Australian Cricket - Crisis, What Crisis ??

[ElwoodBlues1]

While in general I'm not a fan of Langer, I concede the team he has put together is a succcess even though some may argue it's off the back of one or two supreme efforts. He gets some credit.

But I do agree with Langer on one thing;

The battle between Wade and Wagner is what Test Cricket is supposed to be about, batsmen and bowlers pushed to their personal limit.

Put this in context of the fully helmeted and heavily padded Marsh clad is safety equipment tested to ballistic levels walking off the MCG in fear of his safety!

To me the problem seems to lay in the media and social commentary, those calling for Wade's head and those claiming the recent events are some return to a distant form of bodyline, those town criers are the real problem!

Some might argue Wagner is substituting a bodyline approach due to lack of ability and it makes the game a neanderthal one where we will have teams looking for 200cm plus giant fast bowlers
to engage in bouncer warfare like in the hey day of the Windies. Watching Wagner bowling 130k short stuff and Wade taking it on the body was comical rather than entertaining IMO.
Smith looked vulnerable like Wade so we are going to see an endless barrage of non descript short stuff due to the road like nature of all the wickets in Australia?
At least in English conditions its a battle of skill rather than who has the taller quicker bowlers....

[LP]

Some might argue Wagner is substituting a bodyline approach due to lack of ability and it makes the game a neanderthal one where we will have teams looking for 200cm plus giant fast bowlers
to engage in bouncer warfare like in the hey day of the Windies. Watching Wagner bowling 130k short stuff and Wade taking it on the body was comical rather than entertaining IMO.
Smith looked vulnerable like Wade so we are going to see an endless barrage of non descript short stuff due to the road like nature of all the wickets in Australia?
At least in English conditions its a battle of skill rather than who has the taller quicker bowlers....

I don't consider Curtley Ambrose, Joel Garner or Jeff Thompson less skilled than James Anderson, they just have different skills!

In contrast I could probably claim that recent events and rule changes limiting short pitched bowling, to make the game friendlier to participate in at lower levels, have left batsmen less skilled in dealing with it. What would Ian Chappell, Gordon Greenidge or Viv Richards have done to Wagner, Kim Hughes even and Kim was hardly a hard man of the game?

That doesn't make the Wade / Wagner tussle less interesting, it just makes it different from the norm and somewhat extending the range of Test Cricket beyond modern vanilla!

[laj]

Yes, I fear the same.

However, there are rumors of Head making way for a 4th bowler, that could be the source of our fears, with Pattinson still replacing Hazelwood!

However, the dark-side might be Siddle in for Hazlewood, and if Marsh bowls this Weds ...... in for Head?

If Marsh was to play it may be in Sydney if we take in 2 spinners. Cameron Greene would've been ideal but he's stress fractured his back.

[ElwoodBlues1]

I don't consider Curtley Ambrose, Joel Garner or Jeff Thompson less skilled than James Anderson, they just have different skills!

In contrast I could probably claim that recent events and rule changes limiting short pitched bowling, to make the game friendlier to participate in at lower levels, have left batsmen less skilled in dealing with it. What would Ian Chappell, Gordon Greenidge or Viv Richards have done to Wagner, Kim Hughes even and Kim was hardly a hard man of the game?

That doesn't make the Wade / Wagner tussle less interesting, it just makes it different from the norm and somewhat extending the range of Test Cricket beyond modern vanilla!

I'll disagree on Anderson and the those three former quicks...the latter were intimidators who banged it in short to hit batsman, Thommos variation was the sand shoe crusher.
Anderson has to be more skillful because he lacks the height and pace so needs to be doing more with the ball, sure bowling a good bouncer takes some skill but not really at the same level as
bowling a genuine outswinger when conditions dont suit IMHO.
Kim Hughes actually commented when he played that Australia should comb the beaches to find tall athletic specimens that could match the Windies tall rangy quicks...

Wade and Wagner are hardly Lillee and Viv, its a boring contest between two average cricketers, watching Wade body up to Wagner's harmless 130k rubbish doesnt exactly get the juices flowing.Wagner has achieved notoriety and a high world ranking for bowling a short carp line at inept batsman but skillful I dont call him, I call Boult and Southee skilled. I'll agree the batting skill in playing short pitched bowling is poor overall these days compared to the past and that viewing persistent short pitched bowling is different in a novelty way but its not quality cricket that I enjoy. Broad to Warner or Hazlewood to Root is what I would rather watch..

