The great forum in name of the Essendon Football Club
http://bombertalk4.com/
Liam PlunkettBenDoolan wrote:Feeling is Stuart Clark will be selected, logic tells me you need to replace an experienced bowler in Lee with an experienced bowler like Dizzy.
As much as I dislike Lee as a Test bowler, the damage he has/can cause in limited overs is invaluable. In a short space of time he can grab early wickets and put the opposition's innings under extreme pressure from the outset. Who else can perform that duty?
True!bomberdonnie wrote:Liam PlunkettBenDoolan wrote:Feeling is Stuart Clark will be selected, logic tells me you need to replace an experienced bowler in Lee with an experienced bowler like Dizzy.
As much as I dislike Lee as a Test bowler, the damage he has/can cause in limited overs is invaluable. In a short space of time he can grab early wickets and put the opposition's innings under extreme pressure from the outset. Who else can perform that duty?
I think most teams on those grounds will struggle to defend 350. You have to remember that the pitches in NZ were flat as a tack and short boundaries. On those sort of wickets, its easier to chase as you know what your benchmark is and you have nothing to lose, really.BenDoolan wrote:No surprise there really. I think we'll struggle in the cup....our attack isn't anywhere as potent and economical as it was 4 years ago. The stats are starting to show that. Unless we score 500+, we'll struggle to defend totals.
Yeah, I don't have any other explanation other than a "gut" feeling about our chances with the attack we have. I'm not saying it's bad, but I believe other teams will have a better balanced attack than ours. Time will tell, obviously....Rossoneri wrote:I think most teams on those grounds will struggle to defend 350. You have to remember that the pitches in NZ were flat as a tack and short boundaries. On those sort of wickets, its easier to chase as you know what your benchmark is and you have nothing to lose, really.BenDoolan wrote:No surprise there really. I think we'll struggle in the cup....our attack isn't anywhere as potent and economical as it was 4 years ago. The stats are starting to show that. Unless we score 500+, we'll struggle to defend totals.
I think we will be fine in the WI. I get the feeling that these players will be burning from what everybody is saying and they will fire up.
Tait will bowl the middle overs and end up taking the couple of wickets we require in the middle overs.
I think their records speak for themselves RamaRamanama wrote:Lee is now out, Clark is in.
Clark or Lee?? which one would you choose?for me it would be Clark, to McGraths in the team should cause alot of trouble.
Yes i no, but Clark is in great form. hard to leave him out.bomberdonnie wrote:I think their records speak for themselves RamaRamanama wrote:Lee is now out, Clark is in.
Clark or Lee?? which one would you choose?for me it would be Clark, to McGraths in the team should cause alot of trouble.
Lee is going to be a massive loss especially with our recent inability to bowl out the most ordinary of batting line ups!!
I'm not so sure about that. In theory it sounds good, but the reality is that when you have too much of the same thing it gets pretty easy to hit when you start seeing it enough, unless there's plenty of movement off the deck or someone is taking the ball both ways, mixing it up.Ramanama wrote:Lee is now out, Clark is in.
Clark or Lee?? which one would you choose?for me it would be Clark, to McGraths in the team should cause alot of trouble.
http://content-aus.cricinfo.com/austral ... 81489.htmlSimpson, who emphasised fielding practice during his time as Australia's coach in the 1980s, also said Shane Watson's struggle to develop himself could have been managed better by Australia's support staff. "While Watson is a competent, bustling cricketer, I have doubts if he has the skills or flexibility to cope with cricket at the highest level," Simpson said.
"To me, he looks like an over-coached player, lacking in natural skills and movements. Perhaps this is one reason why he has had so many injuries."
Looks as though ol' Bobby Simpson's been reading my stuff! Plagiariser!!!Boyler_Room wrote:Not sure how many of you have read this but Bob Simpson is saying what everyone else is thinking... pity noone will really listen.
http://content-aus.cricinfo.com/austral ... 81489.htmlSimpson, who emphasised fielding practice during his time as Australia's coach in the 1980s, also said Shane Watson's struggle to develop himself could have been managed better by Australia's support staff. "While Watson is a competent, bustling cricketer, I have doubts if he has the skills or flexibility to cope with cricket at the highest level," Simpson said.
"To me, he looks like an over-coached player, lacking in natural skills and movements. Perhaps this is one reason why he has had so many injuries."
jimmyc1985 wrote:That's what i think he really lacks: innate cricketing smarts. He doesn't know what to bowl or when to bowl it and, particularly in his bowling, he just seems such a 'manufactured' cricketer. You can teach them all the technique in the world and they can practice their skills endlessly, but there's also a large element of cricketing instinct required to become a successful bowler, and Watson has absolutely zilch.