Cook - Current Aussie attack better than 05/06/07

invisiblecoolers wrote:Has Cook gone Crazy or is he doing a damage control, M Vaughan posted this question on twitter, lemme post this to 606v2 fans, what made Cook feel this and is it the real scanario?

The current crop better than McGrath,B Lee, Gillespie, S Clarke, Warne, S Macgill,  and the other countless who didn't get enough chances like A Bickel etc,.. ?  

KP_fan wrote:

invisiblecoolers wrote:Has Cook gone Crazy or is he doing a damage control, M Vaughan posted this question on twitter, lemme post this to 606v2 fans, what made Cook feel this and is it the real scanario?

The current crop better than McGrath,B Lee, Gillespie, S Clarke, Warne, S Macgill,  and the other countless who didn't get enough chances like A Bickel etc,.. ?  

whether True or otherwise is besides the point.....Cook  sounds like " My white-wash was better than yours"...and hence sounding cheap and undignified.

he would do well to keep his mouth shut and if asked for ...simply state that his side for thoroughly outplayed.

His comment " I have the vote of confidence " was also uncalled for......doesn't do him any good but a lot of harm.

but I have been saying right from the start of the tour Cook has opened his mouth many times at the wrong-time and spoken wrong words.

kingraf wrote: A more fair question is: Is did the current attackperform better than any previous Australian Ashes bowling attack over the course of a series? In my opinion - yes.

Stella wrote:

KP_fan wrote:

invisiblecoolers wrote:Has Cook gone Crazy or is he doing a damage control, M Vaughan posted this question on twitter, lemme post this to 606v2 fans, what made Cook feel this and is it the real scanario?

The current crop better than McGrath,B Lee, Gillespie, S Clarke, Warne, S Macgill,  and the other countless who didn't get enough chances like A Bickel etc,.. ?  

whether True or otherwise is besides the point.....Cook  sounds like " My white-wash was better than yours"...and hence sounding cheap and undignified.

he would do well to keep his mouth shut and if asked for ...simply state that his side for thoroughly outplayed.

His comment " I have the vote of confidence " was also uncalled for......doesn't do him any good but a lot of harm.

but I have been saying right from the start of the tour Cook has opened his mouth many times at the wrong-time and spoken wrong words.

He was paying them a complement. Is that so wrong?

KP_fan wrote:

Stella wrote:

KP_fan wrote:

invisiblecoolers wrote:Has Cook gone Crazy or is he doing a damage control, M Vaughan posted this question on twitter, lemme post this to 606v2 fans, what made Cook feel this and is it the real scanario?

The current crop better than McGrath,B Lee, Gillespie, S Clarke, Warne, S Macgill,  and the other countless who didn't get enough chances like A Bickel etc,.. ?  

whether True or otherwise is besides the point.....Cook  sounds like " My white-wash was better than yours"...and hence sounding cheap and undignified.

he would do well to keep his mouth shut and if asked for ...simply state that his side for thoroughly outplayed.

His comment " I have the vote of confidence " was also uncalled for......doesn't do him any good but a lot of harm.

but I have been saying right from the start of the tour Cook has opened his mouth many times at the wrong-time and spoken wrong words.

He was paying them a complement. Is that so wrong?

whether True or otherwise is besides the point.....Cook  sounds like " My white-wash was better than yours"...and hence sounding cheap and undignified.

Peter Seabiscuit Wheeler wrote:

kingraf wrote: A more fair question is: Is did the current attackperform better than any previous Australian Ashes bowling attack over the course of a series? In my opinion - yes.

Id go with that. Its still not up there with the star quality and career records of the golden era greats, but how often did those bowlers play as a full strength unit at the top of their game for an entire ashes series in the last decade (which is whats being talked about here)?
Previous ashes series weve seen the best Aussie bowlers injure themselves playing football, not get picked, no ball every second delivery, or bowl like this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MjoGpmqrJMk.

