Peter Siddle

[Adelaide Hawk]

He annoys me at times when he overdoes the short crap but I do enjoy watching him fire up, and he deserves wickets on effort alone.

 

[sherb]

This.

Pretty weird to see any bowler being praised when his team has just conceded over 500 (again), not to mention a first innings deficit of more than 400.

I don't follow the logic.

The bloke takes six wickets in a score of 500 and he shouldn't be praised?

He's managed to do what none of his fellow bowlers have - take wickets.

 

[Bomber Bears]

6/75 not worth a mention eh?

Has taken "6 for" twice in 6 innings

Most wickets for Aust @ 28 for the series.

An invaluable 35no in the 1st innings at Perth.

Inconsistent? yep but cut the bloke some slack - he's our youngest bowler playing in his 20th test match. Just needs to fine tune a few things.

His upside/future is far better than anything else we have at the moment.

6 for twice in 6 innings, but has also only taken 1 wicket in four other innings - when he bowled short and shit. HAS to use his brain, and i'd prefer consistency.

I dont expect bags every time he bowls or anything, but i expect him to bowl consistently, ie pitch it up (which actually makes him effective), and he'll then become a more consistent bowler.

 

[Outshined]

While he obviously needs to improve his consistency and reduce the wicketless gaps he has had this series, there's no doubt now in my mind that Siddle needs to be our strike bowler. Call it knee-jerk if you want, but there are worse things we could do then let him lead the attack in Sydney. Johnson is fantastic when everything suits him, but since international batsmen have figured out you don't have to play at the wide shit, he's been toothless. It's no coincidence that once the breeze at the WACA helped him start swinging the ball back into the right handers, they started playing at everything 2 feet outside off.

Can't believe some are saying Siddle's performance in Perth was bad. He bowled 13 overs in the whole game! Add to that Ponting making him bowl short at England (which did get him his wicket but overall was ineffective) and you can hardly call it a suitable performance to base criticism on.

Another positive is that so far (fingers crossed), he has eliminated that one four ball he used to give up every over.

 

[Knight Ryders]

People need to get a grip.

He bowled poorly in Adelaide where the wicket was a road and so did everyone else. Didn't bowl enough in WACA to be judged.

Our best bowler in Brisbane and Melbourne.

You can all call for the likes of Copeland and co, but Siddle is the only one proving he can take multiple wickets at test level. He's only played test cricket for 2 seasons, so he will only get better. You can bookmark this, he is and will be our number 1 bowler for some time to come.

Haters are going to hate.

 

[ptrg]

6 for twice in 6 innings, but has also only taken 1 wicket in four other innings - when he bowled short and shit. HAS to use his brain, and i'd prefer consistency.

I dont expect bags every time he bowls or anything, but i expect him to bowl consistently, ie pitch it up (which actually makes him effective), and he'll then become a more consistent bowler.

What an absolutely stupid post!
Let's go through it for all you brain dead sheep..

1st test, Siddle took 6 wickets of 11 for the game..

2nd test, Siddle took none of the 5 wickets that Australia got in the entire game! He didn't even get a chance at a second innings!

3rd test, Siddle bowled 13 overs! For the entire game! And still took a wicket!

4th test, Siddle took 6 wickets out of ten...

So that's 13 of the 46 wickets taken by Australia, which is more than a quarter of our wickets!

Wanna pull up all the other bowlers stats while we're at it?

 

[Dixie Flatline]

This.

Pretty weird to see any bowler being praised when his team has just conceded over 500 (again), not to mention a first innings deficit of more than 400.

Shocking effort from the entire team so far in this series, and only Hussey and Watson can really walk away with their heads held anywhere above the vertical atm.

The bowlers, Siddle large among them, have been horrendous.

Siddle bowled 30+ overs against the Poms and conceded only about 15% of the runs that they scored. He took six wickets and was involved in eight dismissals. For good measure, he was third top scorer in the first innings. He was the only reliable bowler Ponting had at his disposal, with Johnson reverting to his left-arm rat shit and Hilfenhaus not looking like taking a wicket until presented with a couple of bunnies.

We don't know what instructions Siddle had in Perth - perhaps he was told to bowl short by Ponting?

 

[Cousin Jed]

What an absolutely stupid post!
Let's go through it for all you brain dead sheep..

