Peter Siddle

[Outshined]

Siddle bowled ok yesterday, bit too full on occasions but consistently made the batsmen play and in the end got a bit of reward (albeit off a few of his least threatening deliveries)

I've always advocated having Sids as the third seamer, at least until a few of the younger guys like Pattinson and Hazlewood get a bit more experience at Shield level. Although Cummins did nothing wrong yesterday, it'd be nice to see an attack along the lines of Copeland, Cutting and Siddle against New Zealand and India, with Harris obviously included if he can manage to last more than one test.

 

[Thommo 42]

That's probably related to the fact Siddle gets the ball to move pretty much never. Swing/seam conditions don't really suit Siddle at all. It may suit Butterworth but not him. Of course it doesn't suit MJ either but he at least gets the ball to move once in a blue moon, which is a better rate. Siddle is more bounce of pitch.

huh?

they're the only conditions that suit him, when the pitch does the work for him as he can't create any natural movement through the air or off the pitch.

 

[Stats Man]

an extremely poor man's Andy Bichel. like, bankrupted.

 

[Japes]

Simple stat.

All tests that Johnson and Siddle have played together. Same conditions, same opponents. All this analysis only refers to those tests - not the 23 or so Johnson has played without Siddle.

24 Tests
Johnson - 99 Wickets, avg 31.3 S/R 54.5
Siddle - 82 wickets, avg 30.2, SR 59.3

Bugger all in it. Johnson has bowled a bit more, has a better strike rate, but is obviously more expensive and has a worse average.

I notice a lot of people are using stats on this thread.

So here are a few more that haven't been considered so far:

In the 3rd and 4th innings of matches (i.e. when bowlers are asked to decisively finish Test matches off), Siddle's record is pretty damning: he has taken only 19 wickets at an average of 46. (For the record, Johnson has taken 72 @ 32.)

Siddle is now into his 25th Test. In his matches to date, Australia has won 9 and lost 10. (Australia's record with Johnson is far better - won 22, lost 14.)

In the 25 most recent Australian Tests in which Siddle has not played, the record is 15 won, and just 5 lost.

 

[Japes]

Another stat to add:

In the 25 Tests played immediately prior to Siddle's debut, Australia won 20 and lost 1.

 

[AM]

When the grandstand heroes here take a test 8/for and a test hat trick, get back to me.

 

[King Elvis]

You've done both of those things then?

 

[AM]

Get back to me when you get the point Elvis.

 

[TheBrownlowMan37]

When the grandstand heroes here take a test 8/for and a test hat trick, get back to me.

Get back to me when you get the point Elvis.

Your point is that no one here has played test cricket so they can't criticise Siddle? Yeah, it's a pretty lame point.

 

[rhaz]

When the grandstand heroes here take a test 8/for and a test hat trick, get back to me.

Thats a shithouse argument mate and you know it.

Say a plumber came around to your place to fix something, but instead ****ed up your pipes and you get angry at him. What would your reaction be if he said "well then grandstand hero, when you become a qualified plumber, you get back to me".

Just because we aren't elite cricketers, doesn't mean we cant criticise.

 

[AM]

Thats a shithouse argument mate and you know it.

Say a plumber came around to your place to fix something, but instead ****ed up your pipes and you get angry at him. What would your reaction be if he said "well then grandstand hero, when you become a qualified plumber, you get back to me".

Just because we aren't elite cricketers, doesn't mean we cant criticise.

Seem to have hit a nerve there mate.

Nothing wrong with constructive criticism. But some of the personal stuff here is weak and uninformed. Not many fast bowlers have taken test 8 fors and a hat trick. You don't achieve that if you bowl 'poo'.

The guy isn't over endowed with natural ability but he tries his guts out for his country and his test record is a reasonable one.

 

[Japes]

Seem to have hit a nerve there mate.

You hit a nerve? All you did was make a fool of yourself, and you were rightly called out on it. Lashing out at someone because they embarrassed you is feeble stuff.

Not many fast bowlers have taken test 8 fors and a hat trick. You don't achieve that if you bowl 'poo'.

What? For whatever your trivial point is worth in any case, numerous fast bowlers have taken a Test hat-trick. Numerous fast bowlers have taken eight wickets (and/or far more than that) in a match.

Incidentally, if you think plucking out two moments from Siddle's mediocre career is appropriate ... why didn't you point out that not many fast bowlers have taken 0/211 in the space of two innings either? It's about as relevant.

The guy isn't over endowed with natural ability but he tries his guts out for his country

Bingo. Was wondering how long it would be before we got the "oh but he tries hard" nonsense from you. It's a sure sign that a Siddle fan is floundering and has nothing to offer when this quintessential tosh is served up.

some of the personal stuff here is weak and uninformed.

