5th Test Border Gavaskar Trophy January 3-7 1000hrs @ the SCG

[Topkent]

46.56...thats his First-Class average with the ball.

Yeah. If he's hard done by Glenn Maxwell could have been our front line spinner as well

 

[beatnik]

But... he's a 38-year-old who has averaged under 30 over the past year (28 since start of last summer). It's not just the recent series v India.

If he was 30 I'd agree with you and back him to recapture past form. But he's not.

We've only had two batsmen over the past 45 years that have played at age 38+. Border and S Waugh - two of our greatest. Both retired before reaching 39. And neither were opening batsmen. Time catches us all.

Might he perform well in Sri Lanka on slower pitches? Maybe. But then it means blooding someone new for the TC and Ashes.

That’s not the same as “doesn’t deserve it” though, is it now?

Personally I think we might need him for the Ashes…we don’t need 2 rookie openers at once and don’t want Head to have to open the batting

 

[sr36]

I always wonder how unlucky Stuey Macgill feels, he's Australia's second greatest ever leg spinner and probably will still be for 100 more years. If he came along in any other era essentially he takes 500 test wickets. He was so unlucky to be born the same time as Warne

We'll never know. The advantage of Warne meant MacGill played most of his tests as a mature bowler at his peak. His record might not have been as outstanding if he was the number one guy on the way up.

 

[PhatBoy]

To watch them back to back is to feel genuinely sorry for Darryl Cullinan. Poor dude. He was a good batter. He was really good! And Warney just ruined the poor bastard.

And aside from the Warne stigma arguably his finest moment came in an innings no one even remembers him for:

When he smashed 94 out of 175 during the infamous ‘you guys are history’ Devon Malcolm demolition when Dev took 9-57 and absolutely destroyed the rest of the SA batting line up. Cullinan was the only batsman he didn’t get and was basically batting on a different wicket

 

[the_interloper]

They took everyone to the cleaners - including Shane Warne.

Australia is a spinners graveyard - particularly for finger spinners. The greats from all over the world come here and don't fire a shot. Murali averaged 75 in Aust. Swann 53, Ashwin 42.

Lyon has averaged 31 in Australia and outbowled every Australian or visiting spinner of any persuasion just about every game for a decade. And then also done well on every other continent.

When the time comes, he'll be the hardest player in our team to replace.

I agree with this, i mean they tried enough guys before they got onto him. Murphy looks a player but we won't really find out for a while, he'll only be playing when we're in the subcontinent, Lyon seems pretty resilient in terms of his body.

Amazed Murali averaged 75 here, that's incredible

 

[sr36]

I agree with this, i mean they tried enough guys before they got onto him. Murphy looks a player but we won't really find out for a while, he'll only be playing when we're in the subcontinent, Lyon seems pretty resilient in terms of his body.

Amazed Murali averaged 75 here, that's incredible

Lyon is really underrated. There's never been a harder time to be a spinner in Aust. Tests don't go 5 days. Sydney is no longer a spinner's paradise. Pink ball has turned Adelaide into a seamers pitch. This is from a couple of years ago, but I don't think it's changed much since.

Nathan Lyon compared to other spinners in the Aust test matches he's played. Warnes average was 27 vs 41 from other spinners.

Player	Balls	Runs	Wkts	Ave	Econ	SR	5w	10w
Nathan Lyon	13665	6707	204	32.87	2.94	66.9	8	2
Others	18703	11321	183	61.86	3.63	102.2	2	0
Total	32368	18028	387	46.58

 

[Topkent]

We'll never know. The advantage of Warne meant MacGill played most of his tests as a mature bowler at his peak. His record might not have been as outstanding if he was the number one guy on the way up.

This could be true, Warne was probably the only spinner ever who was able to intimidate people with mind games like he was a fast bowler, the way he'd stand at the top of his mark and move the field around and stare he could build an atmosphere and a pressure that was box office for a stock standard leggie.

MacGill didn't have that, but could have done what Lyons done? Yeah I reckon.

 

[Rabish Binney]

Only played 46 Test matches. If only he played more Test's. Averaged 29 in Tests and averaged 21 in ODI.

Up there with the best finger spinners I've seen.

Was he the one that could get the ball to turn the other way whilst still bowling with an off spinning action?

 

[swanssince2002]

Interesting that you guys talked about looking for a spinner post-Warne. Stumbled on a video which talked about just that. What a journey to get to Lyon - I think 12 spinners were tried out during that time.

Hauritz seemed like the best of the rest and I thought it would be a seamless transition to MacGill after Warne but injuries and father time hit him.

 

[sr36]

MacGill didn't have that, but could have done what Lyons done? Yeah I reckon.

I think Zampas point is that MacGill couldn't have done what Lyon does and vice versa.

Both greats of their craft with the standard strengths and weaknesses of their craft. MacGill turned it a mile and bowled a heap of deadly balls. He was a real strike bowler who could rip through a team. But he did throw down some rubbish in amongst the deadly balls. He wasn't your man to lock up an end and build up the pressure in the attritional style that the Aussies currently favour. I think we'd choose Lyon over him as he suits our game plan more.

