It's well known (to everyone bar the selectors) that you can't have Siddle and Johnson in the same team, the 2009 Ashes proved that. At this stage though, I'd much rather go in with Harris, Siddle and Copeland. If during the home summer, the new selectors decide to give someone like Pattinson or Cutting a spot at Siddle's expense, so be it. As long as Johnson is no where near the starting XI.
-
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
Having 2 or 3 brett lees would see smashing performances every 4 or 5 tests but the rest of the time the good quality batsmen would destroy them.
And neither siddle nor MJ have the threatening pace of Lee in his first flowering.
(gosh weren't we all excited by that first 18 months
)
I reckon Siddle offers more than Johnson but they probably prefer Johnson due to being a left armer
A pace attack of Harris, Pattinson and Siddle would be quite good with Copeland to replace either Siddle if the conditions dont suit 3 quick guys or Harris if he breaks down. Atleast then you dont have a player who is a better 3rd choice bowler having to move up to open as Copeland could easily do either quite well
A pace attack of Harris, Pattinson and Siddle would be quite good with Copeland to replace either Siddle if the conditions dont suit 3 quick guys or Harris if he breaks down. Atleast then you dont have a player who is a better 3rd choice bowler having to move up to open as Copeland could easily do either quite well
Indeed. The previous selectors seemed to be stuck in 2007/08 in believing that batsmen were still stupid enough to play at the ball angled across them. He's been well and truly figured out and now quality batsmen like Amla in the last test just leave it alone and waiting for the inevitable half volley to put away.
I like Siddle, but I'm still unconvinced as to whether he'll entrench himself in the side. One thing is definitely for sure though, he's better than Johnson, even if he's only a transition bowler.
I like Siddle, but I'm still unconvinced as to whether he'll entrench himself in the side. One thing is definitely for sure though, he's better than Johnson, even if he's only a transition bowler.
Parquet Court
Club Legend
- Jun 10, 2010
- 1,642
- 716
- AFL Club
- Richmond
it seems johnson is stuck in a difficult place at the moment. he is clearly too good for first class cricket, if some people on this board had their way and he went back and played a season of first class cricket then he would pick up bags of wickets...
just cant seem to take that into international cricket though, he is too good at first class level to just leave him there.
just cant seem to take that into international cricket though, he is too good at first class level to just leave him there.
Good reason to leave Siddle out and head in a different direction.
Mat Inns Balls Runs Wkts BBI BBM Ave Econ SR 4w 5w 10
24 42 4954 2532 79 6/54 8/113 32.05 3.06 62.7 3 4 0
Compare that to Bollinger, the bloke they won't select.
Mat Inns Balls Runs Wkts BBI BBM Ave Econ SR 4w 5w 10
12 23 2401 1296 50 5/28 8/141 25.92 3.23 48.0 1 2 0
His average was 23.9 until that last Test again England he played when he was obviously unfit after injury.
I know stats are just that, stats, but that tells a story.
Mat Inns Balls Runs Wkts BBI BBM Ave Econ SR 4w 5w 10
24 42 4954 2532 79 6/54 8/113 32.05 3.06 62.7 3 4 0
Compare that to Bollinger, the bloke they won't select.
Mat Inns Balls Runs Wkts BBI BBM Ave Econ SR 4w 5w 10
12 23 2401 1296 50 5/28 8/141 25.92 3.23 48.0 1 2 0
His average was 23.9 until that last Test again England he played when he was obviously unfit after injury.
I know stats are just that, stats, but that tells a story.
Sids isn't bowling well. But can't have "The Rug" who is just a trundler. And an aging one who hasn't a clue with the bat.
Time to look to the next generation of players. Those that will be part of our resurgence.
Time to look to the next generation of players. Those that will be part of our resurgence.
He's certainly a bit more than a trundler as his record suggests, he doesn't lack fire but, yes, I see your point about the next generation.
Our pathetic capitulation with the bat has overshadowed the fact that on a bowler's wicket, our two main bowlers struggled to take a wicket between them, and the Saffers chased down the second highest fourth innings total in the ground's history.
Siddle & Johnson, both need to go - neither of them are consistent or reliable; how many times have we entered a Test with this as our main bowling pairing, and ended up watching the other side pile on scores well over three or four hundred?
I like Siddle, but it's hard to believe he's an automatic selection - yet he seems to be.
Siddle & Johnson did basically nothing for the entire Test. Once again, Watto looked like the saviour, Harris was obviously impressive - neither of those are our main bowling pairing.