Funny that, because your posts are just as personal as anybody else's. As well as being so weak and uninformed as to be laughable.

 

[davis_756]

Siddle is the only bowler we have that takes any wickets at all on a batter friendly pitch. He is the only one that has a plan to fall back on when pitching it up and hoping for swing fails.

 

[Jimthegreat]

Siddle is the only bowler we have that takes any wickets at all on a batter friendly pitch. He is the only one that has a plan to fall back on when pitching it up and hoping for swing fails.

I must've missed something the last few years. I thought, bar the odd burst, he struggled getting wickets anywhere and just pounded them up there without much thought. Like the Ashes last year, 13 wickets, 11 in 2 innings amongst those massive English scores.

 

[dan warna]

Siddle is a good ordinary bowler of the same calibre of Kasperwisc, Bichel, Lee. A solid support act.

What he lacks, that the others had, was 2 or 3 great bowlers in the team, in the shape of McGrath, Warne and Gillespie.

If it had been siddle instead of Lee, and pretty much the same for MJ, we wouldn't be tearing him down so much.

The problem is we lack a great bowler in our entire line up.

Even the Kiwi's got by with just hadlee to ensure competitiveness. We have zero great bowlers atm.

Our pace battery is have several bowlers that would slip into that 3rd seamer/4th bowler line up from our 'great' era and be adequate/supportive/good.

 

[King Elvis]

Those three are much better.

Davis - bowling short and wide isn't a plan to be proud of.

 

[dan warna]

Those three are much better.

.

Not really, Siddle's numbers match up pretty well with bichel, kaspers and Lee.

Also given siddle has pretty much been bowling in a team without a champion while Lee bowled alongside 3 all time greats, he compares pretty well with the other three, and probably anyone else who slotted into the role of the 4th bowler, or when dizzy wasn't available, the 3rd/4th bowler.

 

[AM]

Not really, Siddle's numbers match up pretty well with bichel, kaspers and Lee.

Also given siddle has pretty much been bowling in a team without a champion while Lee bowled alongside 3 all time greats, he compares pretty well with the other three, and probably anyone else who slotted into the role of the 4th bowler, or when dizzy wasn't available, the 3rd/4th bowler.

Top post dw.

 

[Munro_Mick]

Siddle is a good ordinary bowler of the same calibre of Kasperwisc, Bichel, Lee. A solid support act.

What he lacks, that the others had, was 2 or 3 great bowlers in the team, in the shape of McGrath, Warne and Gillespie.

If it had been siddle instead of Lee, and pretty much the same for MJ, we wouldn't be tearing him down so much.

The problem is we lack a great bowler in our entire line up.

Even the Kiwi's got by with just hadlee to ensure competitiveness. We have zero great bowlers atm.

Our pace battery is have several bowlers that would slip into that 3rd seamer/4th bowler line up from our 'great' era and be adequate/supportive/good.

and that's exactly right - last year for the Ashes - the problem was NOT Siddle as first change bowler. The problem was the lack of 1st tier bowlers. Siddle is a beauty as a 1st change bowler. He can actually get a little bit of shape here and there, and his 6/75 at the MCG last year was a pretty classy display in unfriendly circumstances and with zero support around him.

The other problem for Siddle is he bowled injured there for a while - and being the determined workhorse he is, he battled on through when perhaps he shouldn't have. The home series of 2009/10 was a bad one for him and that's stuffed up his figures a fair bit, 3 wkts at 70 vs the Winides was bad for him, he wasn't right at the time, and that's added 1.5 to his bowling average.

For a guy like Johnson, as pointed out, in the last 12 months, he's been a WACA wonder with pretty well nothing outside of that (a pfeiffer in Mohali) and averaging 54 over that time frame.

For Siddle, he desperately want's to hold his spot to have a crack at New Zealand (at the Gabba!, where last season he took 6/54 in the 1st dig whilst Johnson went none fer for the game)

Siddle hasn't actually played NZ yet. Compare the pair.....

opposition Siddle Johnson
SL 4/91 - 22.75 14/554 - 39.57
India 4/176 - 44 37/1312 - 35.45
WI 3/212 - 70.6 27/824 - 30.52
NZ ----- 26/431 - 16.58
SA 29/760 - 26.21 35/994 - 28.4
Eng 34/1100 - 32.35 35/1205 - 34.42
Pak 8/262 - 32.75 15/525 - 35
Total 82/2601 - 31.71 189/5845 - 30.92

Now, for Siddle, the major aberation there is the Windies, and small samples vs SL and India.
For Johnson, the clear joker in the pack for him is the 26 at stuff all vs NZ. Good on him for doing the job, and that NZ figure brings his career average from 33.21 down to 30.92.