You kind of missed the point. The point was that he wasn't worried so much about the wickets taken as the fact that he seems to take wickets when he pitches it up most of the time, but struggles when he reverts to bowling a lot of short stuff.

 

[Bomber Bears]

What an absolutely stupid post!
Let's go through it for all you brain dead sheep..

1st test, Siddle took 6 wickets of 11 for the game..

2nd test, Siddle took none of the 5 wickets that Australia got in the entire game! He didn't even get a chance at a second innings!

3rd test, Siddle bowled 13 overs! For the entire game! And still took a wicket!

4th test, Siddle took 6 wickets out of ten...

So that's 13 of the 46 wickets taken by Australia, which is more than a quarter of our wickets!

Wanna pull up all the other bowlers stats while we're at it?

Did you watch him bowl in Adelaide and second innings Brisbane? It was back to short rubbish, and he has a tendency to revert to short rubbish, which is why he was mediocre in test cricket bar a few bright spells before this series. As seen in this series when he pitches it up he's a good bowler. When he drops hort he's not effective, doesnt have a particularly menacing short ball and simply looks unthreatening. Im not saying he's been worse than others, although I think Harris outbowled him the last two tests pretty comfortably, but none of the bowlers have been consistently good. What im saying is if he's going to continue to bowl for Australia he should keep bowling with a brain and pitch it up, because this series has clearly shown thats where he is effective. If he pitches it up more often than not he's more likely to be a consistent wicket taker with the occasional bag which we want him to be.

 

[The Passenger]

i'm starting to come along to the lines of thinking that siddle and johnson can't play in the same team together. if neither are on, which is going to happen fairly often, then we are playing with only two bowlers.

and as it is siddle is in better form over the course of this series. his best wouldn't be quite as good as johnson's, but his worst is far better than Johnson's worst....

 

[Wallaby]

Did you watch him bowl in Adelaide and second innings Brisbane? It was back to short rubbish, and he has a tendency to revert to short rubbish, which is why he was mediocre in test cricket bar a few bright spells before this series. As seen in this series when he pitches it up he's a good bowler. When he drops hort he's not effective, doesnt have a particularly menacing short ball and simply looks unthreatening. Im not saying he's been worse than others, although I think Harris outbowled him the last two tests pretty comfortably, but none of the bowlers have been consistently good. What im saying is if he's going to continue to bowl for Australia he should keep bowling with a brain and pitch it up, because this series has clearly shown thats where he is effective. If he pitches it up more often than not he's more likely to be a consistent wicket taker with the occasional bag which we want him to be.

You do know that Cricinfo has a hawk-eye pitch map facility whereby you can get all the screen shots you get from the TV? If you look at Siddle's pitch map for all his bowling, there is not a lot of difference between the innings. In fact I would be tempted to say that in the second innings at Brisbane he pitched the ball up the most he has this summer - and he took 0-for plenty.

http://www.espncricinfo.com/the-ashes-2010-11/engine/match/428749.html?view=hawkeye

He has taken wickets this summer with the short ball - and with the full-length ball. There's more to bowling than just 'pitch it up, son'. You need variation - you need to bowl to a plan for each batsman.

 

[smasha]

VIC once again showed them how it's done.

Siddle has done his job and I see him as a solid support bowler and he has actually been better than that.

Our main bowlers have got lesser figures.

Lets not forget his catching and batting skills.

Hmm being Victorian got anything to do with the bagging he cops?

I would think so.

To be honest in this series the bowlers aren't to blame ,it's the deplorable batting.

How are you supposed to have confidence when you're bowling to a 98 total?

Siddle keeps his spot.

He tries his guts out which is more that can be said for the others.

Clarke,the NSW golden boy gets 9 lives while blokes like Hodge who make 200 get the arse.

Us Victorians know the BS that goes on.

 

[Outshined]

This whole Vic vs NSW bias conspiracy is just getting sad now. Everyone needs to grow up. Seriously. Both states are producing cricketers who could potentially get us out of the situation we are in now, how hard is that to accept?

 

[Jimthegreat]

After bagging him best I give him credit for an excellent, sustained spell of bowling. So good to see him bowl 33 overs in the right areas. He was the only one who put pressure on the bats (did i just say that?!!!...lol). He wasn't dissimilar in Perth or the short time he bowled. No chance to judge him there though in 13 overs. As I said though, want to see this Test after Test, not one, like many others, save their spot then play crap for 4 Tests. If he can bowl like that each Test, even if he doesn't get the figures, we'd all be happy and he can stay forever. Not the pile of wickets one innings then poo for the next few as he has done. Hopefully the penny has dropped.