The way the last innings went, it wouldn't have mattered if we'd made 250 in our second dig, they were batting untroubled.
Siddle & Johnson would be thanking their lucky stars that our batting was a joke; otherwise, the spotlight would rightly be on them.
I'd kill for Bichel & Kaspa at the moment
As it stands, Watson & Harris are the bowlers you'd go to - one is an all-rounder, one is in and out of the side through constant injury.
Our two key quicks are rubbish, if you were Captain, you'd have zero confidence in them as your go to guys.
Get Pattison, George, Cummins, Hazelwood or Copeland into the side. Start rotating them through; Copeland looks reliable - give him a few Tests to see if he can stand up at that level - try and find a strike bowler to go with him.
And Bollinger should be on the radar; if the fools in charge would start managing him properly and actually put together a plan to get him fit for Tests.
Cricket Tragic
Draftee
Siddle against Sth Africa, India (in India) and 2 Ashes series has 64 wickets at 30 a piece.
Bollinger against St Africa, England, India has 8 wickets at 43.
Bollinger against West Indies, Pakistan (in England and Australia) and New Zealand has 42 wickets at 22 a piece.
Stats are just that. But this tells the real story I'm afraid. Anyway the current attack are just keeping the seats warm for Hazelwood, Cummins and Pattinson. Álso 1 hairpiece per team.
Dixie Flatline
Moderator
- Jun 3, 2005
- 36,534
- 37,891
- AFL Club
- Hawthorn
- Other Teams
- Cartagena C.F., NYJ, A's
- Moderator
- #738
Siddle won the "bowl-off" in the tour matches in the lead-up to the tests, so he'll probably be given the second test to turn his form around.
He's not a "smart" bowler in that, watching him bowl, I don't think he actually plans his overs in advance. He just runs in, flings it down as fast as he can (which can vary depending on what time it is, where the planets are aligned in the night sky and how many smoked kippers he ate for breakfast) and hope for the best.
Australia can't afford Siddle and MJ in the same side - it puts too much pressure on Watson to carry the attack and then open the batting. If the selectors are keen for Watson to remain as the opener then, at best, he shouldn't be bowling more than 10 overs an innings to stay relatively fresh when it's time to put on the pads. But with Siddle and MJ packing pop-guns, Watto is dead tired from all the bowling he needs to do before he even gets the chance to open the batting.
He's not a "smart" bowler in that, watching him bowl, I don't think he actually plans his overs in advance. He just runs in, flings it down as fast as he can (which can vary depending on what time it is, where the planets are aligned in the night sky and how many smoked kippers he ate for breakfast) and hope for the best.
Australia can't afford Siddle and MJ in the same side - it puts too much pressure on Watson to carry the attack and then open the batting. If the selectors are keen for Watson to remain as the opener then, at best, he shouldn't be bowling more than 10 overs an innings to stay relatively fresh when it's time to put on the pads. But with Siddle and MJ packing pop-guns, Watto is dead tired from all the bowling he needs to do before he even gets the chance to open the batting.
yep watto has actually evolved into a bowling allrounder in recent times, while his batting has correspondingly died off. article on cricinfo saying in the last 18 months (i think) he's taken most wickets or 5fers or second most of one or other and most of the other or some shit haha. basically putting the specialist bowlers to shame
all indications are clarke will use watto more and more as a bowler. he's the only one who gets decent swing
its up to clarke to get watto down the order ASAP. like doodle said in another thread, you can't shut watto up about the fact his batting is suffering from all the bowling. his heads not clear when he pads up
clarke really has to sit down and sort his batting order out. its all over the shop
the "bowl off" btw siddle and copeland was bollocks. copes had a poor game, so drop him after he played an instrumental role in our first series win for donks, break up his winning partnership with harris and replace him with siddle, reuniting the siddle-johnson partnership of fail. wtf? so dumb and with such mind numbingly predictable results
copes would've been highly suited to that pitch as well. but you know, the selector on duty is the one and only...
all indications are clarke will use watto more and more as a bowler. he's the only one who gets decent swing
its up to clarke to get watto down the order ASAP. like doodle said in another thread, you can't shut watto up about the fact his batting is suffering from all the bowling. his heads not clear when he pads up
clarke really has to sit down and sort his batting order out. its all over the shop
the "bowl off" btw siddle and copeland was bollocks. copes had a poor game, so drop him after he played an instrumental role in our first series win for donks, break up his winning partnership with harris and replace him with siddle, reuniting the siddle-johnson partnership of fail. wtf? so dumb and with such mind numbingly predictable results
copes would've been highly suited to that pitch as well. but you know, the selector on duty is the one and only...