I dont think its vastly unreasonable to say that Australia bowled better as a complete unit through this series than they have done in any series in the last decade. That doesnt mean they are the all time greatest Austlrian attack any more than England should have been claiming their batting line upo was the best it had ever been after trashing Aus last time out.

msp83 wrote:Nathan Lyon had a very good series and he's a capable spinner. But when considering Australian attacks of the recent past, the Shane Warne Glenn McGrath combine has to be considered at least as 3 bowlers. The Australians bowled absolutely superbly throughout this series, but they are not better than the Warne-McGrath attack backed up by the likes of Brett Lee and Jason Gillespie.
Its all gone Alastair, cool down, get done with the ODIs, go home and rest, all these delusions will be over!.

alfie wrote:Agree with a lot of the comments above.  It isn't really an issue of where these individual bowlers rate in overall lists of Australian Test players.  We are really talking about the group of bowlers as a team , over this one series : and Cook is of course only going back to his first series , ie 2006.
2006/7 was a great bunch.  But they were certainly taken apart in the first innings in Adelaide (never mind they came back with a bang in the second !)  The current group really hardly weakened at any point in the series ( OK , maybe a little in Perth second innings : but even in 2006 that same innings proved a bit trickier to demolish...)

Fair enough call , I reckon.

Peter Seabiscuit Wheeler wrote:

msp83 wrote:Nathan Lyon had a very good series and he's a capable spinner. But when considering Australian attacks of the recent past, the Shane Warne Glenn McGrath combine has to be considered at least as 3 bowlers. The Australians bowled absolutely superbly throughout this series, but they are not better than the Warne-McGrath attack backed up by the likes of Brett Lee and Jason Gillespie.
Its all gone Alastair, cool down, get done with the ODIs, go home and rest, all these delusions will be over!.

How many tests in 05/06/07 did England face Warne and McGrath back up by Lee and Gillespie?

guildfordbat wrote:

alfie wrote:Agree with a lot of the comments above.  It isn't really an issue of where these individual bowlers rate in overall lists of Australian Test players.  We are really talking about the group of bowlers as a team , over this one series : and Cook is of course only going back to his first series , ie 2006.
2006/7 was a great bunch.  But they were certainly taken apart in the first innings in Adelaide (never mind they came back with a bang in the second !)  The current group really hardly weakened at any point in the series ( OK , maybe a little in Perth second innings : but even in 2006 that same innings proved a bit trickier to demolish...)

Fair enough call , I reckon.

Alfie - sound comments which I agree with.

You probably do need to factor in some of the comments on Sir Thread's fred about how bad England were in this series to determine how good the Australian bowlers were! However, for consistency, control and domination in a single series it's hard to see past this current quartet.

100 wickets in a 5 match series with England only twice topping 300 and six times all out for less than 180 makes a very compelling case.

PS From my youth, I would give a respectful nod to Lillee, Thomson, Walker and Mallett who often had England in the soup in the mid '70s although even they had the odd stutter along the way.

msp83 wrote:

guildfordbat wrote:

alfie wrote:Agree with a lot of the comments above.  It isn't really an issue of where these individual bowlers rate in overall lists of Australian Test players.  We are really talking about the group of bowlers as a team , over this one series : and Cook is of course only going back to his first series , ie 2006.
2006/7 was a great bunch.  But they were certainly taken apart in the first innings in Adelaide (never mind they came back with a bang in the second !)  The current group really hardly weakened at any point in the series ( OK , maybe a little in Perth second innings : but even in 2006 that same innings proved a bit trickier to demolish...)

Fair enough call , I reckon.

Alfie - sound comments which I agree with.

You probably do need to factor in some of the comments on Sir Thread's fred about how bad England were in this series to determine how good the Australian bowlers were! However, for consistency, control and domination in a single series it's hard to see past this current quartet.

100 wickets in a 5 match series with England only twice topping 300 and six times all out for less than 180 makes a very compelling case.

PS From my youth, I would give a respectful nod to Lillee, Thomson, Walker and Mallett who often had England in the soup in the mid '70s although even they had the odd stutter along the way.

