View Full Version : Brett Lee - serial over-rate offender
LIONS then DAYLIGHT
12 Apr 2009, 15:47
During the 2008 Indian series the over-rate situation really came into the spot light during the 4th test.
Since Brett Lee has left the side our over-rate has been great, in SA there was no problem at all.
The likes of Johnson, Siddle and Hilfenhaus and even McDonald don't stuff around after they have bowled the ball.
They turn and get back to their mark.
Brett Lee was a serial offender in this regard, his overs took an age and as such he was pivotal part of the over-rate problem. His habit of pausing at his mark for several seconds before bowling each ball also chewed up more time.
courtjester
12 Apr 2009, 16:52
He should bowl off seven paces like I do nowadays.
I bowl an over in about 90 seconds (providing I don't get hit to the boundary!!)
He should bowl off seven paces like I do nowadays.
I bowl an over in about 90 seconds (providing I don't get hit to the boundary!!)
that would be a huge ask of Lee to not concede boundaries.
pluga_4
12 Apr 2009, 18:00
During the 2008 Indian series the over-rate situation really came into the spot light during the 4th test.
Since Brett Lee has left the side our over-rate has been great, in SA there was no problem at all.
The likes of Johnson, Siddle and Hilfenhaus and even McDonald don't stuff around after they have bowled the ball.
They turn and get back to their mark.
Brett Lee was a serial offender in this regard, his overs took an age and as such he was pivotal part of the over-rate problem. His habit of pausing at his mark for several seconds before bowling each ball also chewed up more time.
i have pointed this out before only to be shot down and put the blame back to ponting.
wasn't it lee in india with hands on hips asking the skipper for a bowl when we were 10 overs behind the required rate. no wonder why punter didn't bowl him because lee was the major prob why we were in that predicament.
c'mon binga, get thru an over in 4 mins and show us ya still got what it takes !
He should bowl off seven paces like I do nowadays.
I bowl an over in about 90 seconds (providing I don't get hit to the boundary!!)
And your international form has been shit hot lately.
LIONS then DAYLIGHT
12 Apr 2009, 19:12
i have pointed this out before only to be shot down and put the blame back to ponting.
wasn't it lee in india with hands on hips asking the skipper for a bowl when we were 10 overs behind the required rate. no wonder why punter didn't bowl him because lee was the major prob why we were in that predicament.
c'mon binga, get thru an over in 4 mins and show us ya still got what it takes !
He shortened his run up didnt he after that tour?
I remember someone saying that at the Gabba he was off a slightly shorter run?
Anyone else hear that?
pluga_4
12 Apr 2009, 19:41
He shortened his run up didnt he after that tour?
I remember someone saying that at the Gabba he was off a slightly shorter run?
Anyone else hear that?
yeah, can't say i recall that.
we are normally an over behind the required rate after binga bowls the first over of a test.
i just hope he can come back and have one last crack at the big time.
His biggest offense is being seriously over-rated.
courtjester
13 Apr 2009, 05:36
And your international form has been shit hot lately.
I'm doing quite well in the local 2nd XI....
Brett Lee is the most over rated cricketer in the history of Aussie cricket.
He is even worse in england conditions averaging about 40 per wicket.
No way should he be picked in the Ashes squad.
DoubleO7
13 Apr 2009, 16:41
Brett Lee is the most over rated cricketer in the history of Aussie cricket.
He is even worse in england conditions averaging about 40 per wicket.
No way should he be picked in the Ashes squad.
Brett Lee has improved a lot since his early tours to England. The warm up matches should give us an indication at where he is at with his bowling.
In regards to being an 'serial over-rate offender' I think that has more to do with his long run up, thinking about which delivery to bowl (occasional with team members) and conceding more runs than he should.
blue boy jatz
16 Apr 2009, 21:50
Brett Lee is the most over rated cricketer in the history of Aussie cricket.
He is even worse in england conditions averaging about 40 per wicket.
No way should he be picked in the Ashes squad.
what a ridiculous statement:thumbsd:
TheColeTrain
17 Apr 2009, 14:21
what a ridiculous statement:thumbsd:
Why?
It is a pretty easy case to argue for
The 747
17 Apr 2009, 14:53
what a ridiculous statement:thumbsd:
Ah that statement was spot on. Not sure what you are on about.
Tommy the Cat
17 Apr 2009, 15:09
you can never over rate a Bluebag
blue boy jatz
17 Apr 2009, 15:26
Ah that statement was spot on. Not sure what you are on about.
what you honestly think that brett lee is the most overrated cricketer to ever play for Australia? if you do then you have no clue about cricket.
