Brett Lee: Game Over

by Zat Wed 17 Feb 2010, 00:42

Story on cricinfo

"As far as my cricket goes, anything is possible," Lee told the Herald Sun. "I may play one-dayers, or no cricket at all. I may never bowl another ball and if that's the case, I'm so satisfied with my career and my longevity. I'm not saying it's definitely over, but I'm not sure what I want to be just yet.

"To be perfectly honest, I'm not sure what I still want to do in my cricketing life. I need to get to the stage where, if I want to, I can do what I need to do on the field. If it's the case that I don't play again, well, that's the case. There is a part of me that would like to play some sort of cricket again."

Yes, he's provided some excitement, but he's also provided some of the most brain-dead spells of unimaginative bowling. The spiv press will be shattered.

by Shoeshine Wed 17 Feb 2010, 00:51

Perhaps. But if it is the end, 300+ Test wickets is not to be sneezed at.

by horace Wed 17 Feb 2010, 00:55

but the expense at which each of those wickets cost is surely something to sneeze at

by Josh Carney Wed 17 Feb 2010, 01:02

Since his rebirth as a slightly mellowed thoughtful cricketer he has done very well. Early on he was such a show pony which got on the nerves of the home side fans as much as the opposition.

However to his credit he turned it around and became quite a decent cricketer. Good luck to him for the future.

by Zat Wed 17 Feb 2010, 01:06

Shoeshine wrote:Perhaps. But if it is the end, 300+ Test wickets is not to be sneezed at.

With fewer 5-wicket hauls than any other bowler to take that many, and indeed than quite a few bowlers who didn't take as many.

Lee was regarded my many to have a free ride in the team, especially because of his pace. It was the precursor to the Tait story.

Sure, he took some wickets, but bear in mind that had McGrath and Warne not been doing the job for most of his career, it could have been incredibly ugly, and a much shorter time in the middle.

by JGK Wed 17 Feb 2010, 01:19

In tests, he should have been great but was no more than good.

He is undoubtedly a great JAMODI bowler.

by LeFromage Wed 17 Feb 2010, 01:25

England will be devastated.

by Growler Wed 17 Feb 2010, 02:25

Zat wrote:
Shoeshine wrote:Perhaps. But if it is the end, 300+ Test wickets is not to be sneezed at.
With fewer 5-wicket hauls than any other bowler to take that many, and indeed than quite a few bowlers who didn't take as many.

Lee was regarded my many to have a free ride in the team, especially because of his pace. It was the precursor to the Tait story.

Sure, he took some wickets, but bear in mind that had McGrath and Warne not been doing the job for most of his career, it could have been incredibly ugly, and a much shorter time in the middle.

Valid point about the 2GM in the side for most of Lee's carreer .... he probably knew - subconsciously at least - that they'd be capable of carrying himshould the need arise ... as it often did.

I can't help wondering if he'd have knuckled down and taken responsibility if either had been out of the squad for a significant length of time.

by embee Wed 17 Feb 2010, 02:55

Growler wrote:
Zat wrote:
Shoeshine wrote:Perhaps. But if it is the end, 300+ Test wickets is not to be sneezed at.
With fewer 5-wicket hauls than any other bowler to take that many, and indeed than quite a few bowlers who didn't take as many.

Lee was regarded my many to have a free ride in the team, especially because of his pace. It was the precursor to the Tait story.

Sure, he took some wickets, but bear in mind that had McGrath and Warne not been doing the job for most of his career, it could have been incredibly ugly, and a much shorter time in the middle.

Valid point about the 2GM in the side for most of Lee's carreer .... he probably knew - subconsciously at least - that they'd be capable of carrying himshould the need arise ... as it often did.

I can't help wondering if he'd have knuckled down and taken responsibility if either had been out of the squad for a significant length of time.

See Sydney Jan 04 vs Banindia

by Zat Wed 17 Feb 2010, 03:35

A vivid memory. I was there for two days.

by embee Wed 17 Feb 2010, 03:45

...it was probably only a session ...it just seems like two days

by tac Wed 17 Feb 2010, 04:39

To be fair, there was an 18-month period when Lee was probably the best 12th man Oz have ever had . . .

by embee Wed 17 Feb 2010, 04:42

tac wrote:To be fair, there was an 18-month period when Lee was probably the best 12th man Oz have ever had . . .

Bradman , Mick Sawyer , Ordinary Person , Bodyline and [strike]Gabba Dan[/strike] wrote:

What about Andy Bichel?

by horace Wed 17 Feb 2010, 04:52

hehehe....bung was the whingiest of 12th Men.. Bix never complained

by skully Wed 17 Feb 2010, 05:47

JGK wrote:In tests, he should have been great but was no more than good.

He is undoubtedly a great JAMODI bowler.

Sage, and totally unsurprising that he may be done.

by Paul Keating Wed 17 Feb 2010, 08:09

Good?

Good suggests better than average.

I say Lee was an average bowler.

by Brass Monkey Wed 17 Feb 2010, 12:01

skully wrote:
JGK wrote:In tests, he should have been great but was no more than good.