Guildford, the current attack certainly did a better demolition job, but that's about it really. The overall quality of England batting was much better then than what it was here. KP and Collingwood were pretty good with the bat, and Cook, Bell, Flintoff and Strauss also chipped in though not regularly enough. But in this series, England's struggles with the bat that was going on for the best part of 2 years reached its lowest point. Doubtless is the brilliance of this Australian bowling unit, but to suggest they were individually or collectively better than the Warne and McGrath led lot is nothing but escapism in my view.

guildfordbat wrote:

msp83 wrote:

guildfordbat wrote:

alfie wrote:Agree with a lot of the comments above.  It isn't really an issue of where these individual bowlers rate in overall lists of Australian Test players.  We are really talking about the group of bowlers as a team , over this one series : and Cook is of course only going back to his first series , ie 2006.
2006/7 was a great bunch.  But they were certainly taken apart in the first innings in Adelaide (never mind they came back with a bang in the second !)  The current group really hardly weakened at any point in the series ( OK , maybe a little in Perth second innings : but even in 2006 that same innings proved a bit trickier to demolish...)

Fair enough call , I reckon.

Alfie - sound comments which I agree with.

You probably do need to factor in some of the comments on Sir Thread's fred about how bad England were in this series to determine how good the Australian bowlers were! However, for consistency, control and domination in a single series it's hard to see past this current quartet.

100 wickets in a 5 match series with England only twice topping 300 and six times all out for less than 180 makes a very compelling case.

PS From my youth, I would give a respectful nod to Lillee, Thomson, Walker and Mallett who often had England in the soup in the mid '70s although even they had the odd stutter along the way.

Guildford, the current attack certainly did a better demolition job, but that's about it really. The overall quality of England batting was much better then than what it was here. KP and Collingwood were pretty good with the bat, and Cook, Bell, Flintoff and Strauss also chipped in though not regularly enough. But in this series, England's struggles with the bat that was going on for the best part of 2 years reached its lowest point. Doubtless is the brilliance of this Australian bowling unit, but to suggest they were individually or collectively better than the Warne and McGrath led lot is nothing but escapism in my view.

Msp - re your final sentence. I trust you appreciate from my post that I'm not suggesting that is the case at all (even if others are).

kingraf wrote:I'm sorry but are you really telling me that rolling out Artheton, Thorpe, Stewart and Ramprakesh is really the threshold for greatness, and that is somehow a greater achievement?

Nore Staat wrote:In terms of bowling speed I believe Mitchell Johnson is faster than Glenn McGrath but slower than Brett Lee.

Can you give us the actual quote & context of supposed statement.

kingraf wrote:I think the OP is intentionally abstract. It's cool to say "are Siddle, Johnson, Harris really better than Lee, McGrath, Gillespie, Kasprowicz, Stuart Clark etc?" But that's unfair, because those guys never performed in concert as some eight-man pace battery. A more fair question is: Is the current attack better than any previous Ashes bowling attack? In my opinion - yes.

Stella wrote:

KP_fan wrote:

Stella wrote:

KP_fan wrote:

invisiblecoolers wrote:Has Cook gone Crazy or is he doing a damage control, M Vaughan posted this question on twitter, lemme post this to 606v2 fans, what made Cook feel this and is it the real scanario?

The current crop better than McGrath,B Lee, Gillespie, S Clarke, Warne, S Macgill,  and the other countless who didn't get enough chances like A Bickel etc,.. ?  

whether True or otherwise is besides the point.....Cook  sounds like " My white-wash was better than yours"...and hence sounding cheap and undignified.

he would do well to keep his mouth shut and if asked for ...simply state that his side for thoroughly outplayed.

His comment " I have the vote of confidence " was also uncalled for......doesn't do him any good but a lot of harm.

but I have been saying right from the start of the tour Cook has opened his mouth many times at the wrong-time and spoken wrong words.

He was paying them a complement. Is that so wrong?

whether True or otherwise is besides the point.....Cook  sounds like " My white-wash was better than yours"...and hence sounding cheap and undignified.

What are you going on about? Cook was speaking about the tour, and how disappointed he was, and also mentioned as to how good the Aussie attack was. There is absolutely nothing wrong with that at all. To me, he he doesn't speak from the heart enough.

