Cooley/punter/shipherd v McDermott/Clarke re: siddle

Remove this Banner Ad

dan warna

Brownlow Medallist
10k Posts
Oct 13, 2003
20,510
205
melbourne
AFL Club
St Kilda
I've been on here defending Siddle as a good ordinary bowler, a workhorse that picks up 20 overs plus a day. The draughthorse of the side, the guy who bowls the stock balls, and gets 2 wickets an innings. I argued that he was needed to protect they younger bowlers and would only ever be that. I argued that he should be in the side as that. I argued that he'd be collecting 200 odd wickets at 30 a piece and retire in 3 or 4 years time as another 'good' bowler.

Right now, he's a team racehorse, rarely gets more than 3 overs in a row. bowls at 145 kmp/h plus consistently, marginally slower than the fastest, but considerably faster than most fast bowlers. He seems to be fresh at the end of the day as at the start (as opposed to bowling 7 overs straight with the last 3 overs at 134-8 kmp/h). He rarely gets an extended bowling spell (even as long as harris or Hilfy). He often gets to bowl at the set batsmen, and rarely gets a crack at the soft wickets in the tail.

He would seem to be Clarke's death ray. Use sparingly and it will destroy your enemies, and let the lesser troops at the chaff.

I'm on the RHP thread defending Siddle as a GOP. this summer has seen him in the elite category.

IF this is consistent form we are going to see in the next 2 years, how much credit is due to McDermott and Clarke, changing the way we see and use Siddle?

Even in RSA siddle was the workhorse. Right now he is the racehorse. I would rate siddle ahead of any other bowler this summer based on the quality of wickets he's got, he seems to have torn apart many top orders as opposed to moping up tails.

I would suspect even Victoria didn't credit that Siddle was capable of this. He was supposed to be a workhorse who bowled well and ushered in a new era of fast bowlers, and then was going to step aside. His summer has been as good as any in recent years. by example his bowling average has dropped from 33 to 29, better than 10% improvement. throw in about 2 or 3 dropped catches from his efforts as well, and the fact he's taken close to 30 wickets at 18 ish.

I would never have expected this from siddle, I would have been pleased, based on his previous form at 20 wickets at 30 ish, and thought that would be par for him.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

It's funny that back in South Africa, those of us pushing the Siddle cart were having to defend him against people such as :

Johnson (easy enough to point out that take away his one effort in Perth and around that, his numbers were shocking, mid 50s avg's and going for too many runs an over)

Copeland (120kph strike bowler??? hardly!!)

Harris (Mr 1.5 tests it appeared)

and a whole array of youngsters (Pattinson, Cummins, Starc etc etc)

and Hilfy (even after the Ashes - the notion he could swing it, theoretically at least)

People went hard at Siddle. I'm not too sure exactly why. I thought his 1st innings at the Gabba in the Ashes was top class and he wasn't alone in the 2nd inns. He barely got a look in at Perth as Johnson and Harris took the spoils. Siddle's bowling effort at the MCG in the Ashes was a magnificent solo effort that showed just what is being talked about more and more now, his being a captains delight for his energy/work ethic etc etc.

It still bemused me that at Adelaide in the Ashes series, when Siddle bowled, the field was set effectively forcing him to bowl short. But, reality was, with dodgey new ball bowlers, and ordinary spin options - there was never any pressure being sustained.

So, as much as I love Sidds, and felt that he was too often the unlucky bowler and all that - - in the main, this summer, the bowling 'unit' (whoever it has been on the day) has been doing a great job. Siddle IS the common denominator. It may well be that he's the key. On Australia Day 2012 he certainly looked to be.
 
IMHO, the criticisms of Siddle were warranted. He would bowl with a lot of heart, but not a lot of brains.

The guy we are now watching, is just a completely different beast altogether.
 
People went hard at Siddle. I'm not too sure exactly why. I thought his 1st innings at the Gabba in the Ashes was top class and he wasn't alone in the 2nd inns. He barely got a look in at Perth as Johnson and Harris took the spoils. Siddle's bowling effort at the MCG in the Ashes was a magnificent solo effort that showed just what is being talked about more and more now, his being a captains delight for his energy/work ethic etc etc.

It was frustrating, people were bagging him for not being consistent but the best pitch they bowled on he barely got a bowl, sure he got spanked in Adelaide but its the flattest pitch in the world and the bowlers shouldnt be blamed because the batsmen get rolled cheaply on it

But Brisbane and Melbourne were 2 brilliant performances

The key difference this year is not only McDermott but no Johnson
 
We had every right to bag him at the time. Look at his lack of consistency of wickets, line and length and the way he leak runs. No-one can argue that.

