Post BF Upgrade Feedback - Click Here

Remove this Banner Ad

Peter Siddle

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Not looking good for Siddle, he looked the best he has all summer when he started consistently bowling near 150. But next day he has back soreness, so it looks like he won't be touching that mark again unless he remodels his action a bit.
 
redragger said:
Hastings is not an international standard bowler, mid to late 120s does not cut it at that level.
Click to expand...

I would say the exact same thing about Clint McKay, yet he has performed quite strongly at international level (although I'd still question how long that can last).

Hastings is only 24, yet he already has a good domestic record. 35 wickets in 9 Shield games at 20.77 and 12 wickets at 27 in the FRC is pretty impressive for a player his age. And he does bowl a bit quicker than 'mid to late 120s'.

He isn't ready for Test cricket but limited overs cricket is a different game, and I would have him in my team ahead of Siddle. But having said that, I would also have Ryan Harris ahead of both of them, so I'm not complaining....
 
Chris25 said:
I would say the exact same thing about Clint McKay, yet he has performed quite strongly at international level (although I'd still question how long that can last).

Hastings is only 24, yet he already has a good domestic record. 35 wickets in 9 Shield games at 20.77 and 12 wickets at 27 in the FRC is pretty impressive for a player his age. And he does bowl a bit quicker than 'mid to late 120s'.

He isn't ready for Test cricket but limited overs cricket is a different game, and I would have him in my team ahead of Siddle. But having said that, I would also have Ryan Harris ahead of both of them, so I'm not complaining....
Click to expand...

McKay won't make it at test level.

Hastings is also a good lower order bat and should get a shot in the limited overs form.
 
caboose said:
So, in other words, you're basing your call for someone to be included in an Australian team purely on what he has done in a mere handful of games. Against limited opposition, too.

As Spikey says, you can't select someone on that basis. Not unless they show something absolutely incredible, anyway. Hastings hasn't yet. He may do in time, but it's premature beyond belief to push him up to international level ahead of a host of more worthy contenders.



I can't believe you, of all people, have the gall to try this line out. Do you think people have short memories or something?

You, after all, were near-fanatical in telling us all prior to his utter humiliation at international level that McGain was clearly Australia's number one spinner and should be given an extended run in Test cricket.

One of the reasons you advanced over and over again when challenged by people who actually base their opinions of cricketers on their merits rather than simply where they come from was that he was such a great containing bowler and gave so few runs away per over.

But, unfortunately, when this inevitably exploded in your face, you were nowhere to be seen on here.

So please. Don't have the hide to accuse others of being too parochial for their own good. Lest you want to look like one of the biggest hypocrites of all time.
Click to expand...

Actually I'm basing it on Hastings' form in all 3 versions of the game at Domestic level (he is currently sitting equal 3rd on the wicket-taking list at Shield level).

The ODI's & upcoming T20 internationals are the perfect opportunity to give younger players an opportunity. Not all at once if you can avoid it, but with the amount of cricket that has been played in the last 12 months & will be played in the coming months, the workload for our frontline quicks is quite substantial. We have already seen Hilfy & Siddle struggling with injury, do we run Bollinger into the ground as well, or do we rotate the quicks, giving opportunities to some of the younger quicks e.g. McKay, Hastings, Cutting, Rimmington etc (all of whom have displayed some good form at Domestic level)?

As for McGain, he was one of the best performed spinners at Domestic level (he certainly took his wickets a lot cheaper than Krejza, who continues to regularly accumulate centuries at the bowling crease), but to the credit of the South Africans they had a plan to attack him from the outset & it worked admirably & McGain will never play Test cricket again. That's life. Very similar to how the Poms decided to bowl at Hughes' body & quickly sent him packing from the Test team. Fortunately Hughes is young & has time to work on his technique, which when confronted by good short-pitched bowling is found wanting. Unfortunately I have seen nothing this summer to suggest that Hughes has improved his technique against short pitched bowling.
 

Log in to remove this Banner Ad

mediumsizered said:
Actually I'm basing it on Hastings' form in all 3 versions of the game at Domestic level (he is currently sitting equal 3rd on the wicket-taking list at Shield level).
Click to expand...

