Poor side playing well or good side playing badly?

[The Octopus]

I think we are an average side still getting good results.

Opinions?

 

[r dub 19]

I think we are an average side still getting good results.

Opinions?

Agree. It's a shame that WI are missing some players, I'm confident they would of won this series with their full squad. People need to understand this Australian team would be absolutely slaughtered against a goood team. Imagine Sewahg against Australia's bowling attack. (if thats what you can call it)

 

[DeadlyAkkuret]

Still think we're quite a bit better than the Windies and deserve our ranking.

 

[mattys123]

If you call beating a lowly rated Test nation 2-1 in a series (if we get the last wicket tomorrow) a good thing, then yes, we are playing well.

Myself, I would say Australia has 4-5 players in it's current 11 who wouldn't have been in the top 20 in the glory days of the late 90's and early 00's.

The only excuse I can give is injuries, as missing Siddle, Hilfy and Lee has strangled the bowling attack.

It is time to move North out though, and bring in a genuine opener, moving Watson down to 6 and allowing a more "traditional" form of opener to make his mark.

Pakistan won't be easy to beat, they have 2-3 batsman who on their day can do anything, and 2 good young quicks, and a spinner who will bamboozle the Aussies.

No Ponting on Boxing day, and then mostly likely the 2nd test too, means Australia has the opportunity to try out a batsman in the side, preferably an opener.

 

[Illinois Nazi]

It is time to move North out though

Is that the same North who has played just 9 Tests and is averaging over 44 with 3 centuries, and has also chipped in with 6 wickets as an occasional bowler?

Just checking.

 

[Moss Rocket]

It will be 2-0. No doubt we dont have the players we used to and i consider us a weak side, however we do get results like world cups, champions trophy, good recent record in tests etc. When other countries are low on talent they acheive nothing, thankfully we still seem to win more often than not.

 

[DaRick]

Theoretically, this Australian team is still a fairly good one. In practice though, injuries, form lapses, lousy man-management, a lack of killer instinct, some questionable selections and the advent of age have hurt quite a lot. There is also the odd batting collapse.

Ironically, these problems don't appear to have affected the ODI team as much.

 

[Adelaide Hawk]

I'll reserve judgement until after we've played Pakistan.

 

[aussie1st]

WI might be ranked low but they are showing they are much better than that when the put the effort into it. Our bowling isn't great but that is understandable when a whole bowling pack is out injured. The batting is starting to become a worry though, we continue to collapse at crucial moments and its not a one off thing, its happening quite a bit.

 

[The_Reaper]

The selector need to get serious and recognise that we are in a transition stage.

At this point in time it looks very plausible that for the first test of the Ashes, the only changes to the XI at Cardiff would be Watson in for Hughes and Bollinger in for one of the pacemen.

I'd imagine that at this rate we will again have three players retiring during the next ashes series. Three of our top four batsmen, with the other in Watson playing out of position.

The selectors are the only people in the country who have yet to recognise that we are in transition. There selections are aimed at the present and not for the future.

Hughes is clearly a key player for the future and perfomed competently at test level. He did have problems with tall, fast bowlers. However with Flintoff retired how many tall fast bowlers are there in the world?
Morkel? Broad? Harmison?
Of those three how many can bowl accurately?
During the last transition period for our team, youngsters who recognised as key players such as Steve Waugh were given an extended run in the team, despite perhaps not being in the best XI at the time. The same opportunity should be given to Hughes, who actually is arguably good enough to be in the team on performance alone.

Of our three players heading towards the retirement home only Katich has yet to begin the inevitable decline. For all of Hussey's recent woes, Ponting was the member of the Australian top 7 who looked least likely to score a century this series. However he is still good for a decent performance, just no longer good enough for number 3. I would keep Ponting in the side but play him at number 4, with Clarke moving to first drop.
Hussey is gone. We should accept that and let/force him to retire.

