Australia all set to WRECK the rest of the world....

Brett Lee's return to the squad means Australia can lay claim to the quickest quartet in the game - and possibly of all-time. Life was already extremely nervous for the batsmen who had to face Shaun Tait, who cracked the 160kph barrier in February, Dirk Nannes and Mitchell Johnson over the past two months. Now Lee is on the road back after elbow and finger injuries and will add some more fear if he can approach his peak.

But could all four pacemen squeeze into the same Twenty20 side? "You betcha we can," the coach Tim Nielsen told Cricinfo. "Especially against Bangladesh in Barbados [on May 5]."

The Australians believe the Kensington Oval pitch is the only one in the Caribbean that won't be low and slow. "Our past experience there shows the ball does carry and bounce a bit," Nielsen said. "If it's fizzing through, we'll certainly consider four quicks, no doubt, as long as they're all bowling well."

Lee is the main concern after missing the entire home season due to a severe elbow problem and breaking his right thumb four IPL matches into his comeback. He was expensive in those games, giving away 149 runs in 14.3 overs, but feels confident and won't let a sore finger interrupt his international duties.

Wet weather during the pre-tournament camp in Brisbane also restricted Lee's preparation, but Nielsen indicated the 33-year-old was likely to be used in the warm-up matches in St Lucia on Tuesday and Thursday. "The only thing with Brett is he hasn't had a huge amount of competitive bowling, just through these unfortunate injuries," he said. "That's where the two practice games and the lead-up time we have in the West Indies will help him."

Nannes managed nine of the 14 IPL league matches with Delhi while Tait appeared in eight, leaving him a little short of work. Johnson was looking relaxed and cheerful this week after his holiday, which included spending six hours in a tattooist's chair to gain an intricate new design on his right arm. He was one of the eight Australians fine-tuning in Queensland before they left for the Caribbean on Friday.

Australia were knocked out of the previous World Twenty20 in England in the first round and Nielsen will speak to the group about the importance of starting well in the two-week event. He will also look to the batch of players who appeared in the IPL to provide some match toughness and tips.

"They'll help, for certain," he said. "We'd like to think both Husseys, White, Warner and Nannes will play a big role for us."

It will be the first major tournament in charge for Michael Clarke and the side is attempting to eliminate the wobbles that have left them trying to catch up in the shortest form of the game. However, they enter the competition with a strong recent record of four wins and a tie, which eventually ended in a Super Over success against New Zealand.

"We had a poor Twenty20 World Cup last year, there's no doubt about that," Nielsen said. "I remember saying the night before the first game we were as ready to go as we could be and we felt really good about it.

"This time we have a new captain so there are a few new ideas in the group, and a few new players, which is exciting. We're just growing with the game. At international level we're probably the group that plays the least as a team in Twenty20. But we're gelling better and we're looking at having another go at it in the West Indies."

He's no Doug Bollinger.

Four fast trash merchants. Pies, pies, pies, and pies. Loads of fast food ... it's a McDonalds 'attack'..

they are not bad bowlers

Lee has been an outstanding ODI bowler for a decade
Johnson according to reports is quite good these days.
Nannes hardly has a bad game in international cricket
Tait is Tait...the fastest and the most fearsome bowler in the world

Speed is not everything. Harris and Bollinger looked Australia's best quicks during the IPL.

They can bowl quick deliveries but I think 'the quickest quartet .... of all time' is pushing it too far. To be a fine fast bowler you have to be able to bowl long hostile spells in testing conditions. That's why I would prefer Dale Steyn to be given the accolade of fastest bowler in the world rather than one over merchants like Shaun Tait or before him Shoaib Akhtar.

These bowlers are too soft or too flakey to play proper Test cricket. Nannes has no First Class record to speak of, Tait can't handle the demands of proper cricket. Lee has retired, and Mitch Johnson can only bowl quickly for random periods of time when his uncoordinated bowling action clicks. These guys have nothing like the skill, stamina and endurance of the classic Holding / Roberts / Croft / Marshall / Garner bowling attack. That for me is real pace bowling, and is rightly recognised as the fastest / most fearsome bowling attack ever.