Now he's done the "Merv Hughes" from 25 years ago, a bloke who most ordinary to the most aggressive, consistent and one of out best fast bowler, who bowls an extraordinary good line and length.

When things change our opinions must go with that. Now he's the first picked and can't do without him

Hilfenhaus is in a similar boat.

If Cummins follows up he effort in SA We can go with 4 quicks most games in a most aggressive manner not unlike the old West Indies. When Cummins and Pattinson develop further and physically mature and can be highly aggressive, consistent 150k bowlers to combine Siddle and Hilf/Starc/Harris etc...it will be very intimidating.
 
We had every right to bag him at the time. Look at his lack of consistency of wickets, line and length and the way he leak runs. No-one can argue that.

My problem at the time was that there was too much focus on Siddle, and especially for a period there was far, far too little focus on Johnson.

The impact of that one game in Perth was that a lot of people held onto that mental image of Johnson, and didn't look at his figures outside of that.

For the Ashes last year for example -
Total series
Johnson 15 at 36.93 at about 4.06 runs an over. So, scrappy and expensive.
Siddle 14 at 34.57 at about 3.29 an over. So, a bit expensive, but, relatively speaking, not as much a leaker.

however, remove the WACA test :

Johnson (didn't play the 2nd test either)
Johnon 6 at 78.67 at about 4.41 an over......so, now way should be retained on that output from a new ball bowler in 3 tests of 4 played.
Siddle 13 at 34.69 at about 3.36 an over.

To me, that shouted that Siddle well and truly had to be ahead of Johnson, and, perhaps it was only injury that ruled the day, as Johnson held his spot in SL where he still went at about 52 runs a wkt. And then in RSA where he managed 3/255.

After Siddles 'come back' in 3rd test in SL, the head to head there was Johnson 5-377 vs Siddle 8-296.

So, it astounded me that Siddle's head was seemingly first on the chopping block heading into the 1st test v NZ.

And, I'm deligthed that opinions have changed on him now. I do think though, that north of the Murray took a whole lot more convincing, the likes of Jim Maxwell on ABC radio took quite some time to come around on Sidds. Perhaps in their minds the likes of Bollinger, Copeland, Hazlewood and Starc were clearly ahead of Siddle??
 
My problem at the time was that there was too much focus on Siddle, and especially for a period there was far, far too little focus on Johnson.

The impact of that one game in Perth was that a lot of people held onto that mental image of Johnson, and didn't look at his figures outside of that.

For the Ashes last year for example -
Total series
Johnson 15 at 36.93 at about 4.06 runs an over. So, scrappy and expensive.
Siddle 14 at 34.57 at about 3.29 an over. So, a bit expensive, but, relatively speaking, not as much a leaker.

however, remove the WACA test :

Johnson (didn't play the 2nd test either)
Johnon 6 at 78.67 at about 4.41 an over......so, now way should be retained on that output from a new ball bowler in 3 tests of 4 played.
Siddle 13 at 34.69 at about 3.36 an over.

To me, that shouted that Siddle well and truly had to be ahead of Johnson, and, perhaps it was only injury that ruled the day, as Johnson held his spot in SL where he still went at about 52 runs a wkt. And then in RSA where he managed 3/255.

After Siddles 'come back' in 3rd test in SL, the head to head there was Johnson 5-377 vs Siddle 8-296.

So, it astounded me that Siddle's head was seemingly first on the chopping block heading into the 1st test v NZ.

And, I'm deligthed that opinions have changed on him now. I do think though, that north of the Murray took a whole lot more convincing, the likes of Jim Maxwell on ABC radio took quite some time to come around on Sidds. Perhaps in their minds the likes of Bollinger, Copeland, Hazlewood and Starc were clearly ahead of Siddle??

Although cricket is a game built for statistics, the problem with selectively removing one set of performances and retaining another is that you can build any argument you like.

You take out Johnson's WACA test but then don't take out Siddle's Gabba test, which is where he took the bulk of his wickets last summer.

I'm not saying that Johnson should still be playing for Australia, if fit, because he shouldn't. But you just need to be aware that Siddle was just as ordinary as Johnson last summer against the Poms.
 
Although cricket is a game built for statistics, the problem with selectively removing one set of performances and retaining another is that you can build any argument you like.

You take out Johnson's WACA test but then don't take out Siddle's Gabba test, which is where he took the bulk of his wickets last summer.

I'm not saying that Johnson should still be playing for Australia, if fit, because he shouldn't. But you just need to be aware that Siddle was just as ordinary as Johnson last summer against the Poms.

Actually Siddle had two good tests (Brisbane and Melbourne); obviously Johnson only had just the one.