In the eyes of the selectors, North would be the most vulnerable batsman. He will never be a great test bat but should be a useful player to have in the team as we shepherd in the next generation following the upcoming retirements of Katich/Ponting/Hussey.

In terms of Haddin I'm not a fan but his performance with the bat suggest that he should maintain his test spot for the next few seasons. Paine or another keeper can take over once our new top order is settled.

At the moment Bollinger is the standout amongst the bowlers. I'd go into the next test with a new ball pair of Hilfenhaus and Bollinger. Johnson despite bowling poorly has taken over 15 wickets for the series and thus should keep his spot for the start of the Pakistan series with Siddle regaining form at Shield level. However this attack is not set and should Siddle regain form and one of the aforementioned pacemen fail then he should immediately regain his spot.

Hauritz is sadly enough the only spinner that can plausibly be selected.

 

[Kickett Punches Read]

If you call beating a lowly rated Test nation 2-1 in a series (if we get the last wicket tomorrow) a good thing, then yes, we are playing well.

Myself, I would say Australia has 4-5 players in it's current 11 who wouldn't have been in the top 20 in the glory days of the late 90's and early 00's.

The only excuse I can give is injuries, as missing Siddle, Hilfy and Lee has strangled the bowling attack.

It is time to move North out though, and bring in a genuine opener, moving Watson down to 6 and allowing a more "traditional" form of opener to make his mark.

Pakistan won't be easy to beat, they have 2-3 batsman who on their day can do anything, and 2 good young quicks, and a spinner who will bamboozle the Aussies.

No Ponting on Boxing day, and then mostly likely the 2nd test too, means Australia has the opportunity to try out a batsman in the side, preferably an opener.

wow, just....... wow. i cant believe anyone could suggest that with a straight face...... unbelievable.


IMO at the moment,

safe
katich (not sure for how long though)
watson (probably needs to move to 6 at some stage)
Ponting (not sure he will last till the next away ashes like he wants)
clarke
north
haddin (getting on but form has been superb)
Bollinger (he has to be the best bowler in the country now)


Under the pump
Johnson (i know he has wickets, but he needs to work on consistency)
Hussey
Mckay
Hauritz (been good, but im not convinced)

 

[Plugger35]

It will be 2-0. No doubt we dont have the players we used to and i consider us a weak side, however we do get results like world cups, champions trophy, good recent record in tests etc. When other countries are low on talent they acheive nothing, thankfully we still seem to win more often than not.

Well past results are all well and good but at the moment we're struggling to beat a below full strength West Indies and couldn't beat an ordinary England side in our previous test series. I have a feeling we'll struggle against Pakistan as well.

I doubt we would slip below 4th on the rankings, as we should win enough matches to at least maintain our current ranking. We're definitely behind SA & India on present form though.

 

[krisholio14]

Considering the turnover in personnel over the last 3 years, the fact that Australia have remained competitive in that time is a fine effort.

 

[dumb]

yeah, i do wonder what people make of this period. have we gone better or worse than we imagined we would, because we all saw it coming that we'd be without some of our best ever players? i don't think we've done any worse than i myself expected. talk was that we'd draw ratherthan win a lot more games since mcgrath/warne left, but the batting has unexpectedly bottomed out at some rather innappropriate occasions and left us exposed, current test being one of them. johnson is not as dependable as we'd like at the moment, and at other times the rest of the attack gives the appearance it could easily be left out of the team as much as in.

one of the problems is that, we could clean out the team completely like some people want but with the inexperience that would bring in we'd be less competitive and i don't know that the same people could swallow that prospect.

 

[krisholio14]

The bottom line is that Australian cricket fans have been priviledged to watch their team dominate over a 15 year period.

It's not possible to sustain that level of dominance forever, there will be drop offs, however light and/or however briefly.

I think that more than a few fans are struggling to come to terms with the fact that most of the time ATM they don't just waltz in and pummel sides.

They have won this series convincingly enough, but you have to give credit to the Windies, after getting smacked in the first test, they have raised their game.

