Aus Loss Proves Two Previous Threads

[Knackers]

Australia's loss to England in the 5th Test and also their stumbling in their 2nd innings in Melbourne offers some proof and clear answers on two previous threads.

1. Australia is NOT a better team than the mighty Windies of the 80s.

2. Warne is still head and shoulders above MacGill.

Both MacGill and Lee bowled some absolute rubbish on their home pitch, the 5th test also demonstrates that Australia are in deep trouble without Warne and McGrath as strike bowlers.

Gillespie is a great supporting bowler, and Bichel can produce some tight and thoughtful bowling. Lee in my opinion is way overrated and MacGill simply has no control or guile to frustrate good batsmen.

 

[Wicked Lester]

Originally posted by Knackers
Australia's loss to England in the 5th Test and also their stumbling in their 2nd innings in Melbourne offers some proof and clear answers on two previous threads.

1. Australia is NOT a better team than the mighty Windies of the 80s.

2. Warne is still head and shoulders above MacGill.

Both MacGill and Lee bowled some absolute rubbish on their home pitch, the 5th test also demonstrates that Australia are in deep trouble without Warne and McGrath as strike bowlers.

Gillespie is a great supporting bowler, and Bichel can produce some tight and thoughtful bowling. Lee in my opinion is way overrated and MacGill simply has no control or guile to frustrate go
od batsmen.

Knackers

1. I agree. The Windies didn't lose a series for around 15 years. We have about 13 years to go. I wonder at the pressure that this team is under to complete clean sweeps. Obviously the Windies would have tried to win each test they played. We however publicly declare it as our intention before each series. At the moment the team looks to me to be mentally and physically exhausted and of more concern the injuries are mounting.

2. Warne is way above McGill.

As for Lee I think he is showing glimpses that he could be a very good new ball bowler in years to come - but I doubt he will be another McGrath - he and Warne are once in a generation players and we have been blessed to have them in the same team.

This test has certainly shown that our bowling stocks are not quite as deep as some believe.

 

[bluechampion]

hang on...

While it's true that our bowling in this test was sub-standard, it must be noted that it was the last test of a ling summer where we dominated. Our bowlers essentially bowled for two and a half days straight in melbourne, then had to bowl first in this test, with only a couple of days break.

Gillespie was well down on form, and Lee showed glimpses of what he could be when he actually thinks instead of gets carried away with himself.

MacGill is in bad form, but was chosen because for years he deserved the chance, but Warnie was in the way.

Bichel is a back-up bowler, like a Reiffel or a Fleming. He's a third paceman, who bowled some excellent spells, contributed with the bat, and is a top team-man.

This has little reflection on the future of Australian Cricket. It is a reflection of the situation at the end of a long summer.

Before he hit the international scene, Warnie didn't look like he'd make it. That could be the case with a number of bowlers.
Who knows - maybe Rofe or Noffke are the next big things?
Maybe Shane Harwood will have a Colin Miller-like impact on international cricket?
Maybe Cameron White will develop into a quality all-rounder and give the side added flexibility?
Maybe Michael Clarke will be the next Mark Waugh (handy with bat and ball, and tops in the field).


Any of these things could happen. It's too early to call the death of Australian Cricket.

 

[P76]

I don't think the Wicked One is fortelling the death of Australian cricket at all, what he is saying, and I agree with him, is that we have been unbelievably lucky to have two absolute bowling champions in the same side, and that what we saw in the 5th test is a glimpse of what is to come. Let's just say that Noffke and Rofe do become solid test cricketers with a bowling average of 28, and White a good alrounder with a bowling ave. around the same (which is good for a leggie) - still a hell of a lot of a difference to what we've got now.

 

[Dogwatcher]

I also think people are being a little harsh on MacGill.
Sure he bowled some tripe, but what leg spinner apart from WARNE, doesnt?
Virtually every leg spinner thats played test cricket bowls dodgy spells, except Warne - he is something way out of the box and it will be a long time before we see a talent like that again.
We've just been spoilt.

 

[NathanD]

Originally posted by Dogwatcher
I also think people are being a little harsh on MacGill.
Sure he bowled some tripe, but what leg spinner apart from WARNE, doesnt?
Virtually every leg spinner thats played test cricket bowls dodgy spells, except Warne - he is something way out of the box and it will be a long time before we see a talent like that again.
We've just been spoilt.

Not only that, but given the years that Warne has had at the top, he is bound to be a much better bowler given over a decade of bowling at the highest level. If MacGill had had the same opportunities he'd be a different bowler.

 

[Becker]

Originally posted by Knackers
Australia's loss to England in the 5th Test and also their stumbling in their 2nd innings in Melbourne offers some proof and clear answers on two previous threads.

1. Australia is NOT a better team than the mighty Windies of the 80s.

2. Warne is still head and shoulders above MacGill.

Huh? How does that prove anything? Think back to the 1984-85 series when the WIndies were at their peak. They only beat a poor Australian team 3-1. They won the first three, could only manage a draw in the 4th, and were hopelessly thrashed in the 5th test. Just because Australia lost the final Test doesn't prove a thing.

 

[P76]

Becker Becker Becker.....the POINT is that the Windies didn't lose a test series for 15 years.

 

[DaveW]

Re: Re: Aus Loss Proves Two Previous Threads

Originally posted by Becker
Huh? How does that prove anything? Think back to the 1984-85 series when the WIndies were at their peak. They only beat a poor Australian team 3-1. They won the first three, could only manage a draw in the 4th, and were hopelessly thrashed in the 5th test. Just because Australia lost the final Test doesn't prove a thing.

Indeed, the West Indies regularly lost at the very same ground Australia lost at - the SCG. In 1988/89, Allan Border took 11 wickets against them. How does today's loss prove anything?

 

[P76]

Re: Re: Re: Aus Loss Proves Two Previous Threads

Originally posted by DaveW
Indeed, the West Indies regularly lost at the very same ground Australia lost at - the SCG. In 1988/89, Allan Border took 11 wickets against them. How does today's loss prove anything?

Point 1 - there is quite a bit of difference between the Windies losing at the SCG and Australia losing at the same venue. The Windies of that era were acknowledged as being weak vs. spin of any sort, and the SCG suits our attack - both arguments in reverse against us now.

Point 2 - Knackers states that this shows that the Windies were a better side than this one - the argument, as shown in the previous thread, can go on forever, but the fact is that the Windies were undefeated for 15 years, which this team has not been, and couldn't get a clean sweep agin arguably the worst English side to tour here since the last clean sweep. Now there are many reasons why they didn't achieve that, but they have cast the mud into there own faces by talking up their ability to do that.

Don't get me wrong, I love the Oz side, I just think it is a huge call to call them the best ever, as some pundits do.

 

[Becker]

Originally posted by P76
Becker Becker Becker.....the POINT is that the Windies didn't lose a test series for 15 years.

Once again, how does the result of this last Test prove that point? Australia WON 4-1.

 

[Bomber Spirit]

Just like the West Indies did in 1984/85 and 1988/89, the Australians lost a dead rubber Test at the SCG. Nothing to be too concerned about.
But you're right about MacGill. He's not in Warne's class, or anywhere near it.

 

[Knackers]

Yesterday's loss by Australia proves that they are not as good as the 80s Windies because they can't handle the pressure of batting second and chasing runs, the Windies weren't intimidated by this scenario.

Australia's weakness has always been chasing a low score to win a match as shown also in Melbourne.

People are far too quick to compare this Aussie side against the great Windies of the 80s. In my opinion they are not in the same class.

Great sides do not capitulate twice in two tests.