Now he is injued again.
Soft!!
No wonder his wife left him.
TheColeTrain
17 Apr 2009, 19:17
what you honestly think that brett lee is the most overrated cricketer to ever play for Australia? if you do then you have no clue about cricket.
You don't quite get it do you?
He is a good player.
Nothing more nothing less, never has been and never will be a great bowler. Saying somebody is over rated doesn't mean he is crap. It means he doesn't deserve to be rated as highly as he is, its laughable that anybody could consider him to be anywhere near the likes of Jason Gillespie
LIONS then DAYLIGHT
17 Apr 2009, 20:42
Fair point, i think people forget how good Gillespie was before that Ashes 2005 series. Especially people from over-seas.
The guy was an absolute machine, considering the injuries he had he had a magnificent career. His bowling in the 2004 Indian series was unstoppable, seriously it seemed like every over he was sending stumps cart-wheeling.
dan warna
20 Apr 2009, 10:10
If Gillespie was carried 1/3 as much as Lee was during his career he would have god 300 test wickets faster, at a better average than Lee.
the third great bowler Australia has had in the last 20 years behind McGrath and Warne.
McGrath, Warne and Dizzy would stand up favourably to any 3 other bowlers in a test team in the history of cricket IMO.
LIONS then DAYLIGHT
20 Apr 2009, 18:58
Why?
It is a pretty easy case to argue for
No not really.
Fact remains he has taken 300 + wickets at a reasonable average of 31 on some pretty flat wickets.
That is not a bad record at all. Sure it's not in the elite category but I have never heard anyone who knows the game say Brett Lee is in that category. Consquently, how can he be over-rated.
He is a superb white ball bowler, one of our best ever. He is a good test match bowler but his not a great like a Gillespie or a McGrath.
He is also handy with the bat.
No-one is saying his an all-time great, as such I find it hard to conclude that his "over-rated".
If anything you could almost say he is underrated. With all the buster and vitriol that people carry on about him you would think that he averages 100+.
LIONS then DAYLIGHT
21 Apr 2009, 00:37
Exactly, people like Flintoff, Ntini average 30+ with the ball and they are regarded as very good bowlers.
If Lee can rediscover his form prior to India 2008 he will be a massive asset for us.
DoubleO7
21 Apr 2009, 00:48
Exactly, people like Flintoff, Ntini average 30+ with the ball and they are regarded as very good bowlers.
If Lee can rediscover his form prior to India 2008 he will be a massive asset for us.
Ntini averages below 30, 28.37 to be exact.
LIONS then DAYLIGHT
21 Apr 2009, 01:04
Sorry, but still there isn't much of a difference.
Ill Chicken
21 Apr 2009, 01:25
Well there is really. Ntini inclusion was subject to significant pressure due to the policy which had to be employed by the SA cricket board. Compare that to being in a side because the captain thinks you're the fastest bowler in the world, in the number one team in the world and one of the most dominating batting line-ups of all time.
The 747
21 Apr 2009, 13:29
Exactly, people like Flintoff, Ntini average 30+ with the ball and they are regarded as very good bowlers.
If Lee can rediscover his form prior to India 2008 he will be a massive asset for us.
You mean the form he had for 3 consecutive Test series? Because he has been ordinary the entire rest of his career. Averaging 30 when the other bowlers are Warne, McGrath, Dizzy or MacGill etc is not a notable achievement.
Ntini is a far far better bowler than Brett Lee, Flintoff is an all rounder.
LIONS then DAYLIGHT
21 Apr 2009, 14:38
You mean the form he had for 3 consecutive Test series? Because he has been ordinary the entire rest of his career. Averaging 30 when the other bowlers are Warne, McGrath, Dizzy or MacGill etc is not a notable achievement.
Ntini is a far far better bowler than Brett Lee, Flintoff is an all rounder.
I mean the form he had from late 2005 onwards, baring the Indian series and the SA series when he was injured.
Whatever way you look at it Brett Lee has been a good bowler for Australia, his not a great, but his one of our highest wicket-takers.
Averaging 30 on flat wickets isn't that bad, i don't buy this theory that because he was surrounded by Warne and McGrath that he should have averaged less.
Those theories are fanciful.
No-one is saying Lee is in the class of McGrath or Lillee or even a McDermott. But his in the next tier down with the likes of Fleming, Rieffel, Kasper.
Brett Lee has nas never been regarded as a great Test bowler, as such how can he be over-rated? Rather he is classified as a good test bowler who has taken over 300 wickets for Australia.
As a ODI bowler however he is elite.
No-one has over-rated Brett Lee.