[LP]

I don't get the big deal about "boring 130kph", ......... that's Glenn McGrath's speed range.

I was a bowling all-rounder, I could swing the ball either way, bowl leg and off cutters, knuckle balls and toe crushers, but for life of me with all my skills and practice I couldn't bowl 145kph(90mph). 130kph(80mph) no problems, that extra 10kph is nearly impossible for all but a very select few.

Bowling fast is a skill on it's own, but it doesn't make for good cricket.

Bowling at 130kph(80mph) is neither slow bowling nor bad cricket.

I gather this idea that 130kph is boring and slow comes from armchair critics who have never faced an 80 mph bowler.
(btw., For non-cricketing followers of this debate, or just cricket watchers, a 130kph bowler would be faster than nearly all club cricketers, many or most sub-district or even district 2nd, 3rd or 4th cricketers. There is nobody you've watched in the local nets or park that is likely to be bowling 130kph or faster.)

I think Wagner getting a bunch of 130kph balls on the money at any length is far superior to Tait bowling one extraordinary unplayable delivery out of every hundred!

[ElwoodBlues1]

I don't get the big deal about "boring 130kph", ......... that's Glenn McGrath's speed range.

I was a bowling all-rounder, I could swing the ball either way, bowl leg and off cutters, knuckle balls and toe crushers, but for life of me with all my skills and practice I couldn't bowl 145kph(90mph). 130kph(80mph) no problems, that extra 10kph is nearly impossible for all but a very select few.

Bowling fast is a skill on it's own, but it doesn't make for good cricket.

Bowling at 130kph(80mph) is neither slow bowling nor bad cricket.

I gather this idea that 130kph is boring and slow comes from armchair critics who have never faced an 80 mph bowler.
(btw., For non-cricketing followers of this debate, or just cricket watchers, a 130kph bowler would be faster than nearly all club cricketers, many or most sub-district or even district 2nd, 3rd or 4th cricketers. There is nobody you've watched in the local nets or park that is likely to be bowling 130kph or faster.)

I think Wagner getting a bunch of 130kph balls on the money at any length is far superior to Tait bowling one extraordinary unplayable delivery out of every hundred!

NZ selectors have decided to go with 2 metre uncapped Kyle Jamison as a replacement for Lachie Ferguson, 5 wickets so far in the NZ domestic season so he hasnt been picked on over whelming form and its fairly obvious why he has been picked....I rest my case.

[Professer E]

LP is on the money.  I've been to sub district level net sessions with the radar guns set up etc and very very few district level blokes exceed 120.  And at that level,  for a bloke who batted at ten or eleven, that's bloody quick.  How guys make it look easy smashing the likes of Starc square when he's a bees whatsit off in line or length at 145 plus is amazing.  The test level blokes are so good it's not comparable to us mortals.

[ElwoodBlues1]

LP is on the money.  I've been to sub district level net sessions with the radar guns set up etc and very very few district level blokes exceed 120.  And at that level,  for a bloke who batted at ten or eleven, that's bloody quick.  How guys make it look easy smashing the likes of Starc square when he's a bees whatsit off in line or length at 145 plus is amazing.  The test level blokes are so good it's not comparable to us mortals.

But thats the thing, mortals like us view 130k as quick but to Smith, Warner, Williamson and the other test batsman etc thats medium pace and a free hit unless its got something on it....
I watched Brett Lee bowl to one of the English media in a net session and he was just rolling his arm over but it was scary stuff how rapid the ball got to the batsman so I get it but you cant tell me
Travis Head was out to high quality pace bowling for example, he played a crape shot to a crape ball that a player like Gilchrist would have hit out of the stadium.

[capcom]

I remember that EB.  Brett took it easy on him and he learnt a good lesson

[malo]

130-135 is plenty quick enough if you've got the control to go with it & are either hitting the seam, or getting late swing. As we've seen in the past, our batsmen have very little idea on how to play the moving ball...no matter what speed its delivered at !

As for rules on short pitched bowling leading to poor technique in recent years.....I'd go even further back to the development of protective equipment (helmet really).  Batsmen are quite prepared to wear a knock on the scone these days as they know (mostly) they're going to be protected.  This has led to a lot of players having very little idea of how to counter attack, or even evade the bouncer.  I'm certainly not suggesting that helmets are a bad thing, they had to happen, but we see less & less players who are great instinct players of the short ball (the likes of Ponting).