He got so no support here. Johnson was awful again, Harris, we found, had a stress fracture of the ankle and will be out for a while, Hilfenhaus bowled straight bit did nothing again and Smith still has the "L Plates" on.

 

[smasha]

This whole Vic vs NSW bias conspiracy is just getting sad now. Everyone needs to grow up. Seriously. Both states are producing cricketers who could potentially get us out of the situation we are in now, how hard is that to accept?

Totally agree with you.

It's just that Vic players find it ten times harder to get a baggy green than all other states maybe with the exception of Sth Australia.

I actually suggested to drop Siddle for Beer for this game on the cricket boards(in the last test thread).

So no bias from me.

Just find it funny though when a VIC does well everyone bags him.

VICs just have a harder time getting into the Aussie team and it's nothing to do with them being worse players.

 

[Outshined]

Totally agree with you.

It's just that Vic players find it tens times harder to get a baggy green than all other states maybe with the exception of Sth Australia..

It may seem that way, but the ineptidute of the Aussie selectors runs further than a simple bias towards NSW or any other states besides Victoria. Khawaja has had two excellent seasons, and is still yet to debut even when we struggled against Pakistan and the West Indies last year! Copeland is averaging 18 when our bowlers (besides the Victorian Siddle ) can barely take a wicket. I know many Vics on here will point to the Hodge situation, which was definitely a farce, but currently the guys from Victoria like Finch, Pattinson and White who are there or thereabouts are just slightly behind other players who are funnily enough, from NSW.

I'm sure all on here would be much more welcoming of NSW young guns if the selectors were actually playing the ones who are ready for international cricket instead of Smith and Hughes.

 

[rocker_oz33]

siddle has done very well for him self picked up a hatty in the first test and bowled very and caught well in this test.l thought he was abit lucky to get back into the team after along lay off (injury) but good one him.

 

[Jimthegreat]

You do know that Cricinfo has a hawk-eye pitch map facility whereby you can get all the screen shots you get from the TV? If you look at Siddle's pitch map for all his bowling, there is not a lot of difference between the innings. In fact I would be tempted to say that in the second innings at Brisbane he pitched the ball up the most he has this summer - and he took 0-for plenty.

http://www.espncricinfo.com/the-ashes-2010-11/engine/match/428749.html?view=hawkeye

He has taken wickets this summer with the short ball - and with the full-length ball. There's more to bowling than just 'pitch it up, son'. You need variation - you need to bowl to a plan for each batsman.

Between the Brisbane 1st inning and the 1st inning here he had about 1/250 with two consecutive 0/100s. It's been his problem, bursts of wickets or nothing for a few Tests. Bowling version of North. Hence his average of about 32.50 in 21 tests @ just 3 1/2 wickets per Test. This game was a great spell of sustained, which I've never seen before, not just bursts. Just hope now the penny has dropped and he can developed a consistent and long career.

 

[caboose]

News flash, guys.

Aus was knocked over for 98; the Poms made 513.

I would have been far more impressed with Siddle (especially on day 1 with the decent grass covering on the pitch) if the gap between the teams hadn't been more than 400.

Until he stands up and does something when it really matters, pfft.

He has a shocking record in the really big games and big moments.

He has only ever taken 18 wickets in the second innings of games, at an average of about 45.9. That says it all, really.

I want a consistent bowler who is performing in most innings, especially when games are there to be won. Not someone who takes meaningless wickets, is the bowling version of North, and can't ever win us a Test.

 

[smasha]

Siddle has done his job.

What about Hughes,Clarke?

You know if Hughes had VIC next to his name,he wouldn't have even been selected for this test.

That's plain fact.

Cmon ,don't reflect the real problem.

Day 1?

The poms bowled in the best conditions and Siddle bowled when the pitch flattened out.

 

[The Passenger]

siddle has definately not been the problem this test.

but he's sort of inconsistency is what is plaguing the team as a whole.

but he's no where near as inconsistent as johnson, whilst clarke and ponting's form has completely deserted them.

 

[mediumsizered]

Between the Brisbane 1st inning and the 1st inning here he had about 1/250 with two consecutive 0/100s. It's been his problem, bursts of wickets or nothing for a few Tests. Bowling version of North. Hence his average of about 32.50 in 21 tests @ just 3 1/2 wickets per Test. This game was a great spell of sustained, which I've never seen before, not just bursts. Just hope now the penny has dropped and he can developed a consistent and long career.