Mike Selig wrote:The assertion is not unreasonable (which isn't to say that Harris, Siddle and co are better bowlers than McGrath etc.). I think the point is nobody from this 5 man attack has had a poor test.

Looking at recent Aussie attacks:

- declaring this attack better than the one(s) used in the previous 3 ashes series is self-evident: last time around we had Agar playing 2 tests, constant (enforced) chop and changing, an out-of sorts Pattinson at times, etc.; in 2010/11 we had Johnson spraying them apart from Perth, Bollinger and Hilfenhaus about as threatening as your gran trying to mug you with her false teeth, a plethora of fairly hopeless spinners, etc.; in 2009 Johnson was at his most infuriatingly inconsistent, and Stuart Clark bowling friendly medium pacers (which worked at Headingley but not at the Oval) - apart from that the attack was decent (Hauritz as a spinner compares reasonably to Lyon in this series) but there is probably no bowler you would take over any of the bowlers in this series.

I suppose 06/07 was a very strong attack: Clark at his peak, Warne, McGrath and Lee. McGrath was arguably not quite at his peak anymore (although he did produce some great performances), whilst Warne had a couple of moments, but was poor at Sydney say. Lee I thought was one of the unsung heroes of that series actually: came up with crucial wickets. However that attack conceded 550 at Adelaide, and strong second innings performances at Brisbane and Perth. Collingwood scored heavily, and he is hardly a great player (although arguably England are still to replace him in the middle-order). To state this current attack has bowled consistently better is debateable for sure, but not unreasonable.

2005, well McGrath could only play half the tests (and was clearly unfit at Old Trafford). Warne was masterful, Lee was excellent, but whoever bowled as 3rd seamer (Gillespie, Kasperwicz, Tait) were rubbish. No contest.

2002/03: again injuries played a part - Warne played only 3 tests, and McGrath 4. Indeed the Aus attack without Warne and McGrath at Sydney looked only decent (a sign of things to come...). Gillespie was excellent, and Lee and Bichel had their moments, but again, no contest.

2001: personally I think that Australian team was the greatest I've ever seen, and challenging for the best of all time. Langer (once he replaced Slater), Hayden, Ponting, Waugh, Waugh, Martyn, Gilchrist, Warne, Lee, Gillespie (at his absolute best), McGrath. Tough to beat that if you ask me. For the first 3 tests their attack was the best I've seen also: Warne at his best, McGrath at his best, Gillespie bowling superbly, and Lee as a bit of a wildcard but bowling some blistering pace. They fell off a bit towards the end of the series, but I would rank that attack slightly above this one, mainly because if you got through the seamers (as England did at Edgbaston) then you faced Warne... Cook wasn't playing though...

I could go back further (but not before the 90s), but would struggle to find an attack which has matched the current one I have to say..

Mike Selig wrote:I think this side bowled better (we were at least spared Harmison bowling balls off the strip, and Saj Mahmood bowling... well, just bowling to be honest) but batted less well than the side in 06/07. Having said that the side in 06/07 had its moments as well, namely the collapse at Adelaide, gifting Warne 5 wickets on the opening day at the MCG, collapsing at Sydney, etc.

Let's also not rewrite history: in 06/07 England arrived with much the same personnel as had played in 05, against an Aussie side with a few key differences (Hussey and Clark being the main two additions, and what a difference they made). Many thought they stood a good chance of retaining the ashes at the time and there was a lot of bullish talk from the fans and media before the series. Of course in hindsight this was very mistaken, but it's not as if the 06/07 were a bunch of no-hopers either (at the start of the tour at least).

It is always difficult to determine whether results such as these are because one side has played exceptionally well or the other exceptionally poorly. Usually a bit of both.

I don't think anybody is claiming this is a great Australian bowling attack (although IMO it is a very good one) - however they were great during this series.

msp83 wrote:

Mike Selig wrote:I think this side bowled better (we were at least spared Harmison bowling balls off the strip, and Saj Mahmood bowling... well, just bowling to be honest) but batted less well than the side in 06/07. Having said that the side in 06/07 had its moments as well, namely the collapse at Adelaide, gifting Warne 5 wickets on the opening day at the MCG, collapsing at Sydney, etc.