Er, why would form at Shield level come into it unless you're simply dreaming up any reason you can think of for him to be picked for international limited overs games? Would you have made a case for Greg Mail to be picked in the Australian T20 team on the basis of his Shield form? Or someone like Jonathan Wells last season? Of course you wouldn't have.

mediumsizered said:
The ODI's & upcoming T20 internationals are the perfect opportunity to give younger players an opportunity. Not all at once if you can avoid it, but with the amount of cricket that has been played in the last 12 months & will be played in the coming months, the workload for our frontline quicks is quite substantial. We have already seen Hilfy & Siddle struggling with injury, do we run Bollinger into the ground as well, or do we rotate the quicks, giving opportunities to some of the younger quicks
Click to expand...

All true. Yet all a complete red herring as far as your argument goes. The bottom line is there are many bowlers (or all-rounders even if you see him as one of those) who should be ahead of him in the pecking order even if this is the approach the selectors take.

mediumsizered said:
As for McGain, he was one of the best performed spinners at Domestic level (he certainly took his wickets a lot cheaper than Krejza, who continues to regularly accumulate centuries at the bowling crease), but to the credit of the South Africans they had a plan to attack him from the outset & it worked admirably & McGain will never play Test cricket again. That's life.
Click to expand...

The basic reality is he should never have been selected for Test cricket in the first place. Anyone with any decent knowledge of state cricket knows that. Even putting to one side the fact that he was in his late 30s, his performances at state cricket were simply not good or consistent enough to demand he be selected. A spinner who wants to do ok at international level also almost always has to have quite a few attacking weapons in his armoury and not simply be a defensive bowler who waits for batsmen to make mistakes rather than actually causes them.

Fundamentally, you should ask yourself this question. If he had been a Western Australian, South Australian or Tasmanian, would you have been so strident and persistent about saying he must be picked? I know you won't admit it - but I think we all know deep down what the answer is.

It only reinforces the point that you're now pushing Hastings' name forward (ahead of a whole heap of others from the other states who have done more to prove themselves) after he has been in state cricket for the equivalent of all of about 5 minutes.
 
Peter Siddle isn't that bad, even if I'm Victorian.

Tests:
Matches: 17
Balls Bowled: 3,763
Wickets: 60
Bowling Average: 31.53
Five wickets in innings: 2
Best Bowling: 5/21.

Stats don't lair. :p
 
caboose said:
Er, why would form at Shield level come into it unless you're simply dreaming up any reason you can think of for him to be picked for international limited overs games? Would you have made a case for Greg Mail to be picked in the Australian T20 team on the basis of his Shield form? Or someone like Jonathan Wells last season? Of course you wouldn't have.
Click to expand...

To think that form in one variance of the game doesn't influence selectors in another is naive at best.

Hayden got back into the ODI side on his test form. Hussey was promoted up the Test ranks because of his ODI form.

Shaun Marsh is being touted in Test circles largely due to his performances in the shorter versions.

To me a bowler who can perform at shield cricket means they can actually deliver wicket taking balls. So if their OD form shows they take wickets - it's not just due to the fact that batsman have to hit out.
 
The problem with Siddle is he bowls too short. If its not in the exact perfect spot its a piece of cake for the batsmen to leave and if its slight wide or on the hips its a good chance of going for four. Also means the possibility of getting a batsmen LBW or bowled is greatly reduced.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

caboose said:
The basic reality is he should never have been selected for Test cricket in the first place. Anyone with any decent knowledge of state cricket knows that. Even putting to one side the fact that he was in his late 30s, his performances at state cricket were simply not good or consistent enough to demand he be selected. A spinner who wants to do ok at international level also almost always has to have quite a few attacking weapons in his armoury and not simply be a defensive bowler who waits for batsmen to make mistakes rather than actually causes them.
Click to expand...

Well this is a fairly stupid observation mate. The only spinner we have picked since Stuart McGill who actually had half decent domestic performances was McGain (the rest we picked from the freaking second XI's of each state) and you state those performances as a reason McGain should not have been picked. :rolleyes: Perceptive.