This is what comes with experience. 21 tests, just turned 26, he is now entering the peak years of his career. Of course it would help if he had a couple of decent experienced bowlers at the other end, maintaining the pressure on the batsmen.

Our bowling attack looks pedestrian at times, just going through the motions. We need to have 2 bowlers running in & bending their back at both ends. We are just not getting that at the moment & our most experienced bowler (Johnson) is not leading the way for the less experienced bowlers.

 

[mattymac]

I take it we are ignoring the part where Peter Siddle takes 10 wickets and Clark 4 wickets in the 2 test matches they played together. Also that Stuart Clarks tearing up of the English top order was Cook, Collingwood and BROAD!

for anyone that watched the series it was obvious that our attack was impotent and woefully incapable of taking 20 wickets before clark was finally given his spot back.

the games (except lord's where almost the entire english cricket scene was flabbergasted by us not playing clark) followed the same pattern. we would take 2 or 3 wickets early in the first innings with a relatively newish ball

then we would hit the wall and they'd get away from us. cardiff they went from 3/90 to 4/228. lords' was a massacre. edgbaston they went from 2/60 to 4/160. we could never crack them and press home the advantage of early wickets. then enter stuey clark at headingley. comes on when they're 3/39 and knocks them down to 6/72. it was the spell that put us back in the ashes.

they never recovered and we won by an innings. that's the business my friend. taking wickets when it counts

sure, ricky looked after siddle and gave him a good bowl at the tail allowing him to take a 5fer (inc. 8,9,10 and 11) but everyone who watched the series and has half a clue saw that stuey clark was the difference in that match. before clark we were impotent. after his collapse inducing spell we win by an innings. he demoralised the opposition and lifted his team when it mattered. those are facts

cricket isn't just about stats

its about taking wickets when it matters. not taking an ineffectual 5fer once in a 3 match series, usually in a loss or a draw that looks good on the personal stats but does sfa for the team.

siddle bowled well here and bowled well in the first in brissy. in between he was utter shit. he was so shit in perth even ricky didn't trust him with the ball. thats what you get with siddle, a good spell once or twice a summer that seem to rarely have an impact on the outcome and lots of crap in between.

siddle is not the answer. neither is johnson. far too inconsistent. when they're not on we carry them and we're a man down. now that hilf has lost his touch we are truly ****ed. we should probably build a new attack from the ground up. 3 consistent blokes who pitch in regularly and don't have entire matches where they are in the wilderness

Oh I also take it this veteran of English conditions is due to his awesome 13 first class County matches he had played in his life because he sure as hell had never played a test there...

very perceptive of you yes, playing 13 county games (13 more than siddle) and spending extended periods learning in and around the english cricket scene made him a veteran of english conditions compared to everyone else in our attack

 

[Fastback]

News flash, guys.

Aus was knocked over for 98; the Poms made 513.

I would have been far more impressed with Siddle (especially on day 1 with the decent grass covering on the pitch) if the gap between the teams hadn't been more than 400.

Until he stands up and does something when it really matters, pfft.

He has a shocking record in the really big games and big moments.

He has only ever taken 18 wickets in the second innings of games, at an average of about 45.9. That says it all, really.

I want a consistent bowler who is performing in most innings, especially when games are there to be won. Not someone who takes meaningless wickets, is the bowling version of North, and can't ever win us a Test.

He has stood up when it mattered.

6/75 by any measure is a fantastic effort - problem is Johnson, Hilfy & Harris couldn't fire at half his strike rate. Imagine England's score then??

Did you see his effort against SAF at home and away when he was 23/24?

Siddle is the least of our issues.

 

[eddiesmith]

Oh yeah lets attack the guy who took 6 wickets because England lead by 400+ runs, umm so what would they lead by if he didnt take 6 wickets?

As for the rubbish Clark argument that 13 games gives him invaluable experience, I suppose you would have preferred Australias middle order in the Ashes to be Hodge, Dussey, White, Mussey then seeing as they have a combined total of about 1000 games in English conditions? Add in Chris Rogers and Watson at the top and yeah maybe Australia would have won

The bowling was not the problem, it was the batting lineup that continously collapsed on good pitches