Yes, Siddle's improvement has been profound. Although he still occasionally pitches too short, he's become a far more rounded bowler, seemingly capable of taking wickets on any surface because 1) he bowls far more intelligently (using old but effective tricks like bouncing batsmen before catching them flat footed on forward defensive strokes i.e - Kohli in Sydney) 2) pitching fuller means he swings the ball more whilst he can still seam it 3) shrewd usage by Clarke (not overbowling him and thus blunting his edge, using him to break partnerships etc.).

I did propose last year that he used as part of a horses-for-courses policy because his performance was clearly linked to the ground he was on; such an idea seems ludicrous now.
 
Full credit has to go to Mickey Arthur, Craig McDermott and Michael Clarke for issuing the challenge to Peter Siddle to rise to the occasion. He was left out of the 1st 2 test matches in Sri Lanka and he was told in no uncertain terms to pitch the ball up a bit further to allow for movement (seam or swing).

Our bowling attack has a disciplined look. James Pattinson and Peter Siddle are an excellent bowling combination, and with the inclusion of Patrick Cummins, Ben Hilfenhauss, Ryan Harris and Mitchell Starc will be vying for the last bowling spot in the attack.

Even though I was sceptical of CA employing a former test bowler, credit should be given to Craig McDermott for redeeming his image and persona in the eyes of the public. People do deserve second chances and Craig McDermott has made the most of his 2nd chance in life. He was mentored by DK Lillee and Trevor Hendy during his test career and he has imparted his wisdom to our fast bowling group.

And, it makes you wonder about Tasmanian Troy Cooley. Is not it a coincident that 3 Tasmanians along with Ricky Ponting were involved in our leanest period from 2007-2010 (Cox, Boon, Cooley and Ponting)? Cox and Boon have departed whilst Troy Cooley accepted the AIS coaching role in Queensland.

Troy Cooley could not get the best out of Peter Siddle whilst McDermott has got the best out of Siddle, Pattinson and Cummins.

THE GOV
 
I have been a Siddle fan ever since the second two tests of his second series. This was v South Africa 2008-09. What stood out to me at the time was the number of dismissals he was getting bowled or lbw. I really enjoyed the way he just homed in with subtle movements and with enough pace to beat the bat. This is a sign of a fast bowler with potential. Here are the scorecards:

http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/351682.html
http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/351683.html

Those matches and how he took those wickets along with his ability to bowl with the same power in over 20 as over 1 was good enough for me very early on.

The one thing which I think could take him from very good to fantastic would be if he could 'whip' his delivery action slightly more. However, this maybe near impossible.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

And, it makes you wonder about Tasmanian Troy Cooley. Is not it a coincident that 3 Tasmanians along with Ricky Ponting were involved in our leanest period from 2007-2010 (Cox, Boon, Cooley and Ponting)?

Not sure if it's a coincidence as such, more a fact. Whether it means anything is a different matter all together.
 
Siddle and Johnson were both crap last Summer.

Siddle, now, at the ground, doesnt look pedestrian anymore - he looks bloody dangerous, and it's great to see.

very good point - I managed the 4th day of the Melb test and as much as Pattinson and Hilfenhaus got wickets etc, it was Siddle that really seemed to raise the energy. (was it just me? was it the crowd? I dunno).

But, whatever it was, you felt that something was going to happen. Even in this 2nd inns in Adelaide, he's wicketless so far, but, been inches from his MO this summer of a wicket within the first 2 overs of a new spell - i.e. catch just short of Haddin, catch b/w Haddin and 1st slip (was that really a 1st slip??), and a ball juuust missing the off stump......my prediction is, after he finally got his bag that he'll go wicketless in this innings!!
 
Amount of times Siddle has removed each batsman;

Gambhir - 3
Sehwag - 2
Dravid - 2
Tendulkar - 3
Laxman - 2
Kohli - 3
Dhoni - 1
Ashwin - 3
Khan - 2
Yadav - 1

So 16 of Siddle's 22 wickets have been against India's top and middle order. Fair effort that.

Another interesting stat I picked up while looking through the scorecards is that Indian batsmen have made 30+, 24 times this series, Siddle has taken 10 of their wickets.
 
Although cricket is a game built for statistics, the problem with selectively removing one set of performances and retaining another is that you can build any argument you like.

You take out Johnson's WACA test but then don't take out Siddle's Gabba test, which is where he took the bulk of his wickets last summer.

I'm not saying that Johnson should still be playing for Australia, if fit, because he shouldn't. But you just need to be aware that Siddle was just as ordinary as Johnson last summer against the Poms.

There were a couple of primary reasons for looking specifically at Johnson away from Perth.