TheColeTrain
21 Apr 2009, 18:00
If Ntini was able to play in Brett Lees place his record would be so much better then Lees, and good bowler can take wickets with 3 of the greatest bowlers ever in Warne, McGrath and Gillespie at the other end.
And yes Gillespie deserves to be rated that highly before anybody challenges me.
Lee is a good bowler, Ntini is a very good bowler who has had much more pressure to perform throughout his career then Lee has had and has a better record to show for it as well.
LIONS then DAYLIGHT
21 Apr 2009, 18:42
Still doesnt mean that Lee is over-rated does it?
TheColeTrain
21 Apr 2009, 19:23
Still doesnt mean that Lee is over-rated does it?
Yes, he has a higher rating then he deserves.
Thats not a knock on Lee, more the fan boys out their that get hysterical at the slightest criticism
LIONS then DAYLIGHT
21 Apr 2009, 19:29
Im not a fanboy at all. But the critisicm he gets is disgraceful.
He has taken over 300 wickets @ 31.
He could conceivably cut that average down to under 30 before he retires. He has been a good servant of Australian cricket in both forms of the game.
No-one is saying his an all-time great.
aaronm46
22 Apr 2009, 02:25
I do agree with LtD, I feel his lack ofcontrol has been his biggest downfall in Test Cricket, its just due to the way in which he bowled which was well suited to the one day game
LIONS then DAYLIGHT
22 Apr 2009, 02:47
I do agree with LtD, I feel his lack ofcontrol has been his biggest downfall in Test Cricket, its just due to the way in which he bowled which was well suited to the one day game
Yeah at times his lack of control was a characteristic of how he bowled prior to 2005. In saying that he was more then capable of bowling some great spells, but his extra pace ment that he was always going to go for more runs. He bowled poorly
His performance in India was ordinary and as such I think people let this get in the way of their judgement, almost like the frustation of not winning gets to people and they hold a grudge.
Under Steve Waugh i felt Lee was wrongly used as a "enforcer" or just told to run in and bowl fast. Bowling fast doesn't get quality batsmen out, these days they have lots of padding so there is little fear factor there. So if your just going to run in and bowl fast your going to go around the park against quality batsmen. You still need the basics of line and length. Early in his career Lee could follow this principle but then just throw it out the window the next game.
His first really poor series was against England in 2001, the fact he averaged 55 and played all 5 tests led to people thinking he was a teachers pet or the golden child. That never helps people when it comes to judging a player.
I just feel that he still has something to offer Australian cricket as his career winds down in next 2 or 3 years.
Ill Chicken
22 Apr 2009, 04:33
Yeah at times his lack of control was a characteristic of how he bowled prior to 2005. In saying that he was more then capable of bowling some great spells, but his extra pace ment that he was always going to go for more runs. He bowled poorly
His lack of pace meant he was going for more runs.
His performance in India was ordinary and as such I think people let this get in the way of their judgement, almost like the frustation of not winning gets to people and they hold a grudge.
His lack of consistency was proven and people finally realised he is not the bowler to lead the Australian attack.
Under Steve Waugh i felt Lee was wrongly used as a "enforcer" or just told to run in and bowl fast. Bowling fast doesn't get quality batsmen out, these days they have lots of padding so there is little fear factor there. So if your just going to run in and bowl fast your going to go around the park against quality batsmen. You still need the basics of line and length. Early in his career Lee could follow this principle but then just throw it out the window the next game.
Lee is in the side to bowl quick. Fact. Lee is ineffective when his pace drops to mid 140's. Fact. Lee's place in the side has always come into question when his pace has dropped off. Fact.
His first really poor series was against England in 2001, the fact he averaged 55 and played all 5 tests led to people thinking he was a teachers pet or the golden child. That never helps people when it comes to judging a player.
His first, second, third and fourth series against England was poor. Fact.
I just feel that he still has something to offer Australian cricket as his career winds down in next 2 or 3 years.
Yes he will have something to offer doing domestic duties along with filling a ODI role. His test career should be finished.
unstable punt
22 Apr 2009, 05:24
During the 2008 Indian series the over-rate situation really came into the spot light during the 4th test.
Since Brett Lee has left the side our over-rate has been great, in SA there was no problem at all.
The likes of Johnson, Siddle and Hilfenhaus and even McDonald don't stuff around after they have bowled the ball.
They turn and get back to their mark.
Brett Lee was a serial offender in this regard, his overs took an age and as such he was pivotal part of the over-rate problem. His habit of pausing at his mark for several seconds before bowling each ball also chewed up more time.
Brett Lee should get nowhere near the OZ team, his time is over, finito, piss off please