Johnson has a definite love for Perth - 30/544 at 18.13, and Hamilton (in and vs NZ) with 10/132 at 13.2. His other good grounds (avg below 25 are Adelaide, where he missed last season, Jo'burg and Bridgetown).

Siddle actually has 3 'pet grounds', Leeds (6/71 at 11.83), Hobart (5/65 at 12.8) and Durban (5/81 at 16.2), and 3 for 20-25 avg range being Colombo, Jo'burg and Melbourne.

So, the final point - any bowler who get's harshly judged now and misses the chance to have a crack at the Kiwi's will most likely be really, really dirty.

Ironically, looking at the batting, Hughes and Watson as an opening pair, finally, a century stand, and they've probably bought themselves a home summer - because, obviously, they'll back themselves in against the Kiwis in the first couple of tests. One wonders, had bad light not denied a 4-5 over spell at the end of day 1,.....might that story have been much changed?

 

[mediumsizered]

Siddle is a good ordinary bowler of the same calibre of Kasperwisc, Bichel, Lee. A solid support act.

What he lacks, that the others had, was 2 or 3 great bowlers in the team, in the shape of McGrath, Warne and Gillespie.

If it had been siddle instead of Lee, and pretty much the same for MJ, we wouldn't be tearing him down so much.

The problem is we lack a great bowler in our entire line up.

Even the Kiwi's got by with just hadlee to ensure competitiveness. We have zero great bowlers atm.

Our pace battery is have several bowlers that would slip into that 3rd seamer/4th bowler line up from our 'great' era and be adequate/supportive/good.

This is spot on. Johnson should have been the bowler to step up after McGrath, but he just isn't up to it.

You have to feel for any young bowler coming into the Australian team at the moment because they don't have a Lillee, a McDermott, or a McGrath bowling at the other end putting the pressure on.

As for those posters who continue to state that Siddle only takes wickets in bursts, the reality is he is taking wickets. Perhaps if the likes of Hilfenhaus & to a lesser extent Copeland did the same, you would have your wish & Siddle wouldn't be in the team. Of course it wouldn't hurt if someone like Bollinger could actually get his body right as well.

 

[Jimthegreat]

Not really, Siddle's numbers match up pretty well with bichel, kaspers and Lee.

Also given siddle has pretty much been bowling in a team without a champion while Lee bowled alongside 3 all time greats, he compares pretty well with the other three, and probably anyone else who slotted into the role of the 4th bowler, or when dizzy wasn't available, the 3rd/4th bowler.

Lee and Kasper were alot better than Siddle. Alot more skilled. Don't worry about figures. Lee and Kasper got wickets regularly in Tests whereas Siddle does in bursts then nothing for ages. Much better consistency factor. Lee got 310 at 4 per Test with few 5 wicket hauls meaning he was at least getting wickets at a consistent rate. Also had a 10 ball per wicket better strike rate than. Lee could lead the attack and one would feel confident, not that way with Siddle or Johnson. Lee was expensive but he was a very regular wicket-taker to make up for it and got the big wickets. It's why we put up with Johnson until recently. In the end the last Series McGrath and Warne played Lee opened the bowling. While one doesn't like to compare Tests to ODIs at all it had to be noted how much better did our attack look last summer when we had a new bowling line-up in the ODIs with Lee opening. Looked like it went up 5 classes in ability and potency rather than the previous impotence. We appreciated how good Lee actually was when compared to what we have currently in the Test arena even if he certainly was no McGrath.

IIRC Lee, Kasper and Stuart Clark were the quicks that lead us to a 3-0 whitewash over SA 2 tours ago when McGrath was out (Warne was there though). If we had them now I'd be real confident.

 

[Jimthegreat]

and that's exactly right - last year for the Ashes - the problem was NOT Siddle as first change bowler. The problem was the lack of 1st tier bowlers. Siddle is a beauty as a 1st change bowler. He can actually get a little bit of shape here and there, and his 6/75 at the MCG last year was a pretty classy display in unfriendly circumstances and with zero support around him.

The other problem for Siddle is he bowled injured there for a while - and being the determined workhorse he is, he battled on through when perhaps he shouldn't have. The home series of 2009/10 was a bad one for him and that's stuffed up his figures a fair bit, 3 wkts at 70 vs the Winides was bad for him, he wasn't right at the time, and that's added 1.5 to his bowling average.

For a guy like Johnson, as pointed out, in the last 12 months, he's been a WACA wonder with pretty well nothing outside of that (a pfeiffer in Mohali) and averaging 54 over that time frame.

