Ok what the hell is going on with Starc

[Pykie]

And the fact that he's seen as a Strike bowler and Siddle isn't. I'll address some of your other crappy points later but right now I have a business to run.

What goods a "strike bowler" when his great SR is built off of skittling no 9, 10 & 11's?


A strike bowler is Dale Steyn or Rabada.

A bowler that can dismiss any batsman.

Not Mitchell Starc.

 

[Ok Boomer]

You said he was very average ALWAYS has been. For 2016 he was judged our best Test bowler. How can that be VERY average?

I'm talking about an entire body of work over many years. You're cherry picking one year which really only included one good series against Sri Lanka and two series at home where he still averaged over 30 with the ball. Yes, the reality is that his body of work throughout his test career is very average, especially considering the gifts he has. He leaks more runs per over and relies on more tail end wickets than any of his contemporaries. The only twisted argument is yours.





Now jog on and run your useless business because you clearly have no idea.

 

[Crankitup]

I'm talking about an entire body of work over many years. You're cherry picking one year which really only included one good series against Sri Lanka and two series at home where he still averaged over 30 with the ball. Yes, the reality is that his body of work throughout his test career is very average, especially considering the gifts he has. He leaks more runs per over and relies on more tail end wickets than any of his contemporaries. The only twisted argument is yours.

View attachment 741952
View attachment 741953
View attachment 741954

Now jog on and run your useless business because you clearly have no idea.

All that crappy analysis to try and cover up the fact that your original statement was wrong. If you'd just said 'usually' instead of 'always' we wouldn't have wasted all this time because I wouldn't have had much of an issue to take up with you.

always
adverb
al·ways | \ ˈȯl-wēz , -wəz, -(ˌ)wāz also ˈȯ- \
Definition of always

1: at all times

 

[Crankitup]

@Thomas2 Starcy going alright today isn't he? Could have used him bowling to Stokes in the last test.

 

[Ok Boomer]

@Thomas2 Starcy going alright today isn't he? Could have used him bowling to Stokes in the last test.

Nice of him to start bowling stuff that is remotely close to test match standard after the rubbish he served up at the start of the innings.

A perfect encapsulation of his test career. Some magic with a lot of rubbish = very average. 2/66 at an economy of 3.74 as we speak.

You do not need a dictionary to confirm that.

 

[Crankitup]

Nice of him to start bowling stuff that is remotely close to test match standard after the rubbish he served up at the start of the innings.

A perfect encapsulation of his test career. Some magic with a lot of rubbish = very average. 2/66 at an economy of 3.74 as we speak.

You do not need a dictionary to confirm that.

3 fer now at a better E/R than Broad in Australia's 1st innings.

 

[Bradesmaen]

3/80, what a massive job that was. He managed to beat his England average by picking up the 10th batter. Superstar.

 

[Crankitup]

3/80, what a massive job that was. He managed to beat his England average by picking up the 10th batter. Superstar.

Jaundiced eye glasses on again I see. Someone has to get the last batsman out. We couldn't quite manage it in the last test. Also got Stokes out which we also struggled to do when it really mattered. Same number of wickets as Broad in the first innings at a better E/R to boot.

 

[Bradesmaen]

View attachment 742385

Jaundiced eye glasses on again I see. Someone has to get the last batsman out. We couldn't quite manage it in the last test. Also got Stokes out which we also struggled to do when it really mattered. Same number of wickets as Broad in the first innings at a better E/R to boot.

I mean I'm not the one wanking off Starc with this incredibly blind defence of him.

 

[Crankitup]

I mean I'm not the one wanking off Starc with this incredibly blind defence of him.

The only blind defense going on here is you of your incredible bias. Why not just admit he has done a good job against England in that innings? Nup, your blind hate won't let you do that. If he scores a century and then gets 6 for * all you still wouldn't let your pride do so. Unmentionable **** of the highest order.

 

[Bradesmaen]

The only blind defense going on here is you of your incredible bias. Why not just admit he has done a good job against England in that innings? Nup, your blind hate won't let you do that. If he scores a century and then gets 6 for fu** all you still wouldn't let your pride do so. Unmentionable **** of the highest order.

But he didn't? 3/80 after they had already scored 200? If he bowled properly early then we could have had them out for below 200. Jesus christ use your brain kid.

 

[Crankitup]

But he didn't? 3/80 after they had already scored 200? If he bowled properly early then we could have had them out for below 200. Jesus christ use your brain kid.

He didn't get a third spell yesterday waldo. All because of precious concerns about E/R. He got the key wickets today when no one else looked like doing so and in the end his E/R was fine. Better than Broads in the 1st innings. He would've had a 4th wicket too if Paine didn't burn all our reviews on crap. You are brain dead.

 

[frankrizzo]

3/80, what a massive job that was. He managed to beat his England average by picking up the 10th batter. Superstar.

His second new ball bowling was very good, he was very poor earlier but credit to him he pulled it back well.

 

[Ishikawa]

I think the hierarchy has managed the bowlers in this series superbly. Used everyone to their best effect. Starc is no exception, has got his weapons that are extremely handy at times but also flaws when expected to provide something more substantial and prolonged with the red ball. Be interesting to see how they all sit once Richardson's back, I'd presume he takes Siddles spot in the set-up but you never know given Siddle's cricketing obituary has bee written a few times. So potentially it is Starc who drops back.

