North should replace Hauritz as frontline spinner - MacGill

[aussie1st]

STUART MacGILL has backed Marcus North to be retained for the coming Ashes series - as Australia's first-choice spinner.

For arguably the most contentious position for the opening Test at the Gabba, selectors are agonising between maligned offie Nathan Hauritz, NSW teammate Steve Smith, Tasmanian left-armer Xavier Doherty and a host of unproven candidates.

However, MacGill, who bagged 208 Test wickets with his ripping leg breaks, believes the answer could be right in front of their noses.
Advertisement: Story continues below

''I think Nathan Hauritz has done a very good job in a variety of situations and environments over the past 12 to 24 months,'' MacGill told The Sun-Herald.

''But I've said this before the 2009 Ashes, I'm of the opinion that Marcus North can do the job that Nathan has been asked to do.

''If that's the case, then Marcus North plays and Nathan doesn't. It's a very, very tough call, but by picking a No.6 batsman who can do that job, you've got another bowler. If it's not Marcus North [in that role], then he goes, because he's not the best No.6.

North should replace Hauritz as frontline spinner - MacGill

He seems to be one of the few ex Aussie players actually calling for North and Hussey to be dropped. Really the only difference between Hauritz and North is the fact Hauritz is use to bowling the longer spells. Else as MacGill has pointed out there is little difference between what the two do. The main problem is if North isn't doing his main job which is making runs. But given hes a lock for the first test, that four man pace attack looks good to me with North as the main spinner.

 

[TumTum]

Didn't help us at the Oval did it.

 

[Biggy]

If they start playing North at 8 then that'll do me.

 

[sifter132]

It might work well for Brisbane and Perth when a 4 quick attack will look better. Otherwise, no I don't think so.

 

[RoboRocks]

The problem comes when you get to Adelaide and Sydney, where the pitch might turn. The spinner needs to play a significant role and North won't bowl England out. For me, although I've said it before, Krejza is the best wicket taking option. He may concede a lot of runs, but he could bowl a side out on a turning track on day 5.

 

[aussie1st]

Didn't help us at the Oval did it.

Works both ways, playing Hauritz didn't help us in Cardiff and didn't help us in India.

The problem comes when you get to Adelaide and Sydney, where the pitch might turn. The spinner needs to play a significant role and North won't bowl England out.

Well a) Hauritz barely gets turn so that doesn't help him! b) Hauritz won't bowl England out either. Really the only spinner worth looking at the moment is O'Keefe and hes too raw. Selectors would be hypocrites to pick Krejza given he hasn't improved on the reason for being dropped.

 

[pcfan123]

Stupid idea, he is a part timer and they are never good substitutes for specialist bowlers.

There is so much talent in Australia in all departments of the game, its amazing that they are trying to salvage this hack instead of testing out young blood.

 

[Cricketman]

I don't know much about Australian cricket but there isn't much talent from what I can see in the spin dept. Didn't see Doherty bowl but he looks like a good prospect looking at his figures vs a side that is probably best against spin bowling.

 

[pcfan123]

Dropping him down the order and playing him as a spinner is not going to miraculously improve his spin bowling though. That is my point, he is a mediocre spin bowler when compared to actual Test specialist spinners.

 

[War]

If he was performing consistently with the bat @ # 6. Then the need to even think of spinner playing would be useless. But its a bit over the top to drop him down the order & play him as main spinner, that would mess up AUS balance immensely.

War added 3 Minutes and 16 Seconds later...

The problem comes when you get to Adelaide and Sydney, where the pitch might turn. The spinner needs to play a significant role and North won't bowl England out. For me, although I've said it before, Krejza is the best wicket taking option. He may concede a lot of runs, but he could bowl a side out on a turning track on day 5.

Yep. The selectors in Adelaide & SCG tests, should suck it up & realise they made a stupid error with Krejza ITFP & pick him. Since he is indeed very likely do such a job on turning 5th day track better than any spinner in AUS regardless of the fact that tasmania & AUS selectors dont know how to use him in long version cricket.

War added 3 Minutes and 11 Seconds later...

