Taking 20 Wickets

[The Fonz]

After Brisbane, people said the bowling attacks were the same as both only took 11 wickets.
Since then England has taken 60 wickets, Australia has taken 35.

 

[damochandler]

After Brisbane, people said the bowling attacks were the same as both only took 11 wickets.
Since then England has taken 60 wickets, Australia has taken 35.

we have only had to bowl in the second inning once since brisbane

 

[The Fonz]

we have only had to bowl in the second inning once since brisbane

That's part of the problem - not the answer. You only lose by an innings because you can't bowl them out cheaply enough the first time. They couldn't keep England below 500.

 

[damochandler]

That's part of the problem - not the answer. You only lose by an innings because you can't bowl them out cheaply enough the first time. They couldn't keep England below 500.

i was only a taking the piss out of the inept way we have been playing

 

[glenferry23]

we failed to take 20 wickets in the test series in india too....i wonder how many tests in the past 12 months or so we've actually been able to take 20 wickets for the match...it would be an ugly statistic i feel...

 

[The Fonz]

The crazy thing is that Tremlett has come in, played 2 tests and taken as many wickets as Siddle - the leading Australian wicket taker.

 

[damochandler]

we took 20 in perth quite easily

 

[Knight Ryders]

We desperately missed a fit and firing Dougy Bollinger. Reliable, quick and swings it both ways. I think he could have had an impact against the English middle order.

 

[ROSEMVP]

lol dougie is a tail end bully most of his wickets are tail enders.

the bowlers arent the problem. its the useless batsman.

 

[Dipper]

The trouble with the 4 quicks played is that they all seem to have one suit only.

Johnson has that x-factor and has to be kept in for it because no one else does but he performs only once in a while.

Hilfenhaus can swing it, but when he's not getting swing he doesn't really seem able to come in and hit the pitch hard and work batsmen over.

Siddle does come in and hit the pitch hard and work batsmen over but seems to get very little sideways movement.

And Harris is a bit of a trier who isn't really top notch in any one area.

You'd really want to be able to amalgamate Siddle and Hilfenhaus to make one bowler and for Johnson to have some reliability when he's not 'on'.

The Fonz mentioned Tremlett coming in and having as many wickets as Siddle in 2 Tests and it's a good point, he gets big bounce aligned with bowling fairly tight lines and lengths so he's a threat even if the ball isn't doing much but he nibbles it off the seam when it's on offer, gets a little bit of orthodox swing and a bit of reverse when that's available too.

He's not in that A class of bowler but he's pretty handy, especially to come into the team when the first choice is injured.

Seems a better bowler than both Broad and Finn to me.

 

[Parquet Court]

the most frustrating aspect and probably most dooming fact is that if the pitch isnt providing a little or offering a bit of bounce, our bowlers have absolutely no chance of doing any sort of damage.

siddle, johnson have had a couple of good innings but **** if johnson doesnt have a raring perth sea-breeze he cant get a hint of swing, just look at the MCG test, he went back to those innocuous sliding deliveries to the right handers and he even occasionally plonked one on the batsmens half of the pitch.

harris is ok and a workhorse, pitches it up but he is gone for 4 mths now, siddle is ridiculously over-rated, there are not any better options atm but give it a year or two and hopefully george or someone will be ready.

he has two 6 fors but up at the gabba on that opening day it was swinging more than david bowie at an after party but he did bowl extremely well at the G for his 2nd 6 for. but then he has these plateaus where he resorts to banging it into the pitch (occasionally in the batsmens half of the pitch).

he just looks like one of those bowlers who can keep it tight but has that predictability that someone like sangakarra or gayle will feast upon in the seasons to come.

hilfenhaus could be in for a long stint at domestic level, nigh on useless in the series thus far. Again he can keep it tight but needs english conditions or inept batsmen to poke at his outswinging deliveries, IMO he has become very 1 dimensional. doesnt make anyone play enough and is not deserving of the new ball. he was initially very effective but seems to have lost the ability to swing the ball enough to trouble world class batsmen.

bollinger needs to come back once fit, much better than hilfy, can swing it consistently. unfortunately siddle will be safe for some time to come and johnsons waca test will give him at least 18 more months in the test side.

 

[The Passenger]

i've been banging on and on all summer about how we need to find a team that is going to consistently take 20 wickets.... at the moment our bowling attack isn't. We've only taken 20 wickets in a match once in the last seven.

i do feel last summer has really masked the problems in our team. we were winning against very mediocre teams (Windies, Paki's, Kiwi's). We took 20 wickets in each of those eight matches and won all bar one of them.

Prior to that against decent opposition (England 2009 ashes and six tests against Saffers) it was same story as were seeing now. 11 matches and only twice took 20 opposition wickets. Previous year 2008 tour of India - of the four tests only once took 20 indian wickets.

and then prior to that our bowling was actually good.

You don't have to read much of what i say to know i bang on and on and on and on about the importance of being able to take 20 wickets. and whilst on current form i reckno our batting is worse than our bowling (not much in it), we are simply playing to draw if we can't take 20 wickets. and as such our bowling needs to be addressed urgently.

our bowling is redicolously inconsistent, and a lot of this stems from siddle and johnson, who the more i think about it, we are probably just going to have to make a decision to go in one direction or the other..... hopefully not because when they are both on (when was the last time that happend??) we win the match, but their best and worst are so far apart it kills. you can carry one quick bowler like that if your other two quick's are taking wickets (which harris is - kinda, but he's injured now anyway, but hilfenhaus isn't take wickets).... but we are carrying two inconsistent quicks. no team can do that.

if people wanna know we i bang on about taking 20 wickets. in the matches against decent opposition since the indian tour 2008 (so i'm including india 2008, south africa six tests 2008/09, ashes 2009, india 2010, ashes 2010/11)....

so we've played 21 test matches, won 5, lost 11, drawn 6.

in those 21 tests we've taken 20 wickets only 4 times for 3 wins and 1 loss.

in the other 17 tests we've failed to take 20 wickets.... we've won 2 (taken 18 and 19 wickets in those 2 tests), lost 10, drawn 5.

in the matches i've excluded in that period against ordinary opposition - NZ, Paki's and Windies. We've played 12. we've won 10 (took 20 wickets in all 10 matches), drawn 1 (took 20 wickets), lost 1 (took 17 wickets).

 

[damochandler]

lol dougie is a tail end bully most of his wickets are tail enders.

the bowlers arent the problem. its the useless batsman.

look the govs alter ego. wath more cricket before you post anything more on here

 

[Doodlesweaver]

We desperately missed a fit and firing Dougy Bollinger. Reliable, quick and swings it both ways. I think he could have had an impact against the English middle order.

Dougie hasn't been crash hot the second half of the year. He wasn't that much better than Johnson for 3 innings against Pakistan in England. Then wasn't fit.

Playing against committed confident batsmen is far different to playing against Pakistan and the West Indies.