Got nothing more to add to that. Says it all.
Gak Attack
Brownlow Medallist
I see no reason to play Siddle or Johnson at all, certainly not both of them. Really given their ages and how bad their bad is and with Siddle his good probably isn't that great... at least I can respect his work rate and would still take him over Johnson if given a choice. However, why play them? We shouldn't. And we shouldn't look to bring back a Hilfenhaus or Bollinger either. These guys are certainly not going to improve and if anything decline and you would struggle to argue at least Johnson isn't even better than the latest crop of youngsters.
Even if these guys are slightly better than the young quicks coming through, its not like they're good enough to take us to the top. We need to do what other teams have done and play kids with talent so we can build a world beating team again. Pattinson, Faulkner, Cutting, Copeland, Cummins, Marsh and any other kid who shows pontential should be rotated through with Harris and Watson providing the experience to help these guys. They need to be persisted with for a few years, even if it means some tough losses against the likes of India and England.
What excuses can the selectors use to keep these blokes in the side? Most of the kids mentioned perform just as well at domestic level in recent years.
We can't drop Johnson because he can bat a bit?
Marsh and Faulkner can bat a bit, you can play SOK as another in the spinner rotation who can bat.
Need a left hand bowler?
Faulkner, Putland
Need pure pace?
Cummins
Need a workhorse?
Copeland
Even if these guys are slightly better than the young quicks coming through, its not like they're good enough to take us to the top. We need to do what other teams have done and play kids with talent so we can build a world beating team again. Pattinson, Faulkner, Cutting, Copeland, Cummins, Marsh and any other kid who shows pontential should be rotated through with Harris and Watson providing the experience to help these guys. They need to be persisted with for a few years, even if it means some tough losses against the likes of India and England.
What excuses can the selectors use to keep these blokes in the side? Most of the kids mentioned perform just as well at domestic level in recent years.
We can't drop Johnson because he can bat a bit?
Marsh and Faulkner can bat a bit, you can play SOK as another in the spinner rotation who can bat.
Need a left hand bowler?
Faulkner, Putland
Need pure pace?
Cummins
Need a workhorse?
Copeland
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
You're worried about a 26 year old being too old for the team and want to drop him for a 28 or 30 year old?
Personally, I love Sids (fairly biased) so I don't want to see him dropped. Whenever he goes back to Shield cricket he always seems to do pretty well so he's clearly not a terrible bowler. He's at the age where he should be reaching his peak as a bowler. The big problem for me is that he doesn't have a clearly defined role in the team. He's shown that he can keep it tight (he has a better overall economy rate in tests than Bollinger and Johnson and roughly the same as Harris and Hilfenhaus) and he's also shown that he can take wickets in a burst. Many of his problems probably come from him being asked to do too many things at once.
Personally, I love Sids (fairly biased) so I don't want to see him dropped. Whenever he goes back to Shield cricket he always seems to do pretty well so he's clearly not a terrible bowler. He's at the age where he should be reaching his peak as a bowler. The big problem for me is that he doesn't have a clearly defined role in the team. He's shown that he can keep it tight (he has a better overall economy rate in tests than Bollinger and Johnson and roughly the same as Harris and Hilfenhaus) and he's also shown that he can take wickets in a burst. Many of his problems probably come from him being asked to do too many things at once.
Because that's no way to pick a team at the highest level (or at state level indeed). We're in this mess because we picked Siddle on the back of 5 games in the shield + an aus a match (in which he was outperformed by bollinger in both) eg talent!!!!!! MJ was much the same. We're in this mess because of the very things you want to do, picking on talent and a few decent performances over a very short period
You pick players based on 4 game seasons, or a performance in a shield final, or because of one good spell and you're destined to failure. Every decent state player at one stage or another will have a period of great form. Some will come straight in and do it. For others it'll come after years of struggle. You don't throw him into the Aus team asap in the aftermath of that form patch. Corey Richards hit 4 tons in a very short time including one against the touring England team. 2 years later he was barely in the NSW team. James Pattinson doesn't even have a 5 wicket haul to his name. You don't win games because in theory you are the more talented team. You don't hand out caps to the youngest people you find. You hand them out to the people who have performed to a high level over a couple of seasons in the level below, ideally. As mentioned in the argus review there's room for the odd wildcard youngster, but making a habit for it is about the last thing Australian cricket needs. We've been handing out caps to young talented kids at state level for a quite awhile and guess what, it hasn't worked.
