2nd Test Australia v West Indies Jan 25-29 1430hrs @ the Gabba

[Westend]

He was a failed number six, why do we need prolonged exposure to work out he's a failed number four?

this is his third bat ...batting at four

 

[SC_Power]

Yes the guy averaging 50 in shield cricket when the rest of shield cricket is ass at the moment is going to get more than 2 tests to prove himself at 4.

He has been okay although not spectacular to start his test career. He gets more time simply because he has more talent than anyone else waiting in the wings

No doubting his talent, absolutely nowt, but does that buy him 30 tests? 50? 100?

We could be entering a repeat of the Dave Warner defence in a few years I reckon.

 

[LukeParkerno1]

Same arguments were rolled out for keeping him over Mitch Marsh, history didn't exactly vindicate that.

I wasn’t a fan of it but at least Matsh had test tons before his recall (just was horribly , you are wanting blokes that have never shown that. If you want Renshaw maybe but even he’s only averaging 30’s at the high level. Pucovski can’t stop headbutting the ball so what’s your alternative and don’t say one of the sub 30’s blokes

 

[Adelaide Hawk]

Do you pay attention to Shield cricket?

People keep talking about Green in Shield cricket but he rarely ever plays there. He's had 1 innings in 2023-24, and didn't play at all in 2022-23.

 

[Javiersuka]

How much play possible tomorrow and on the final day ?

 

[Ohitsthatguy]

People keep talking about Green in Shield cricket but he rarely ever plays there. He's had 1 innings in 2023-24, and didn't play at all in 2022-23.

What would you do with the side? Genuine question

 

[LukeParkerno1]

How much play possible tomorrow and on the final day ?

Morning session tomorrow should be okay, rest of the day is dicey. Day 5 who knows but more play expected there

 

[Southerntakeover]

Mitch Marsh never had a good FC record, he was picked on vibes

Yes, and so obsessing over a largely irrelevant consideration probably isn't the best selection practice.

 

[Jimthegreat]

How many available players average more than Green at Test level, or if they are uncapped average more than him at FC level?

Not Bancroft, not Renshaw, not Harris. So forget them.

At Test level it's Handscomb, Pucovski, Patterson and maybe Burns if he's available.

Green's average of 33 isn't huge but he averages more than Carey and Mitch Marsh.

Why would we promote someone from a lower level that at a lower level performs worse than Green?

Carey's a keeper so not actually a full-time bat. I wouldn't use Marsh's overall average as a guide.

Green is struggling, has struggled since he got in, much due to self-belief. No way you play him at 4 right now at Test level. It's either Green or Marsh as both are all-rounders, not both. On form Marsh is miles ahead. As far as Renshaw and Bancroft go they are openers, so a bad comparison there. Smith back to 4, even 5, and open with a regular opener.

If Pucovski was good to go and in form he'd be by far the first opner picked.

 

[southern_crusher]

Do you pay attention to Shield cricket?

He's had like 1 game in over 2 years in the Shield.

 

[SC_Power]

He has the same test stats as Stokes did at the same time, boy people are impatient here. Had one innings last test got a good ball (it can happen), poor shot first innings this test, and he’s not out right now. People are expecting the bloke to be prime Jacques Kallis and if he isn’t they want to replace the bloke with a sub 30’s cricketer

If you want to go with stats, then Green is not a #4, barely averaging 30 in test cricket (and only 25 over the last 18 months over 14 tests)
No one is expecting Kallis, but we do expect some basis for selection. Green’s is there, but on potential, and for how long?
Maybe Carey should play at 4, they have the same test averages after all.

 

[Southerntakeover]

this is his third bat ...batting at four

Yes, but he's played 25 tests and has an average of 33, largely playing an easier position.

Do we need to give Hazelwood 10 tests at four to work out he's not a batsman?

 

[Iceman!]

No doubting his talent, absolutely nowt, but does that buy him 30 tests? 50? 100?

We could be entering a repeat of the Dave Warner defence in a few years I reckon.

Well if like the David Warner situation we have no good options we can cross that bridge when we come to it.

 

[Ohitsthatguy]

He's had like 1 game in over 2 years in the Shield.

And he's dominated them, what do you want him to do?

 

[TigerCraig]

Inglis to 4, you know it makes sense

 

[Iceman!]

He was a failed number six, why do we need prolonged exposure to work out he's a failed number four?

Who is better than Green? Who do you think we can pick to improve this team.

 

[Headless]

Yes, but he's played 25 tests and has an average of 33, largely playing an easier position.

Do we need to give Hazelwood 10 tests at four to work out he's not a batsman?

I'd quite like it for the novelty.

 

[Jimthegreat]

Yes the guy averaging 50 in shield cricket when the rest of shield cricket is ass at the moment is going to get more than 2 tests to prove himself at 4.

He has been okay although not spectacular to start his test career. He gets more time simply because he has more talent than anyone else waiting in the wings

Just don't play a struggling bat at no.4. It's even worse with Marnus out of form. You're no.3 can't make a run and your no.4 looks far from ready to bat there. Best sort that out before NZ.

 

[Scorpus]

Yes, and so obsessing over a largely irrelevant consideration probably isn't the best selection practice.

There are few examples of players with poor FC records playing well at Test level and Marsh certainly isn't one of them.

A player with a worse record than Green is more likely to perform worse

 

[SC_Power]

Inglis to 4, you know it makes sense

Would be ICC test cricketer of the year for 2024, right?

 

[yabsy]

He has the same test stats as Stokes did at the same time, boy people are impatient here. Had one innings last test got a good ball (it can happen), poor shot first innings this test, and he’s not out right now. People are expecting the bloke to be prime Jacques Kallis and if he isn’t they want to replace the bloke with a sub 30’s cricketer

Stokes never batted at 4 tho, which is a top order / specialist batsman position.

On Redmi Note 8 Pro using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[LukeParkerno1]

If you want to go with stats, then Green is not a #4, barely averaging 30 in test cricket.
No one is expecting Kallis, but we do expect some basis for selection. Green’s is there, but on potential, and for how long?
Maybe Carey should play at 4, they have the same test averages after all.

He is not a natural 6 I agree he's a top order batsman that needs time to build into his knock. He will be fine and he's clearly the better talent, more than happy he's at 4.

 

[PhatBoy]

He has the same test stats as Stokes did at the same time, boy people are impatient here. Had one innings last test got a good ball (it can happen), poor shot first innings this test, and he’s not out right now. People are expecting the bloke to be prime Jacques Kallis and if he isn’t they want to replace the bloke with a sub 30’s cricketer

Says the guy who wants a 350 wicket taker executed if he doesn’t take a wicket every ball

 

[Iceman!]

Just don't play a struggling bat at no.4. It's even worse with Marnus out of form. You're no.3 can't make a run and your no.4 looks far from ready to bat there. Best sort that out before NZ.

So give the option, who is it?

 

[Scorpus]

Carey's a keeper so not actually a full-time bat. I wouldn't use Marsh's overall average as a guide.

Green is struggling, has struggled since he got in, much due to self-belief. No way you play him at 4 right now at Test level. It's either Green or Marsh as both are all-rounders, not both. On form Marsh is miles ahead. As far as Renshaw and Bancroft go they are openers, so a bad comparison there. Smith back to 4, even 5, and open with a regular opener.

If Pucovski was good to go and in form he'd be by far the first opner picked.

Lots of our players have struggled including Bancroft and Renshaw when played at Test level. So they are picking the players with the best record.