He is undoubtedly a great JAMODI bowler.
Sage, and totally unsurprising that he may be done.

Yeah definitely. Surprising he had as few injuries as he did, all in all, as he always bowled his heart out. A genuine trier with brilliant athleticism. Shame, from an Aus perspective, that he was one of the most stupid bowlers in the game. From an England perspective, he always gave us a release of pressure. I loved him for that.

by Shoeshine Wed 17 Feb 2010, 12:14

Brass Monkey wrote:
skully wrote:
JGK wrote:In tests, he should have been great but was no more than good.

He is undoubtedly a great JAMODI bowler.
Sage, and totally unsurprising that he may be done.

Yeah definitely. Surprising he had as few injuries as he did, all in all, as he always bowled his heart out. A genuine trier with brilliant athleticism. Shame, from an Aus perspective, that he was one of the most stupid bowlers in the game. From an England perspective, he always gave us a release of pressure. I loved him for that.

Actually, I'd remember him as someone who played the game with a smile on his face. He always looked like he was having the time of his life playing Test cricket - and not that many players do that.

by Brass Monkey Wed 17 Feb 2010, 12:21

You're right, though many gay celebrations and the odd bit of bravado later he turned out to be as 'Aussie' as the rest of the lowlives we were facing.

by Growler Wed 17 Feb 2010, 15:03

embee wrote:
Growler wrote:
Zat wrote:
Shoeshine wrote:Perhaps. But if it is the end, 300+ Test wickets is not to be sneezed at.
With fewer 5-wicket hauls than any other bowler to take that many, and indeed than quite a few bowlers who didn't take as many.

Lee was regarded my many to have a free ride in the team, especially because of his pace. It was the precursor to the Tait story.

Sure, he took some wickets, but bear in mind that had McGrath and Warne not been doing the job for most of his career, it could have been incredibly ugly, and a much shorter time in the middle.

Valid point about the 2GM in the side for most of Lee's carreer .... he probably knew - subconsciously at least - that they'd be capable of carrying himshould the need arise ... as it often did.

I can't help wondering if he'd have knuckled down and taken responsibility if either had been out of the squad for a significant length of time.

See Sydney Jan 04 vs Banindia

OUCH !!!!!

He did have a shocker, didn't he? But, having had a look at the series figures, none of the bowlers exactly covered themselves in glory. MacGill 14 @ 50 and Dizzy 10 @ 37 were top but they don't even come into the "respectable" category, let alone decent.

In truth though, when I said a significant length of time - I meant missing a lot of games over about 3 years as happenned with Freddie ... he'd play 3 games, miss 4 - play another couple then miss 5 etc. As a comparison - Anderson was generally better without Fred in the team, although Fred was the better bowler. Warne & McGrath didn't miss games like Fred did, so Lee was never tested that way ..... so we'll never know what he may have done.

Its worth repeating - you buggers were spoiled for so long having those two legends together for so long. We'd have been a lot stronger side had Lee & MacGill been qualified as English - but neither have truly won over many Aus fans.

by PeterCS Wed 17 Feb 2010, 16:00

The poor fella. Gave his heart and soul to Australia. And now this.

by Basil Wed 17 Feb 2010, 19:08

I take that all this talk about retirement is a euphemism for keeping himself fresh for the IPL!

by Eric Air Emu Wed 17 Feb 2010, 21:10

300 wickets at 30-ish- that's as good as any England bowler over the last 30 years. You Aussies really are ungrateful filth.

by PeterCS Wed 17 Feb 2010, 21:20

They still love him in Dubyaland - even though JGK and Skulls try hard to tone down their lurrrve, so as not to court riducule from the (more scathing) backwoods of Oz.

by horace Wed 17 Feb 2010, 23:28

pcs calls it right...Brett lee and his test career is the classical NSW story...aside from McGrath they have not produced decent test players since slats and tubby - gilly does not count as he had to leave the place to get recognition

by Sponsored content

Brett Lee: Game Over

Brett Lee: Game Over

Re: Brett Lee: Game Over

Re: Brett Lee: Game Over

Re: Brett Lee: Game Over

Re: Brett Lee: Game Over

Re: Brett Lee: Game Over

Re: Brett Lee: Game Over

Re: Brett Lee: Game Over

Re: Brett Lee: Game Over

Re: Brett Lee: Game Over

Re: Brett Lee: Game Over

Re: Brett Lee: Game Over

Re: Brett Lee: Game Over

Re: Brett Lee: Game Over

Re: Brett Lee: Game Over

Re: Brett Lee: Game Over

Re: Brett Lee: Game Over

Re: Brett Lee: Game Over

Re: Brett Lee: Game Over

Re: Brett Lee: Game Over

Re: Brett Lee: Game Over

Re: Brett Lee: Game Over

Re: Brett Lee: Game Over

Re: Brett Lee: Game Over

Re: Brett Lee: Game Over

Re: Brett Lee: Game Over