1. Perth was clearly the most (pace) bowler friendly track dished up in last years Ashes series.
2. of the Australia grounds, the WACA is clearly Johnson's preferred (based on stats), 30 wkts at 18.13 (vs SCG 15 at 37.2, MCG, 13 at 32.7, Hobart 5 at 56, Gabba 17 at 26.17 and Ade 19 at 23.78). If Johnson could bottle the WACA and take it everywhere with him, no doubt he would. He's almost a WACA specialist. That's part of the reason to isolate how he went head to head with Siddle when the conditions weren't quite so suited to him. That and, last year at the WACA, Siddle was a luxury as a 4th quick, barely required, and only got 1 wkt - not because he was poor, but, because he wasn't required. Missing a chance to bowl substantially on that track clearly distorts the comparisons where as in the other tests, there was no lack of opportunity.

btw - re
Although cricket is a game built for statistics, the problem with selectively removing one set of performances and retaining another is that you can build any argument you like.

so true, however, as the opponents of B.Hodge would argue, when a single performance very much skews the larger pool of output, then, perhaps it's worthy to remove those performances outside even just a single standard deviation. This is where we try to make an 'average' a little more meaningful.

For example, prior to this test, M.Clarke for the Indian series had scores of 31, 1, 18.......and 329*. That gave him a tally of 379 at an average of 126.33. We all know that he wasn't averaging a 100 every time he came to bat. That 329* provides a massive distortion, but, batters get that even in such a way that a bowler doesn't get any benefit of a 'not out' with respect to an innings being closed early!!!!
Actually, for Clarke, go back to 3rd test in SL at Colombo,
scores follow : 6, 112, 151, 2, 11, 2, 139, 22, 0, 31, 1, 329*, 18, 210, 37.

it's a little Marcus North(ish). A hundred or bust!!!
The 5 centuries provide 951 for 4 outs at avg of 237.75.
the other knocks provide 130 at 13.
If he fails to make 100, his top score is 37 and avg is 13. The combined tally, 1081 for 14 outs at 77.21.
Mathmatically, the avg is 71.4 across the sample, stdev is 97.77 so we'd statistically remove the 210 and 329*. His mode is 2 (pretty meaningless) but his median is 22 which is very far to the left of the average.
There's a shocking skew on his bell curve!!!!
 
Amount of times Siddle has removed each batsman;

Gambhir - 3 c Hussey, c Warner, c Ponting
Sehwag - 2 c&B, c Haddin
Dravid - 2 Bowled, c Cowan (also a bwld off a no ball)
Tendulkar - 3 c Ponting, Bowled, c Hussey
Laxman - 2 c Clarke, c Haddin
Kohli - 3 c Warner, c Haddin, c Haddin
Dhoni - 1 c Ponting
Ashwin - 3 LBW, c Haddin, c Cowan
Khan - 2 c Haddin, c Marsh
Yadav - 1 c Haddin

So 16 of Siddle's 22 wickets have been against India's top and middle order. Fair effort that.

Another interesting stat I picked up while looking through the scorecards is that Indian batsmen have made 30+, 24 times this series, Siddle has taken 10 of their wickets.

I filled in the modes of dismissal above......there's not been any 'cheap' dismissals amongst that lot.

Now, nothing against Starc, but, he got a couple which reminded me of Johnson the first time he bowled (at the WACA Starc did bowl better....but, so did Johnson). I've come to realise the 'left armers line' that can effectively pick up pretty cheap soft wickets for a leftie without having to be bowling well. Johnson I realise now had that left armers 'knack' of getting wickets even if not bowling well.....alas, in recent times he'd lost even that knack.
 
Siddle and Johnson were both crap last Summer.

Siddle, now, at the ground, doesnt look pedestrian anymore - he looks bloody dangerous, and it's great to see.

Johnston is a big disappointment. Has the potential but seems to always be distracted. Reminds me a lot of Brendan Julian. Both could bowl a Jaffa, but just not consistent enough.

I still think JOhnston in good form is still in our best side, but he just has to focus and be disciplined.
 
Love the fact Siddle is now effectively used as a hitman.

The crowd love him and get right behind him which really fires him up.

A fair description.

he's gone from the footsoldier, to the assassin. He barely bowls 10 to 15 overs a day, even when he gets a wicket, he's off after 3. Traditional thinking was to leave the bowler on for an over or two after a wicket, but no, he gets a wicket and clarke whips him off. At first I was critical of this, but look the proof is in the pudding. massive wickets at sub 20 for a season.

He often roots out established batsmen, rarely gets the new ball, and rarely gets to bowl at the tail.

And yet he's marginally behind Hilfy for most wickets, and the quality of his wickets could arguably be superior to hilfy's as well. Probably could have propped up his numbers by a 6 or 7 over spell on the tail, but no, clarke gets him off regardless after 3 overs.

Noted that he's bowling at between 145 and 150 for most of his overs. That is a good 5% up from 12 months ago.

Faster, more accurate, and more effective.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top