So sure, the Aussie side now doesn't compare to the side of even 5 years ago, but then, few sides in the history of the game would. There's plenty of talent in this Australian side, and plenty to like about it, it's just going to take a little more time for the core of players to get the right amount of experience.

 

[The 747]

Theoretically, this Australian team is still a fairly good one. In practice though, injuries, form lapses, lousy man-management, a lack of killer instinct, some questionable selections and the advent of age have hurt quite a lot. There is also the odd batting collapse.

Ironically, these problems don't appear to have affected the ODI team as much.

Possibly because the ODI team gets constantly refreshed with new and hungry young players.

 

[DaRick]

Possibly because the ODI team gets constantly refreshed with new and hungry young players.

The Test team has quite a high turnover rate now, though. Injury has affected both teams, so new players have had to be introduced.

Luckily for us, the ODI injuries have allowed hitherto underperforming players (like Cameron White) to settle in and finally find their place in the team. The selectors also appear to have handled the ODI team better, dropping players at more appropriate times (i.e - Dave Hussey), rather than letting them stay for several bad series at a time.

 

[Jimthegreat]

I think we are an average side still getting good results.

Opinions?

Not sure. We've only won one big series of note since September last year, the one time when the bowlers got it all together.

Bowling wins Test matches more often than not and it's an area we're really struggling at times. Bollinger's the great find of this series. The other is the emergence of Watson as a world class all-rounder. Hilfenhaus will help alot as will a decent spinner. That would allow Johnson to come in for short spells for shock effect rather than being a spearhead. Then he's an asset. At the moment he has as many match-losing spells as he does match-winning spells. As far as pressure goes he makes Brett Lee look like Glenn McGrath, which we know he's not! Finding a spinner is easier said than done.

Batting's generally been good bar the odd collapse but changes will obviously need to be made soon due to age. Hope Ponting's out for the next Test in a way, and that's nothing against him, just to see how Hughes goes at no.3 after his century yesterday. Openers are going very well so don't want to upset that.

Suppose that's a side in transition.

 

[Wish Wellingtons]

Average side playing crap sides.

 

[darcytiger]

Our batting line up is still pretty good on paper. Still up there with the best in world cricket at the moment
Our bowling line up is state cricket level at best, absolutely shitful

 

[Furn]

Somewhere in between the OP's statement. A pretty decent side playing pretty decent cricket.

There aren't any really top sides out there, so there's no one Aus cant beat but there's also no teams (except Bang,Zim etc) that they are a sure thing against either.

Not such a bad thing, test cricket around the world is pretty competitive, imagine this summer with the Aus team from 5 years ago, it would be a slaughter and pretty boring to watch.

 

[Slander]

The Test team has quite a high turnover rate now, though. Injury has affected both teams, so new players have had to be introduced.

I make it 33 players in the past 3 years....
1) Langer
2) Hayden
3) Ponting
4) Hussey
5) M.Clarke
6) Symonds
7) Gilchrist
8) Warne
9) Lee
10) S.Clark
11) McGrath
12) Jaques
13) Katich
14) Hughes
15) Watson
16) Hodge
17) McDonald
18) North
19) Haddin
20) Manou
21) Hogg
22) MacGill
23) Casson
24) White
25) Krezja
26) Hauritz
27) McGain
28) Johnson
29) Tait
30) Siddle
31) Bollinger
32) Hilfenhaus
33) McKay

All have played test cricket since January 2, 2007. I would like to see the turnover rate from other top nations but would guess Australia's is the highest.

We also don't have the depth we used to the Aussie 2nd XI in the early 2000's would've looked something like
Elliott
M.Hussey
Hodge
Love
Lehmann
Katich
Haddin
Bichel
Kasprowicz
Bracken
MacGill

Arguably would've been the 2nd best side in the world at the time.
In short we are still a decent side playing decent cricket. Injury free we would be pushing for the number 1 ranking.