Not that McGain was up to it anyway, he needed to be perfect from day 1 and he was not.

On the other post about McKay not making it at Test level, I would not be so sure. I don't think much of him either but he has this habit of getting better and better.....I recall he used to a total liability in T20 but kept improving. Hopefully remains a Test depth bowler though, not convinced he has enough tricks to take scalps.
 
The 747 said:
No because Siddle has shown a capacity to learn from his mistakes, something Brett has never done.

So Siddle has potential to be better than Lee......and will thankfully shoot far less advertisments and dish out far less ghey celebrations....
Click to expand...

I'd say he's following the Brett Lee path quite well. When he started he ran in fast - bowled fast and got wickets and looked a world beater.

Now when his pace drops off he is shown to be a one-trick pony. The good news is he can get better - and Brett never did - but i wouldn't say he is learning from his mistakes - look at say his 1st 9 tests as opposed to his last 8. If he is learning so much - why is he going backwards?
 
The Falcon Strike said:
I'd say he's following the Brett Lee path quite well. When he started he ran in fast - bowled fast and got wickets and looked a world beater.

Now when his pace drops off he is shown to be a one-trick pony. The good news is he can get better - and Brett never did - but i wouldn't say he is learning from his mistakes - look at say his 1st 9 tests as opposed to his last 8. If he is learning so much - why is he going backwards?
Click to expand...

Also Lee was a level above most other fast bowlers in terms of speed.

Siddle can be amongst the fastest but doesn't stand out enough to take wickets from pure speed
 

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

The Falcon Strike said:
I'd say he's following the Brett Lee path quite well. When he started he ran in fast - bowled fast and got wickets and looked a world beater.

Now when his pace drops off he is shown to be a one-trick pony. The good news is he can get better - and Brett never did - but i wouldn't say he is learning from his mistakes - look at say his 1st 9 tests as opposed to his last 8. If he is learning so much - why is he going backwards?
Click to expand...

I didn't say he was learning I said he showed a capacity to learn. ;) Which Lee never had.

Personally I think he is going backwards for 2 reasons - 1) your second year in Test cricket is a lot harder, the opposition have studied you and worked out your strengths & weaknesses and 2) we keep playing him in ODI cricket when he should be back playing 4 day cricket for Victoria. Much rather we keep Harris around for ODI cricket and spell the horse.....
 
The 747 said:
I didn't say he was learning I said he showed a capacity to learn. ;) Which Lee never had.

Personally I think he is going backwards for 2 reasons - 1) your second year in Test cricket is a lot harder, the opposition have studied you and worked out your strengths & weaknesses and 2) we keep playing him in ODI cricket when he should be back playing 4 day cricket for Victoria. Much rather we keep Harris around for ODI cricket and spell the horse.....
Click to expand...

Good post mate, you're right on the money there. In my opinion Siddle has to work on his fitness. Like it or not, international cricket is a gruelling job these days and Siddle hasn't shown the ability to stay fit for a protracted period of time. It's clear that he needs to be at his best to make it at the highest level, because we see what happens when he's not firing.

Oh, and I can't wait 'til Bollinger shows his true form and starts bowling pies again. The 'Bogan Bollinger - Left Arm Krud' thread will not take long to get going. The Brett Lee pie machine thread is always waiting in the wings once he does another Fox Sports interview too...
 
The 747 said:
I didn't say he was learning I said he showed a capacity to learn. ;) Which Lee never had.
Click to expand...

same sh1t different shovel....

how do you know he has a capacity to learn if he hasn't already - some sort of brain scan stats i'm not aware of?
 
Bollinger hasn't been shit since about 2005. I think you might have to get used to the new him.


And Lee should never ever be in contention for the test team again, but he's still the first bowler I'd pick for ODI's.
 
Spikey said:
Bollinger hasn't been shit since about 2005. I think you might have to get used to the new him.
Click to expand...

He hasn't played India/Saffas/Poms yet. We shall see...

Spikey said:
And Lee should never ever be in contention for the test team again, but he's still the first bowler I'd pick for ODI's.
Click to expand...

Agree wholeheartedly with this post.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Remove this Banner Ad

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Back
Top Bottom