2015 ICC Cricket World Cup Final: New Zealand vs Australia - 29th March, 2.30pm AEDT @ MCG

Remove this Banner Ad

Status
Not open for further replies.
2003 and 2007 sides were the best two. Personally I preferred the 2007 side (just), you had the electric pace of Tait and Lee, the control of McGrath, then the spin of Hogg.

Still think the 2015 side is good without being great, with Starc practically carrying a pretty average attack half the time, and Steve Smith carrying our batting.

How soon we forget: Brett Lee didn't play in 2007 World Cup. Nathan Bracken, Tait and McGrath were the front line pacemen.
 
2003 and 2007 sides were the best two. Personally I preferred the 2007 side (just), you had the electric pace of Tait and Lee, the control of McGrath, then the spin of Hogg.

Still think the 2015 side is good without being great, with Starc practically carrying a pretty average attack half the time, and Steve Smith carrying our batting.
What?!?

Starc was in a different galaxy this tournament, but Johnson took 15 wickets at 21, Faulkner 10 wickets at 19, Hazlewood 7 at 25 (with a good economy). Even Maxwell chipped in with regular wickets. There's no way you can describe that as a 'pretty average attack'.

As for batting, you're forgetting that Maxwell averaged 64 for the tournament, and everyone else played their role. Finch looked out of his depth at times but still got a century and 81 in a semi final.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

What?!?

Starc was in a different galaxy this tournament, but Johnson took 15 wickets at 21, Faulkner 10 wickets at 19, Hazlewood 7 at 25 (with a good economy). Even Maxwell chipped in with regular wickets. There's no way you can describe that as a 'pretty average attack'.

As for batting, you're forgetting that Maxwell averaged 64 for the tournament, and everyone else played their role. Finch looked out of his depth at times but still got a century and 81 in a semi final.

Other World Cups we have had MULTIPLE people with 20 wickets, look at 2003 for evidence on that. I know the pitches were flatter this time, but the point stands. Starc carried this attack.

Forgot Maxwell, but even so that is 2 batsmen...you are being very generous counting Finch! Might as well count Warner while you are at it despite him having a horrendous WC!
 
What?!?

Starc was in a different galaxy this tournament, but Johnson took 15 wickets at 21, Faulkner 10 wickets at 19, Hazlewood 7 at 25 (with a good economy). Even Maxwell chipped in with regular wickets. There's no way you can describe that as a 'pretty average attack'.

As for batting, you're forgetting that Maxwell averaged 64 for the tournament, and everyone else played their role. Finch looked out of his depth at times but still got a century and 81 in a semi final.
Johnson especially stepped up in the knockouts. Not sure how you can call it average just because they weren't all taking their wickets @10 runs per wicket. Only conceded just over 600 in 3 knockout games in a hugely high scoring tournament
 
What?!?

Starc was in a different galaxy this tournament, but Johnson took 15 wickets at 21, Faulkner 10 wickets at 19, Hazlewood 7 at 25 (with a good economy). Even Maxwell chipped in with regular wickets. There's no way you can describe that as a 'pretty average attack'.

As for batting, you're forgetting that Maxwell averaged 64 for the tournament, and everyone else played their role. Finch looked out of his depth at times but still got a century and 81 in a semi final.

I thought it was notably a team effort that's why the Team of the Tournament probably won't be dominated by Aussies.

Also, they've shifted players around and in and out. It's probably only in the last three games that we've played exactly the same line-up.
 
I thought it was notably a team effort that's why the Team of the Tournament probably won't be dominated by Aussies.

Also, they've shifted players around and in and out. It's probably only in the last three games that we've played exactly the same line-up.
Maxwell, Smith and Starc would be the only locks for the team of the tournament in my mind.
 
How soon we forget: Brett Lee didn't play in 2007 World Cup. Nathan Bracken, Tait and McGrath were the front line pacemen.

They all bowled incredibly well in 2007 as well, i think people tend to rate the 2007 WC win lower than others because of the piss poor organization, the time the games were on and the farcical near darkness finish but we really did dominate that cup more than any other.
 
Remember when saying "Steve Smith" would get an American Dad! joke?

On that note I'm going to bed.
 
What?!?

Starc was in a different galaxy this tournI dent, but Johnson took 15 wickets at 21, Faulkner 10 wickets at 19, Hazlewood 7 at 25 (with a good economy). Even Maxwell chipped in with regular wickets. There's no way you can describe that as a 'pretty average attack'.

As for batting, you're forgetting that Maxwell averaged 64 for the tournament, and everyone else played their role. Finch looked out of his depth at times but still got a century and 81 in a semi final.
Shame u dont hav a selfie as your avatar.You are one damn stunner,side note,my ex's name was sylvia,and i think of u once,i promise;)
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Still think the 2015 side is good without being great, with Starc practically carrying a pretty average attack half the time, and Steve Smith carrying our batting.[/QUOTE]

Pretty average attack ?.. Geez if you don't want them we'll take them !
Only thing missing is a decent spinner.

Starc will become one of the great ODI players if he stays fit. 150km ,left arm, swings it both conventionally and reverse. Hes the full package
 
Which match was the best of the tournament?
NZ v SA was a belter

couple of the minnow games were excellent too, AFG vs SCO was a great contest, WI vs IRE also a great game
 
Other World Cups we have had MULTIPLE people with 20 wickets, look at 2003 for evidence on that. I know the pitches were flatter this time, but the point stands. Starc carried this attack.

1999 - 12 matches - 1 bowler with 20+
2003 - 11 matches - 2 bowlers with 20+
2007 - 11 matches - 3 bowlers with 20+
2011 - 6 matches - 0 bowlers with 20+
2015 - 8 matches - 1 boers with 20+

So sure, in 2003 we had 2 bowlers with 20+ wickets, but Aus also played 3 more games.
 
2007 probably had the most rounded side, an people forget how good Brett Lee was, an that was when he was at his quickest. Pretty sure Tait playe in that one too. Great attack. Then you have matchwinners in Gilchrist, Ponting, etc


Pretty sure Lee was out injured in 2007..Tait replaced him
 
The difference is I couldn't care less that New Zealand lost, since you know.... I am not a Kiwi :p

Who suggested you were a New Zealander
In fact I would suggest nobody gives a toss who you support.
Your rhetoric displays you are not an Australian Cricket supporter who clearly is a hater of Clarke though.
 
Hard to go past NZ v SA for me. Most even contest between bat and ball.

I agree it was a great contest. The best of the tournament.
If the rain had not intervened though I do believe South Africa would have scored in the high three hundreds which would have made the chase somewhat more difficult.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top