Perth. Maybe 7 years ago or so? Bouncer, bouncer, pin-point yorker which almost had Gilly speared through the chest by a cart-wheeling stump. Bouncers and yorkers (he never bowls yorkers enough now) weren't Lee's problems, it was ordinary bread and butter bowling that he wasn't so hot at.
sherb
Hall of Famer
The exception that proves the rule perhaps?
The desire to remove Siddle's best returns to attempt some form of normalisation of his average has to be based on a logical rationale.
The comparison to Mitch Johnson over the last 12 months - you can quite justifiably separate out the Perth game, for reasons such that it was the MOST bowler friendly track, we know that it is almost unique in test cricket. And when seeing that Johnno's lead in (that includes a 5fer) saw him average 54, and the other side of that WACA game has seen him again average 54 and even more now after this last test - - - that's sustained 54plus average over a 12 month period other than a single aberation.
That's a logical analysis.
For Siddle, it's nonsense to remove his 5fers.
However, this is the same rationale that the Hodge haters applied. Deciding to ignore his unbeated 200 and instead to look solely at his return outside of that.
That left him with 503 for 9 outs reducing to 300 for 9 outs and so an average of 33.33, with 2 50s, a 40 and only twice failing to make double figures. And that was reason enough to push him out at the time.
There's slight logic in doing that - as the impact of an unbeaten 200 is massive.
Whereas Siddle's 2 bags of 6 fer in the Ashes series is not comparable - the 'unbeaten' element doesn't enter into it. And given the effort in both cases on the pitches in both cases against the opposition in both cases - you can't justify discounting those.
It's not about discounting them. You guys are missing the point entirely. It's about showing that when he doesn't have an outstanding performance, he has a crappy one. And the outstanding performances aren't regular enough to offset the crappy ones.
Lee is never going to be considered with McGrath. Very few quicks is in history would.
Lee couldn't get one off a length because his action was too low. Need a higher action and hit the pitch hard just short of a length. He'd have to have re-defined his whole action for that. He was lower and full. Bowled his best during the second half of his career when he became more consistent in line and length as he still does in the ODI arena. Certainly a good Test bowler but not a great. He'd certainly open the bowling now though if he decided to play Test match cricket again.
While one is very dubious about comparing ODI and Test cricket didn't it still look like the level of bowling went up a pile of notches against England when the ODIs started.
That's the thing. Them difference between his odd massive efforts and his poor ones are poles apart with the former, unfortunately, way too rare.
I'm a Victorian and I like Peter Siddle. I really do have a lot of time for him. However it is also my opinion that he is completely over rated. Now is the time against the best batsman in the world that he needs to step up.
He impresses me against average opposition like New Zealand and on green tracks. However how will he fare against the best on the best batting tracks in the country.
It's time he does more and as the senior bowler in the line up the pressure is on.
He impresses me against average opposition like New Zealand and on green tracks. However how will he fare against the best on the best batting tracks in the country.
It's time he does more and as the senior bowler in the line up the pressure is on.
Kyptastic
Premium Gold
Essendon Player Sponsor 2024 - Archie Perkins and Nic Martin
Veteran
Essendon Player Sponsor 2023 - Archie Perkins and Nic Martin
Essendon Player Sponsor 2022 - Anthony McDonald-Tipungwuti and Archie Perkins
Pokemon is Life
Essendon Player Sponsor 2014
Essendon Player Sponsor 2013
Essendon Player Sponsor 2012
Siddle's best results have been against South Africa home and away and England (in terms of his best, he's still had bad days against these teams as well). His games against New Zealand reminded me of how he bowled against South Africa in 09, except he's added a bit more swing to his reportoire in the meantime.
time for him stop using the short ball when number 11 is at the crease
Is overrated big time by some in the media, especially SEN, but I'll give him his due, he has been alot better the last few Tests bar mind numbing bowling to the tail at times. Still not sure about his length, hence on moving green tracks he beat the bat without catching the edge but his line was alot better. No "4 balls" each over. Bigger test now will come on the flatter tracks.
Once everyone is fit he probably misses out.
Not sure I like him re-joining one of bowling version of the 3 Stooges (Siddle. Hlifenhaus and Johnson) this Test that have caused us alot of recent pain and bowled us to defeat so often. Maybe they're bowling alot better now but after recent failures it scares the sh1t out of me. We'll soon find out I suppose.
Once everyone is fit he probably misses out.
Not sure I like him re-joining one of bowling version of the 3 Stooges (Siddle. Hlifenhaus and Johnson) this Test that have caused us alot of recent pain and bowled us to defeat so often. Maybe they're bowling alot better now but after recent failures it scares the sh1t out of me. We'll soon find out I suppose.
Yup our batsmen collapse for 47, 130 against NZ, 98 at the MCG, 250 in ADELAIDE but its all the bowlers fault. Our bowlers arent great, especially that bunch but the reason we lose Tests is usually the batting. So we drop the bowlers....just like Pakistan usually do.
Considering we are missing six Test squad bowlers - Harris, Watson, Johnson, Cummins, Bollinger, Cutting - nobody could have an idea of what our best bowling line up would be in a given game. But while our batters continue to collapse lets back them and drop some more bowlers
Yup our batsmen collapse for 47, 130 against NZ, 98 at the MCG, 250 in ADELAIDE but its all the bowlers fault. Our bowlers arent great, especially that bunch but the reason we lose Tests is usually the batting. So we drop the bowlers....just like Pakistan usually do.
Considering we are missing six Test squad bowlers - Harris, Watson, Johnson, Cummins, Bollinger, Cutting - nobody could have an idea of what our best bowling line up would be in a given game. But while our batters continue to collapse lets back them and drop some more bowlers
Seems you missed the point.
Who's talking about dropping bowlers. It's what they brought back, not dropped. Siddle, Hilfenhaus and Johnson together have bowled us to many embarrassing performances and defeats You know that, I know that. Now we have two of the 3 back together. You wonder why I'm apprehensive. 12 months ago...1/517, 5.629, 513. 644. Then there was the putrid efforts in the 2009 Ashes. Your memory can't be that short, surely. Might turn out ok this time but it scares me as it stands now against India. I know injures have hurt us but I would've picked Hazelwood not gone back to what hurt us before. Things have been better in the bowling department with Cummins, Pattinson, Harris when he's been around, and even Copeland, putting the focus squarely back on the bats and their current putrid efforts.
Kyptastic
Premium Gold
Essendon Player Sponsor 2024 - Archie Perkins and Nic Martin
Veteran
Essendon Player Sponsor 2023 - Archie Perkins and Nic Martin
Essendon Player Sponsor 2022 - Anthony McDonald-Tipungwuti and Archie Perkins
Pokemon is Life
Essendon Player Sponsor 2014
Essendon Player Sponsor 2013
Essendon Player Sponsor 2012
Bowlers can get better though. Look at Jimmy Anderson - he was garbage when England got 5-0'd here back in 06/07. He went away, worked on his game and he's arguably the best bowler in the world right now with Steyn. If Hilfenhaus has improved his game then what came before doens't matter.