Let's also not rewrite history: in 06/07 England arrived with much the same personnel as had played in 05, against an Aussie side with a few key differences (Hussey and Clark being the main two additions, and what a difference they made). Many thought they stood a good chance of retaining the ashes at the time and there was a lot of bullish talk from the fans and media before the series. Of course in hindsight this was very mistaken, but it's not as if the 06/07 were a bunch of no-hopers either (at the start of the tour at least).

It is always difficult to determine whether results such as these are because one side has played exceptionally well or the other exceptionally poorly. Usually a bit of both.

I don't think anybody is claiming this is a great Australian bowling attack (although IMO it is a very good one) - however they were great during this series.

There is no doubt the current attack was superb in this series, but that doesn't make them greater than the previous attacks just like that. Cook would have been better off stopping at saying this Australian attack was great during the series concluded.
By the way Mike, Michael Clarke was part of the 05 Ashes, and England were missing their charismatic Ashes winning skipper Michael Vaughan, Marcus Trescothick and Simon Jones, 3 very key players who played major roles in the success of 2005.

msp83 wrote:

Mike Selig wrote:I think this side bowled better (we were at least spared Harmison bowling balls off the strip, and Saj Mahmood bowling... well, just bowling to be honest) but batted less well than the side in 06/07. Having said that the side in 06/07 had its moments as well, namely the collapse at Adelaide, gifting Warne 5 wickets on the opening day at the MCG, collapsing at Sydney, etc.

Let's also not rewrite history: in 06/07 England arrived with much the same personnel as had played in 05, against an Aussie side with a few key differences (Hussey and Clark being the main two additions, and what a difference they made). Many thought they stood a good chance of retaining the ashes at the time and there was a lot of bullish talk from the fans and media before the series. Of course in hindsight this was very mistaken, but it's not as if the 06/07 were a bunch of no-hopers either (at the start of the tour at least).

It is always difficult to determine whether results such as these are because one side has played exceptionally well or the other exceptionally poorly. Usually a bit of both.

I don't think anybody is claiming this is a great Australian bowling attack (although IMO it is a very good one) - however they were great during this series.

There is no doubt the current attack was superb in this series, but that doesn't make them greater than the previous attacks just like that. Cook would have been better off stopping at saying this Australian attack was great during the series concluded.
By the way Mike, Michael Clarke was part of the 05 Ashes, and England were missing their charismatic Ashes winning skipper Michael Vaughan, Marcus Trescothick and Simon Jones, 3 very key players who played major roles in the success of 2005.

msp83 wrote:

Mike Selig wrote:I think this side bowled better (we were at least spared Harmison bowling balls off the strip, and Saj Mahmood bowling... well, just bowling to be honest) but batted less well than the side in 06/07. Having said that the side in 06/07 had its moments as well, namely the collapse at Adelaide, gifting Warne 5 wickets on the opening day at the MCG, collapsing at Sydney, etc.

Let's also not rewrite history: in 06/07 England arrived with much the same personnel as had played in 05, against an Aussie side with a few key differences (Hussey and Clark being the main two additions, and what a difference they made). Many thought they stood a good chance of retaining the ashes at the time and there was a lot of bullish talk from the fans and media before the series. Of course in hindsight this was very mistaken, but it's not as if the 06/07 were a bunch of no-hopers either (at the start of the tour at least).

It is always difficult to determine whether results such as these are because one side has played exceptionally well or the other exceptionally poorly. Usually a bit of both.

I don't think anybody is claiming this is a great Australian bowling attack (although IMO it is a very good one) - however they were great during this series.

There is no doubt the current attack was superb in this series, but that doesn't make them greater than the previous attacks just like that. Cook would have been better off stopping at saying this Australian attack was great during the series concluded.
By the way Mike, Michael Clarke was part of the 05 Ashes, and England were missing their charismatic Ashes winning skipper Michael Vaughan, Marcus Trescothick and Simon Jones, 3 very key players who played major roles in the success of 2005.