Tait in his own words was 'buggered' after just one over during the recent Aussie summer. As Gary says, sustained pace is superior to getting the clock up to 160km for a few balls when you're fresh. And Tait never knows where his balls are going anyway.

The faster it comes on to the bat, the faster it comes off it. Bangladesh might find them a handful, but on the slow Windies pitches, I don't think out and out pace is the right tactic. Spin will play the key role.

Yeah, Lee and Tait have been very erratic in the IPL. I think a major weapon in 20/20 is bowling with changes of pace. If you are an express fast bowler you should in theory have a more effective slower ball - but some fast medium bowlers have mastered the slower ball too.

Gary 111 wrote:They can bowl quick deliveries but I think 'the quickest quartet .... of all time' is pushing it too far. To be a fine fast bowler you have to be able to bowl long hostile spells in testing conditions. That's why I would prefer Dale Steyn to be given the accolade of fastest bowler in the world rather than one over merchants like Shaun Tait or before him Shoaib Akhtar.
These bowlers are too soft or too flakey to play proper Test cricket. Nannes has no First Class record to speak of, Tait can't handle the demands of proper cricket. Lee has retired, and Mitch Johnson can only bowl quickly for random periods of time when his uncoordinated bowling action clicks. These guys have nothing like the skill, stamina and endurance of the classic Holding / Roberts / Croft / Marshall / Garner bowling attack. That for me is real pace bowling, and is rightly recognised as the fastest / most fearsome bowling attack ever.

thats BS...Akhtar has quite a few test wickets and does NOT belong in the same boat as tait...

.... and MJ is FAST most of the times...

Being FAST is not everything. There hasn't been a great genuinely FAST bowler since the Windies bowlers in the 80's. Since then we've seen lots of FAST but INCONSISTENT quicks.

Henry wrote:Being FAST is not everything. There hasn't been a great genuinely FAST bowler since the Windies bowlers in the 80's. Since then we've seen lots of FAST but INCONSISTENT quicks.

we have had this discussion about 783 times...

speed helps plus its better to watch Shoaib than Mcgrath...every one would agree with that.

On a flat pitch i would pick Akhtar of 2002 to 05 over Mcgraths and Pollocks

PlanetPakistan wrote:

Henry wrote:Being FAST is not everything. There hasn't been a great genuinely FAST bowler since the Windies bowlers in the 80's. Since then we've seen lots of FAST but INCONSISTENT quicks.

we have had this discussion about 783 times...

speed helps plus its better to watch Shoaib than Mcgrath...every one would agree with that.

On a flat pitch i would pick Akhtar of 2002 to 05 over Mcgraths and Pollocks

Most ridiculous statement of the year.

I think this clip sums everything up.

Brett Lee "whizzing past the edges", McGrath, delivering the goods.

DJ_Smerk wrote:

PlanetPakistan wrote:

Henry wrote:Being FAST is not everything. There hasn't been a great genuinely FAST bowler since the Windies bowlers in the 80's. Since then we've seen lots of FAST but INCONSISTENT quicks.

we have had this discussion about 783 times...

speed helps plus its better to watch Shoaib than Mcgrath...every one would agree with that.

On a flat pitch i would pick Akhtar of 2002 to 05 over Mcgraths and Pollocks

Most ridiculous statement of the year.

why?
if a batsman is on top of his game on a flat pitch then there is very little a bowler like Pollock can do...

Akhtar on the other hand had the ability to knock over QUALITY batsmen on the flattest pitches HENCE i would go with Akhtar over BOTH Pollock AND Mcgrath.

But when the batsman starts picking the barrage of pace (its been known to happen) and if the bowler offers little to nothing else in terms of variation, then he'll become predictable.

Not discounting pace, as you look at Dennis Lillee and think, wow. That guy had pace, variation and a brain.

I think it's down to the individual. Akhtar's best bowling performance in my opinion (where he used pace and variety) was against a sorry England batting order in 2005.

I can't stand down though when you say Akhtar was better as a player or better to watch than McGrath. Ludicrous. Sorry.