For Siddle, he desperately want's to hold his spot to have a crack at New Zealand (at the Gabba!, where last season he took 6/54 in the 1st dig whilst Johnson went none fer for the game)

Siddle hasn't actually played NZ yet. Compare the pair.....

opposition Siddle Johnson
SL 4/91 - 22.75 14/554 - 39.57
India 4/176 - 44 37/1312 - 35.45
WI 3/212 - 70.6 27/824 - 30.52
NZ ----- 26/431 - 16.58
SA 29/760 - 26.21 35/994 - 28.4
Eng 34/1100 - 32.35 35/1205 - 34.42
Pak 8/262 - 32.75 15/525 - 35
Total 82/2601 - 31.71 189/5845 - 30.92

Now, for Siddle, the major aberation there is the Windies, and small samples vs SL and India.
For Johnson, the clear joker in the pack for him is the 26 at stuff all vs NZ. Good on him for doing the job, and that NZ figure brings his career average from 33.21 down to 30.92.

Johnson has a definite love for Perth - 30/544 at 18.13, and Hamilton (in and vs NZ) with 10/132 at 13.2. His other good grounds (avg below 25 are Adelaide, where he missed last season, Jo'burg and Bridgetown).

Siddle actually has 3 'pet grounds', Leeds (6/71 at 11.83), Hobart (5/65 at 12.8) and Durban (5/81 at 16.2), and 3 for 20-25 avg range being Colombo, Jo'burg and Melbourne.

So, the final point - any bowler who get's harshly judged now and misses the chance to have a crack at the Kiwi's will most likely be really, really dirty.

Ironically, looking at the batting, Hughes and Watson as an opening pair, finally, a century stand, and they've probably bought themselves a home summer - because, obviously, they'll back themselves in against the Kiwis in the first couple of tests. One wonders, had bad light not denied a 4-5 over spell at the end of day 1,.....might that story have been much changed?

Siddle was one of the problems in the Ashes as was Johnson and Hiflenhaus. 13 wickets in 5 Tests, 11 in two innings, that's a problem. Don't worry about stats. He just wasn't the only problem. Bar Harris, he was still probably the best of the bowlers, which is underlines the problem as a whole.

 

[dan warna]

Brett lee took 2.06 wickets per innings
Siddle takes 1.88 wickets per innings
Kaspers took 1.53 wickets per innings
Bichel took 1.56 wickets per innings

I would say also Brett Lee had a two great wicket keepers in heals and gilly and a great slips cordon as well as a fantastic lead bowling attack, same as kaspers and bichs.

Siddle has Haddin keeping for him, and a solid if aging slips cordon and MJ running the opposition into form.

Even yesterday siddle had a good LBW turned down and a catch dropped, stuff that would happen very rarely with waugh or punter's teams, whereas the current team seem to put down at least 1 or 2 per test match.

As for Lee leading the attack, well, he was adequate as a first strike bowler, but accumulation isn't a substitute for greatness. 100 wickets in his first 18 months and 200 over the next 10 years tells his story.

A worth contributor to the international attack, but really for all his pace, bluster and marketing, a pin up boy sold well rather than a great bowler.

I've never said siddle is a great bowler, but he is a worthy international bowler.

 

[danielnajdek]

There's no point bringing out stats dude they wont take notice of them anyways. They have a perception that his a crap bowler and no matter what he does that isn't gonna change. The batting defintely doesn't help when the bowlers have to bowl again the next day instead of having a couple of days rest that they should get if it weren't for our shocking batting of late.

 

[Japes]

Brett lee took 2.06 wickets per innings
Siddle takes 1.88 wickets per innings
Kaspers took 1.53 wickets per innings
Bichel took 1.56 wickets per innings

I would say also Brett Lee had a two great wicket keepers in heals and gilly and a great slips cordon as well as a fantastic lead bowling attack, same as kaspers and bichs.

Siddle has Haddin keeping for him, and a solid if aging slips cordon and MJ running the opposition into form.

Even yesterday siddle had a good LBW turned down and a catch dropped, stuff that would happen very rarely with waugh or punter's teams, whereas the current team seem to put down at least 1 or 2 per test match.

As for Lee leading the attack, well, he was adequate as a first strike bowler, but accumulation isn't a substitute for greatness. 100 wickets in his first 18 months and 200 over the next 10 years tells his story.

A worth contributor to the international attack, but really for all his pace, bluster and marketing, a pin up boy sold well rather than a great bowler.

I've never said siddle is a great bowler, but he is a worthy international bowler.

If you're going to argue (as you did earlier) that Siddle is significantly disadvantaged by having no great bowlers around him (McGrath, Gillespie, Warne etc), then there's no point also using stats comparing how many wickets he takes relative to the likes of Bichel and Kasper per innings.

Either you think it's a level playing field, or you don't.