 

[Pykie]

So for all the "suck it Starc haterz"

He took 4 wickets @ 31.50, 57 SR at an economy rate of 3.32.

Pretty much inline with his career average other than the higher SR.


I will give him credit, he get some key pegs at key times.

I just don't think he suits this bowling attacking moving forward however.

Pattinson/Richardson should be the 3rd bowling option moving forward depending on conditions.

 

[The Speaker]

So for all the "suck it Starc haterz"

He took 4 wickets @ 31.50, 57 SR at an economy rate of 3.32.

Pretty much inline with his career average other than the higher SR.


I will give him credit, he get some key pegs at key times.

I just don't think he suits this bowling attacking moving forward however.

Pattinson/Richardson should be the 3rd bowling option moving forward depending on conditions.

Pretty much agreed

 

[The Passenger]

This test did encapsulate his career. Bowled poorly on Friday, bowled well Saturday morning (although again, not without some poor balls). Not great, but not terrible in the fourth innings.

If he doesn't get those two wickets on Saturday morning I think it would have been hard for the selectors to have any more faith in him for the short term, assuming the rest of the test pans out the same way. Two balls before the Bairstow wicket he bowled an absolute shocker that went to the boundary and I must admit I thought Starc could be in a for a very rough morning.

With the Ashes in the bag, Cummins on the back of a huge tour and I expect to be rested, I think Starc will get the fifth test. They'll probably want to have another look at him as well.

He really is an enigma. When you look at him, he's got just about everything you want in a quick bowler. Tall, quick, swing it, bowls left arm as a bonus. But goes to show how important consistency is at test level and in many ways is the most underrated trait of a test bowler.

 

[Mego Red]

Clearly should be playing in this test. Ludicrous selections.

 

[Howard Littlejohn]

Clearly should be playing in this test. Ludicrous selections.

Coming in to the series this was the only ground I would have considered him. But after he played at Old Trafford, I reckon I would have gone Pattinson over Siddle for The Oval. (Especially if MMarsh is playing - which even in the circumstance I was against, less so than normal but still didn't like it. Playing Siddle as a long-spell relieving bowler and a fifth bowler as well makes no sense. Well, apart from the fact the bowlers are scoring as much as most of the batsmen I guess.)

 

[Crankitup]

Clearly should be playing in this test. Ludicrous selections.

As well as bowling better than Siddle he probably would have reached 50 again which would've been very handy.

 

[The Convert]

I think we are going to starve England of runs.
They'll get themselves out.
Even when siddle wasnt getting wickets he was bowling tight. Starc goes for 3 1/2 runs an over

I love it when hes bowling at 150k and scaring batsmen but he can lose it and get cained

If things go badly the aussie bowlers are still strangling England at 2 runs an over

Langer might be bng but hes inside the heads of this English side and dishing them a savage beating with a great bowling line up and an adequate batting squad

Without smith we would be getting absolutely flogged


On SM-G950F using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[to1994]

As well as bowling better than Siddle he probably would have reached 50 again which would've been very handy.

Has a batting average of 22, nothing to suggest that or are you saying we can count on Mitch Marsh for a fifty every Test too?

Siddle was poor but because he didn't bowl well we turned to Marsh who picked up 5. I dare say he wouldn't have out bowled him so the difference was negligible.

I still stand by moving Starc on from Test level, I just don't think it's a format that suits him despite a solid overall record. Let him prolong his career in ODIs so we can get two more World Cups out of him and focus on Pattinson/Richardson for Tests.

 

[Crankitup]

Has a batting average of 22, nothing to suggest that or are you saying we can count on Mitch Marsh for a fifty every Test too?

Siddle was poor but because he didn't bowl well we turned to Marsh who picked up 5. I dare say he wouldn't have out bowled him so the difference was negligible.

I still stand by moving Starc on from Test level, I just don't think it's a format that suits him despite a solid overall record. Let him prolong his career in ODIs so we can get two more World Cups out of him and focus on Pattinson/Richardson for Tests.

Never come across the word 'probably' before? I based that assertion on the fact that in his last innings he batted better than I've ever seen him bat before and they weren't able to get him out despite him swinging the bat. His average in England (29) is also higher than his overall average. It's obvious we won't see eye to eye on this though. Just like we won't agree on your 'I dare say ...' comment, which I totally reject.

 

[gbatman]

I could be wrong but Starc has all the talent in the world and no guts. Reckon he's lazy and doesn't put in, doesn't push through hard.

Warnie has called him out on a number of times. He's not wrong. We all know how quick he can bowl a but boy has he played a lot of cricket bowling well under pace.

Why isn't he in this side? Can he not bowl well if he's sore or a bit underdone?

I don't know what's going on here but he bowled well the last test and we are playing an over cooked Siddle ahead of him.

 

[LukeParkerno1]

I don't know what's going on here but he bowled well the last test and we are playing an over cooked Siddle ahead of him.

He bowled well in one innings, lets to over exaggerate his performance, and in that innings he was poor for half of it- was good on the second part of the first innings. In many ways that match typified Starc. We really missed Jhye Richardson badly.