DJ_Smerk wrote:But when the batsman starts picking the barrage of pace (its been known to happen) and if the bowler offers little to nothing else in terms of variation, then he'll become predictable.

Not discounting pace, as you look at Dennis Lillee and think, wow. That guy had pace, variation and a brain.

I think it's down to the individual. Akhtar's best bowling performance in my opinion (where he used pace and variety) was against a sorry England batting order in 2005.

I can't stand down though when you say Akhtar was better as a player or better to watch than McGrath. Ludicrous. Sorry.

1- i never said that.

2- How was it a sorry batting line up? didn't they win 6 straight series including ashes with the same batting line up.

England were to up their own arse, arrogance.

Are Australia intending to open a pie shop?

PlanetPakistan wrote:

Henry wrote:Being FAST is not everything. There hasn't been a great genuinely FAST bowler since the Windies bowlers in the 80's. Since then we've seen lots of FAST but INCONSISTENT quicks.

we have had this discussion about 783 times...

speed helps plus its better to watch Shoaib than Mcgrath...every one would agree with that.

On a flat pitch i would pick Akhtar of 2002 to 05 over Mcgraths and Pollocks

I agree with Smerky - McGrath would be the smart pick. Shoaib on a flat pitch would likely:

a) stop trying to bowl fast as soon as the shine had gone off the ball
b) pick up / feign injury

Between 1997 - 2007 Shoaib was only fit enough to play 46 out of 94 matches. In 2002-05 he only played 23 out of 37. And that's how many matches he started - he didn't always finish them.

The tough flat pitches you speak of such as the 2005 tour of India or the 2002/03 tour of South Africa he was absent. He managed to make the Zimbabwe tour though.

An example of McGrath vs Shoaib on a flat pitch in Shoaib's so called pomp:

link

McGrath takes 4-50 & 0-53, Shoaib bowls 15 overs (0-69) out of Australia's total of of 568 before picking up an 'injury' and not bowling in the second innings.

Gary 111 wrote:

PlanetPakistan wrote:

Henry wrote:Being FAST is not everything. There hasn't been a great genuinely FAST bowler since the Windies bowlers in the 80's. Since then we've seen lots of FAST but INCONSISTENT quicks.

we have had this discussion about 783 times...

speed helps plus its better to watch Shoaib than Mcgrath...every one would agree with that.

On a flat pitch i would pick Akhtar of 2002 to 05 over Mcgraths and Pollocks

I agree with Smerky - McGrath would be the smart pick. Shoaib on a flat pitch would likely:

a) stop trying to bowl fast as soon as the shine had gone off the ball
b) pick up / feign injury

Between 1997 - 2007 Shoaib was only fit enough to play 46 out of 94 matches. In 2002-05 he only played 23 out of 37. And that's how many matches he started - he didn't always finish them.

The tough flat pitches you speak of such as the 2005 tour of India or the 2002/03 tour of South Africa he was absent. He managed to make the Zimbabwe tour though.

An example of McGrath vs Shoaib on a flat pitch in Shoaib's so called pomp:

link

McGrath takes 4-50 & 0-53, Shoaib bowls 15 overs (0-69) out of Australia's total of of 568 before picking up an 'injury' and not bowling in the second innings.

there are so many holes in that post that i don't even know where to start so i won't start and study for my finals instead.

you win.

Holes in what? - its mainly a list of factual statements / statistics.

Good luck with the exams - if you are capable of constructing a convincing argument that Shoaib was more reliable and effective than McGrath in testing conditions (and not at all injury prone / pea-hearted) then you should be able to pass with flying colours.

PlanetPakistan wrote:they are not bad bowlers

Lee has been an outstanding ODI bowler for a decade is a big humoungous bucket of crap
Johnson according to reports is quite good these days a big bucket of crap.
Nannes hardly has a bad game in international cricket is OK
Tait is Tait...the fastest and the most fearsome bowler in the world grand canyon of crap buckets

Fixed.

Ya gotta love PP's passion for all things express pace bowling.

Yes, the quartet of Tait, Lee, Johnson and Nannes may be (at their fittest) one of the quickest quartets of all time, but man, there would truckloads of pies delivered.