I quote the argus review:
Point 3 clearly affects MJ and Siddle, and also the failure of the selectors to judge the attack as a whole. As rarely the attack works as a whole. It's usually one or two players doing the work ala the first innings. But going out and picking a player who has had a good 4 game start to the season is hardly ideal. Said it before and I'll say it again - I'd rather steve magoffin than pattinson or cummins currently.
You pick players based on 4 game seasons, or a performance in a shield final, or because of one good spell and you're destined to failure. Every decent state player at one stage or another will have a period of great form. Some will come straight in and do it. For others it'll come after years of struggle. You don't throw him into the Aus team asap in the aftermath of that form patch. Corey Richards hit 4 tons in a very short time including one against the touring England team. 2 years later he was barely in the NSW team. James Pattinson doesn't even have a 5 wicket haul to his name. You don't win games because in theory you are the more talented team. You don't hand out caps to the youngest people you find. You hand them out to the people who have performed to a high level over a couple of seasons in the level below, ideally. As mentioned in the argus review there's room for the odd wildcard youngster, but making a habit for it is about the last thing Australian cricket needs. We've been handing out caps to young talented kids at state level for a quite awhile and guess what, it hasn't worked.
I quote the argus review:
Point 3 clearly affects MJ and Siddle, and also the failure of the selectors to judge the attack as a whole. As rarely the attack works as a whole. It's usually one or two players doing the work ala the first innings. But going out and picking a player who has had a good 4 game start to the season is hardly ideal. Said it before and I'll say it again - I'd rather steve magoffin than pattinson or cummins currently.
- Sep 5, 2007
- 16,277
- 13,189
- AFL Club
- Hawthorn
- Other Teams
- Liverpool, Nashville predators
I think he is improving now he is pitching it up more, but agree with most that both he and MJ can't be in the same team. Of the two, I'd take Siddle, purely as I think he is more consistant.
I think that Pattinson should be in there, to replace Johnson, and if you are going to replace Siddle, then look at a guy like Ben Cutting who has been taking wickets in the Shield for the past few years.
Bollinger needs to improve his fitness to be considered.
Siddle is more consistently what?
Yes. He's as consistent as Marcus North was with the bat. That's the problem. Ashes saw 13 wickets, 11 in two innings. Hence his average of 32 and strike rate of 62 in 24 Tests @ only just over 3 wickets per Test.
If we're going to lose we may as well lose with a newcomer. I'd play both Cummins and Copeland with Harris. Nice spot for Cummins to debut, at altitude in J'burg.
God I hope so Jim.
Carbine Chaos
See My Chess
- Apr 1, 2009
- 65,160
- 98,730
- AFL Club
- West Coast
- Other Teams
- Perth FC, Everton, Delhi
Cummins
J. Pattinson
Coulter-Nile
M. Marsh
O'Keefe
We have the potential for a really good bowling attack in a few years, and any of those could be replaced by George, Cutting, Faulkner, Hazlewood, Duffield, Starc, Richardson etc. A lot will depend on Mitch Marsh getting the balance right between his batting and bowling, but I'm sure it will come with experience.
Siddle (as much as I love him) et al. will be redundant soon enough. We have some really good young options coming through.
J. Pattinson
Coulter-Nile
M. Marsh
O'Keefe
We have the potential for a really good bowling attack in a few years, and any of those could be replaced by George, Cutting, Faulkner, Hazlewood, Duffield, Starc, Richardson etc. A lot will depend on Mitch Marsh getting the balance right between his batting and bowling, but I'm sure it will come with experience.
Siddle (as much as I love him) et al. will be redundant soon enough. We have some really good young options coming through.
Gak Attack
Brownlow Medallist
Was this in response to mine? None of the players I mentioned as replacements are older than Siddle. Copeland is closest but also a completely different bowler. Siddle doesn't have a defined role because he is not the best we have in any role. Like I said workhorse keeping it tight, Copeland has his measure. Wicket taking strike bowler... Harris has him by a mile. On pace friendly wickets I'm not against playing him and dropping the spinner, as you said he does a bit of everything so in those situations hes not a bad option. Either way if it's him or Johnson it's not even a debate, Siddle every day.. Johnson is pure rubbish 9 times out of 10.
- May 10, 2004
- 24,853
- 5,691
- AFL Club
- Geelong
- Other Teams
- Pistons/Hammers/Sri Lanka/The Exers
Hello!