Warney transcends because he was a strike bowler who could also lock up an end. The best of both worlds.

 

[Black Diamond]

Hauritz seemed like the best of the rest and I thought it would be a seamless transition to MacGill after Warne but injuries and father time hit him.

Jason Krejza was the best of the rest. I will die on this hill.

Flight was good, could turn it and extract bounce. They were frightened after his second test and reverted to the safer Hauritz option.

 

[Topkent]

I think Zampas point is that MacGill couldn't have done what Lyon does and vice versa.

Both greats of their craft with the standard strengths and weaknesses of their craft. MacGill turned it a mile and bowled a heap of deadly balls. He was a real strike bowler who could rip through a team. But he did throw down some rubbish in amongst the deadly balls. He wasn't your man to lock up an end and build up the pressure in the attritional style that the Aussies currently favour. I think we'd choose Lyon over him as he suits our game plan more.

Warney transcends because he was a strike bowler who could also lock up an end. The best of both worlds.

And Warne had McGrath at the other end who could be a strike bowler who also held up and end and created pressure to allow Warne to attack even more as well. What a team lol

I think MacGill could have a licence to attack if we had an allrounder like Watson or Webster who could also bowl a 7 over spell and just bowl stump to stump. You're right though MacGill arguably spun it more than Warne which meant he was never gonna have full control every time. His action was also wild lol

 

[Lunchtime]

Was he the one that could get the ball to turn the other way whilst still bowling with an off spinning action?

Yep thats him. He was the first to bowl the doosra.

 

[Lunchtime]

This could be true, Warne was probably the only spinner ever who was able to intimidate people with mind games like he was a fast bowler, the way he'd stand at the top of his mark and move the field around and stare he could build an atmosphere and a pressure that was box office for a stock standard leggie.

MacGill didn't have that, but could have done what Lyons done? Yeah I reckon.

I reckon MacGill could of achieved what Lyon has achieved wicket wise. It's just that MacGill was a world class leg spin bowler but in front of him (Warne) was a freak leg spin bowler.

 

[Lunchtime]

Jason Krejza was the best of the rest. I will die on this hill.

Flight was good, could turn it and extract bounce. They were frightened after his second test and reverted to the safer Hauritz option.

Jason really used to give the ball a rip.

 

[PhatBoy]

Lyon is really underrated. There's never been a harder time to be a spinner in Aust. Tests don't go 5 days. Sydney is no longer a spinner's paradise. Pink ball has turned Adelaide into a seamers pitch. This is from a couple of years ago, but I don't think it's changed much since.

Nathan Lyon compared to other spinners in the Aust test matches he's played. Warnes average was 27 vs 41 from other spinners.

Player	Balls	Runs	Wkts	Ave	Econ	SR	5w	10w
Nathan Lyon	13665	6707	204	32.87	2.94	66.9	8	2
Others	18703	11321	183	61.86	3.63	102.2	2	0
Total	32368	18028	387	46.58

It’s a double edged sword though.

1. Generally bowlers of any persuasion will know their conditions and bowl them better than others so most of the spinners he’s competing against - Ashwin has bowled quite a bit here in that time, Maharaj a bit, Jadeja, they’re probably the main ones - they’re not going to be as equipped to bowl here regardless of how un helpful the conditions are. Lyon is a GOOD bowler, an excellent bowler. He knows how to use whatever IS on offer be it bounce or breeze or whatever, or any spin that he might be able to get.

2. No one in their right mind can ignore how helpful it has to have been to bowl behind 3 guys who so regularly have the opposition 4/100. It is so infrequent that Lyon comes on to bowl with the pressure on HIM in Australia. That is a huge thing to have in your favour just as it is for the other guys who get to bowl in their conditions overseas.

 

[sr36]

It’s a double edged sword though.

1. Generally bowlers of any persuasion will know their conditions and bowl them better than others so most of the spinners he’s competing against - Ashwin has bowled quite a bit here in that time, Maharaj a bit, Jadeja, they’re probably the main ones - they’re not going to be as equipped to bowl here regardless of how un helpful the conditions are. Lyon is a GOOD bowler, an excellent bowler. He knows how to use whatever IS on offer be it bounce or breeze or whatever, or any spin that he might be able to get.

2. No one in their right mind can ignore how helpful it has to have been to bowl behind 3 guys who so regularly have the opposition 4/100. It is so infrequent that Lyon comes on to bowl with the pressure on HIM in Australia. That is a huge thing to have in your favour just as it is for the other guys who get to bowl in their conditions overseas.

No doubt. You see it with Lyon in Asia too. It's taken him a lot of tours to become a good spinner in Asian conditions.

But how much more effective Lyon has been in Aussie conditions compared to all other spinners has been remarkable. Ave of 31 vs 61 for other spinners. Warnes was 27 vs 41.