Works both ways, playing Hauritz didn't help us in Cardiff and didn't help us in India..

Exactly. People seem to forget all of his other failures on 5th day tracks when he had to chance to bowl out teams pre & post Oval 09. But yet make it sound as if Hauritz would have definately done a job when if he had played @ the Oval. Crazy logic really.

 

[sifter132]

Just on Krejza, an attacking spinner is a very sexy idea, but there have been VERY few of them in Test cricket history. Warne, Murali, MacGill and Swann basically. Here are the spinners with strike rates below 60:
Bowling records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | Cricinfo.com
Look at Bevan and Katich! And Krejza's 25th on that list with only 2 Tests!

It makes sense that your spinner ISN'T attacking because he's generally going to bowl more overs than your fast bowlers. 30 overs a day of attacking, more risky spin is going to be more expensive. I mean Krejza's Test RPO is 4.5 - that's 135 runs for 3 wickets maybe in your 30 overs? Krejza's FC RPO is almost 4 as well BTW, just in case you think I'm exagerrating. 30 overs from Hauritz by comparison might be 2.5 wickets for 94 using his RPO of 3.16. Is the chance of the half wicket worth the 40 runs (or 20 using Krazy's FC RPO)? That's what you need to decide with the balance of your attack.

It probably would have been worth it in India, because even when Hauritz was trying to defend he was getting scored on quickly. In that case you might as well have a more attacking spinner. But until EVERY team can spank Hauritz like that, I don't think the switch to an attacking spinner needs to be made.

 

[War]

Just on Krejza, an attacking spinner is a very sexy idea, but there have been VERY few of them in Test cricket history. Warne, Murali, MacGill and Swann basically. Here are the spinners with strike rates below 60:
Bowling records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | Cricinfo.com
Look at Bevan and Katich! And Krejza's 25th on that list with only 2 Tests!

It makes sense that your spinner ISN'T attacking because he's generally going to bowl more overs than your fast bowlers. 30 overs a day of attacking, more risky spin is going to be more expensive. I mean Krejza's Test RPO is 4.5 - that's 135 runs for 3 wickets maybe in your 30 overs? Krejza's FC RPO is almost 4 as well BTW, just in case you think I'm exagerrating. 30 overs from Hauritz by comparison might be 2.5 wickets for 94 using his RPO of 3.16. Is the chance of the half wicket worth the 40 runs (or 20 using Krazy's FC RPO)? That's what you need to decide with the balance of your attack.

It probably would have been worth it in India, because even when Hauritz was trying to defend he was getting scored on quickly. In that case you might as well have a more attacking spinner. But until EVERY team can spank Hauritz like that, I don't think the switch to an attacking spinner needs to be made.

Well yes. Generally you would want your spinner to be fairly economical, especially give the aggressiveness of AUS pace attack.

That is where AUS & Tasmania have totally failed to understand how to use Krejza. They expected him to be economical in 4-man attacks, when his strenght is to be aggressive & when he struggled to do the role they wanted to dropped him.

Fact is as i've articulated before. Understanding Krejza strenght means you can only play in on real turners (mainly found in the subcontinent) & every SCG & Adelaide home test. Since he will aid bowl on good sides more often than not on wearing 5th day/turners wickets. Compared to Hauritz who even if teams dont destroy him like IND did, he will not ever do a job a a 5th day turner. So whatever potential control he would bring to Ponting becomes redundant reallly.

Otherwise the 4 quicks have to play in every other tests, where conditions aren't as spinner friendly. Since in them is AUS most likely chance of taking 20wickets in most conditions more often than not IMO. We cant expect perfection now with no legends like Warne & McGrath to take wickets in all condtions basically all the time. Some test will arise when the 4-man attacks struggles to win you a test & bowl out a team - but i'm confident it wont happen very often at all, once they are all bowling to potential.

 

[sifter132]

I could see Krejza as a useful 2nd spinner in a Test Australia must win eg. Sydney this summer if Aussies are down 1 or drawing. Otherwise, nup - no sell. Too risky.