Post Lyon, it'll be hard to find a specialist spinner who justifies a game on spicy drop in pitches that don't break up - even on the very rare occasions the games get to day 5.

I'd love us to find a big turning leggie strike bowler with heaps of variations, or an offie who can keep it as tight as Lyon and chip out wickets as regularly as he does, but I wouldn't hold my breath. Lyon is unobtrusive but remarkable.

 

[sr36]

Jason Krejza was the best of the rest. I will die on this hill.

Flight was good, could turn it and extract bounce. They were frightened after his second test and reverted to the safer Hauritz option.

He was an offie who bowled like the stereotypical leggie. Gave it a massive rip and thus bowled some peaches, but dragged down a boundary ball every over. Couldn't keep it tight. Thus couldn't do the job we want from a spinner.

 

[PhatBoy]

Jason Krejza was the best of the rest. I will die on this hill.

Flight was good, could turn it and extract bounce. They were frightened after his second test and reverted to the safer Hauritz option.

He had a first class strike rate of 79.

For relativity’ sake, Dan Cullen’s was 81.

Kiwi Mark Craig, one of the worst bowlers I’ve seen to get more than a couple of test matches, was 75.

In that one test where Krejza got his 8-200 odd he DID throw it up and give it a rip but if he was doing that throughout his 50-odd shield games it wasn’t working real well from a strike rate perspective even for a spinner

 

[DaRick]

I think Zampas point is that MacGill couldn't have done what Lyon does and vice versa.

Both greats of their craft with the standard strengths and weaknesses of their craft. MacGill turned it a mile and bowled a heap of deadly balls. He was a real strike bowler who could rip through a team. But he did throw down some rubbish in amongst the deadly balls. He wasn't your man to lock up an end and build up the pressure in the attritional style that the Aussies currently favour. I think we'd choose Lyon over him as he suits our game plan more.

Warney transcends because he was a strike bowler who could also lock up an end. The best of both worlds.

As I've said before, I prefer MacGill against batting lineups that can't play spin (ENG 98/99) or against incompetent batting lineups in general (BAN 2003/04), because they won't pick his wrong'un or negotiate his turn very well.

Against batting lineups that can play spin, I prefer Lyon, because he's quicker through the air and gets more bounce with his overspin, so it's more difficult to get down the wicket to him or cut him - Alastair Cook, who was otherwise a very good player of spin, had notable difficulty with Lyon's extra bounce. Plus he coughs up fewer four balls.

He had a first class strike rate of 79.

For relativity’ sake, Dan Cullen’s was 81.

Kiwi Mark Craig, one of the worst bowlers I’ve seen to get more than a couple of test matches, was 75.

In that one test where Krejza got his 8-200 odd he DID throw it up and give it a rip but if he was doing that throughout his 50-odd shield games it wasn’t working real well from a strike rate perspective even for a spinner

Mark Craig (and Dom Bess for that matter) are actually good analogues for Krejza.

Plenty of turn but zero control or variation - which made them easy targets when the ball wasn't turning.

Assuming that big turn generally makes a spinner threatening is a mistake, but a common one - I know, because I've made it.

 

[big_e]

MacGill averaged 22.1 when Warne was in the side and 33.5 when he wasn't. Very, very important context when talking about his record.

 

[western royboy]

This could be true, Warne was probably the only spinner ever who was able to intimidate people with mind games like he was a fast bowler, the way he'd stand at the top of his mark and move the field around and stare he could build an atmosphere and a pressure that was box office for a stock standard leggie.

MacGill didn't have that, but could have done what Lyons done? Yeah I reckon.

Warne stands alone as a bowler on any level. Macgill as good as he was, is limited by what type of surfaces he was effective on because he was a completely different bowler to Warne.


Using the same logic, Lyon is streets ahead of any other offie that we’ve ever had

 

[Topkent]

MacGill averaged 22.1 when Warne was in the side and 33.5 when he wasn't. Very, very important context when talking about his record.

Who cares about that context? Warne averaged 29 in those same games.

That 33 includes his two series after Warne retired where he was absolutely shocking and should never have been picked. If you ignore those his average is 30 without Warne.

30 is a very good average for a leggie.
22 is a world class average and better than any spinner ever who's bowled any amount. Hardly a stick to beat him with

 

[Black Diamond]

He was an offie who bowled like the stereotypical leggie. Gave it a massive rip and thus bowled some peaches, but dragged down a boundary ball every over. Couldn't keep it tight. Thus couldn't do the job we want from a spinner.

I just thought with him we should have been more patient. I don't agree with defaulting to spinners to play a containment role.

 

[DaRick]

I just thought with him we should have been more patient. I don't agree with defaulting to spinners to play a containment role.

IMO he would have been another Mark Craig if we tried that.

Sometimes you just have to pick what's there. And given McGain's dismal performance when tried, the most suitable bowler during the 2008-11 period was Hauritz/O'Keefe.