I'd have 4 quicks in Brisbane, Perth. Hauritz in Adelaide, Melbourne and Sydney. All 3 of those places get turn and England would be able to bat pretty well there even against 4 quicks, so I'd rather have Hauritz as my plan B, not North.

And I think Hauritz should be given a run in this 'A' match in Hobart. See how England are going to play him. If they are going to attack him, can Hauritz handle it? If he can't, it gives the selectors time to think what they will do instead. If they rest Hauritz in Brisbane, then play him in Adelaide but England successfully target him, you might be getting too late in the series to fix the problem. Better to know there's a problem earlier than later. But I personally don't think it will be a problem. Hauritz was treated with respect by the Poms in 2009 (Pietersen aside), and in Australia he'll get a little more turn at the 3 venues I've outlined. And he might be the man to worry Strauss again.

And this is about the 3rd thread I've been defending Hauritz . People will start wondering... Ah, I like defending the helpless: Clarke, Watson from 2005-2008, Brett Lee - it's fun.

 

[War]

I could see Krejza as a useful 2nd spinner in a Test Australia must win eg. Sydney this summer if Aussies are down 1 or drawing. Otherwise, nup - no sell. Too risky.

I'd have 4 quicks in Brisbane, Perth. Hauritz in Adelaide, Melbourne and Sydney. All 3 of those places get turn and England would be able to bat pretty well there even against 4 quicks, so I'd rather have Hauritz as my plan B, not North.

And I think Hauritz should be given a run in this 'A' match in Hobart. See how England are going to play him. If they are going to attack him, can Hauritz handle it? If he can't, it gives the selectors time to think what they will do instead. If they rest Hauritz in Brisbane, then play him in Adelaide but England successfully target him, you might be getting too late in the series to fix the problem. Better to know there's a problem earlier than later. But I personally don't think it will be a problem. Hauritz was treated with respect by the Poms in 2009 (Pietersen aside), and in Australia he'll get a little more turn at the 3 venues I've outlined. And he might be the man to worry Strauss again.

And this is about the 3rd thread I've been defending Hauritz . People will start wondering... Ah, I like defending the helpless: Clarke, Watson from 2005-2008, Brett Lee - it's fun.

No sure about that 2 spinners idea my friend. Even if such a scenario where to happen before the SCG test. I dont see how AUS could balance the team & play too spinners. But for me gut feeling tells me even with no FC game under his belt, Krejza can come in on a turner & Adelaide or SCG & be effective.

I would have played Haurtiz in the A team match as well. But they haven't, so that either its a sign that they already will pick in the main squad for Brisbane (which i totally opposed as u all know ha) or that they will drop him.

Not sure if he will get more turn @ Adelaide, SCG & MCG. As when he struggled @ Cardiff or the Oval test in which he didn't play. The level of last day wicket turn may be even at best. I have no confidence that will do a job unless ENG bat like school kids like what PAK did last summer.

ENG played Hauritz way to conservatively in the Ashes indeed. If they play him properly & a tad more aggressively like how NZ played him early this year, he can/most likely will be easily hit off his lenght IMO.

I have defended a few helpless players as well. But as you will expect me to say again, i can see no way how one can defend Hauritz anymore ATS my friend. Since his recall vs SA 08/09 i always expected him to struggle to be an effective bowler againts good batsmen on turners, so for me, nothing more is needed to see after 2 years of failures in such circumstances. So AUS selectors should save themselves the time & energy & drop him from the test set-up for good.

 

[sifter132]

Well I'd hate 2 spinners to be picked TBH as well, but that's the only time I'd entertain Krejza.

And I know your opinions on Hauritz - we can mutually respect each other's views Be interesting to see how England play him this time as well because as you say, they were pretty defensive last time. My own bias will come in here and say they didn't need to be aggressive to Hauritz with the 'one boundary ball an over' crap that Johnson and Siddle were pumping out.

Strauss in particular will be interesting to watch, given Hauritz got him a couple of times with pretty tame prods. Maybe he'll attack, but as Warne says, you want often batsmen to attack you.