Tend to agree. Not sure it will work but feel England will go this way.
-
AFLW 2024 - Round 10 - Chat, game threads, injury lists, team lineups and more.
Australia Test squad - 2015
- Thread starter Sweet Jesus
- Start date
- Tagged users None
Tend to agree. Not sure it will work but feel England will go this way.
- Jan 13, 2015
- 1,603
- 966
- AFL Club
- Sydney
are the 2 warm up matches really solving the selection issues or creating more headaches?
do rogers and harris get their spots back? for me they do, its just a matter at who's expense (s.marsh/starc)
is it as simple as the last test XI with trying to fit in rogers and harris (and/or maybe m.marsh)
anything can still happen with a tour match to go - watto could still break down.
do rogers and harris get their spots back? for me they do, its just a matter at who's expense (s.marsh/starc)
is it as simple as the last test XI with trying to fit in rogers and harris (and/or maybe m.marsh)
anything can still happen with a tour match to go - watto could still break down.
The_Reaper
Hall of Famer
Rogers and Harris come in.
The second innings proved that the selectors opted for Rogers.
Starc misses out for Johnson.
- Jun 23, 2008
- 33,486
- 27,233
- AFL Club
- Collingwood
- Other Teams
- Norwood, Everton, Detroit Red Wings
Serious question - If The Ashes are about "win now", rather than developing for the future, then wouldn't it be logical to pick a bloke who has vast experience and great success in English conditions, eg. Steve Magoffin? Or is it just "assumed" or somehow "known" that he'd somehow not cut it against England in England, despite having success bowling against English players in English conditions?
Magoffin's bowling numbers in the County Championship (all Division One) from 2012-Present - 1,899 overs, 523 maidens, 5,023 runs, 246 wickets (12 5-fers) - 20.42 average, 2.65 economy rate, 46.32 strike rate.
I guess I'm not really strongly arguing that Magoffin deserves to be in ahead of our current Test players, just moreso wondering why these sort of performances (experience and playing to the conditions) rarely seem to see a player come under consideration. If he was putting up those sort of numbers in Sheffield Shield, people would be screaming for him to be in the Test side (or maybe not, purely due to his age).
Magoffin's bowling numbers in the County Championship (all Division One) from 2012-Present - 1,899 overs, 523 maidens, 5,023 runs, 246 wickets (12 5-fers) - 20.42 average, 2.65 economy rate, 46.32 strike rate.
I guess I'm not really strongly arguing that Magoffin deserves to be in ahead of our current Test players, just moreso wondering why these sort of performances (experience and playing to the conditions) rarely seem to see a player come under consideration. If he was putting up those sort of numbers in Sheffield Shield, people would be screaming for him to be in the Test side (or maybe not, purely due to his age).
Not only do Aus not want him but WA dumped him years ago due to his constant injury issues. He was in the test squad in 2009, he was called in as cover for someone on a tour to SA before the Ashes but never got a game.
When Harris retired I almost wondered whether he or Hogan would be a half-decent chance for a Mike Whitney type call-up out of the blue. Wouldn't have been the worst call.
He's playing in WA as a foreign player now. He can't be called up even if they wanted him which I'm sure they don't.
So, now what? Playing the two strike bowlers was a risk. With Harris out it was a risk that had to be taken, its fair to say it didn't pay off. But the man who was supposed to be the steady bowler, Hazelwood, was a mixed bag as well. Started the match well but couldn't maintain a line through a spell. Does Siddle have to come in, if so in Hazelwood's place or one of the strke bowlers misses out? Assuming Starc is fit to play, if not Siddle has to be the replacement.
And the batting. Sadly a lot is predictable. So many of our batsmen go too hard on low and slow pitches, four more decks like that will follow. They negate Australia's batting as much as they negate Johnson's pace. And of course there is very little patience in that top nine. I still worry about Smith at #3, but there isn't really an alternative. And that is not something that can be easily fixed, these guys are used to hitting through the ball regularly. Add movement to that and some collapses will occur.
Voges' double failure is disappointing but he has to get another chance. He doesn't have a lot of history to ensure he is retained but his form, this match aside, has been good enough. He did look bad when he got out though, and may well be the scapegoat to be sacrificed in order to retain Watson.
Watson getting 30 in two poor scores is probably enough for the selectors to claim he deserves his spot ahead of others in the line up. The problem is 30 is about as many as can be hoped for, not good enough for a top six batsman. Cowan was dropped for being better than that in a harder role. He only bowled 13 overs for the match, when England had one fairly high score.
A fifth bowler isn't needed; Smith, Voges and Warner can bowl that many overs - Smith more likely to get a breakthrough but can be expensive in the process. That said, on form Mitch Marsh may be better with the bat alone than Shaun which means a fifth bowler is there by default.
Haddin's dropped catch was arguably a turning point, very early in the game to say that though - and the bowling afterwards was hardly conducive to creating more chances. I always judge keepers on the keeping. Nevill is as good, maybe slightly better, so comes in. The batting bonus is just a bonus.
And the batting. Sadly a lot is predictable. So many of our batsmen go too hard on low and slow pitches, four more decks like that will follow. They negate Australia's batting as much as they negate Johnson's pace. And of course there is very little patience in that top nine. I still worry about Smith at #3, but there isn't really an alternative. And that is not something that can be easily fixed, these guys are used to hitting through the ball regularly. Add movement to that and some collapses will occur.
Voges' double failure is disappointing but he has to get another chance. He doesn't have a lot of history to ensure he is retained but his form, this match aside, has been good enough. He did look bad when he got out though, and may well be the scapegoat to be sacrificed in order to retain Watson.
Watson getting 30 in two poor scores is probably enough for the selectors to claim he deserves his spot ahead of others in the line up. The problem is 30 is about as many as can be hoped for, not good enough for a top six batsman. Cowan was dropped for being better than that in a harder role. He only bowled 13 overs for the match, when England had one fairly high score.
A fifth bowler isn't needed; Smith, Voges and Warner can bowl that many overs - Smith more likely to get a breakthrough but can be expensive in the process. That said, on form Mitch Marsh may be better with the bat alone than Shaun which means a fifth bowler is there by default.
Haddin's dropped catch was arguably a turning point, very early in the game to say that though - and the bowling afterwards was hardly conducive to creating more chances. I always judge keepers on the keeping. Nevill is as good, maybe slightly better, so comes in. The batting bonus is just a bonus.
Bradesmaen
TheBrownDog
It's the same as players like Sayers and Butterworth not getting a gig over the golden children like Starc, Cummins and Marsh even though they have performed better for a number of years.
- Apr 15, 2008
- 7,996
- 10,100
- AFL Club
- Hawthorn
- Other Teams
- Roger Federer
I thought Hazlewood was mostly pretty good. He, like all our bowlers, had a bad period after Root's non-dismissal, but overall he was good.
Starc's performance should have silenced a few naysayers, but I get the feeling that they will come up with ways to make out that 7/174 is not a good return for a test in England on a pitch that did not suit him. They'll probably refer to that period where everyone bowled poorly to paint him as inconsistent. Whatever - he was easily our most threatening bowler and he bowled some real beauties.
Johnson bowled better than his figures suggest but he's been in something of a lean patch for a while now. Concerning. He needs to turn it around fast because he is a confidence player, and it will really help the overall campaign if he can reinstate that fear into the English lineup.
Lyon was excellent. He shouldn't really be the subject of selection speculation at the start of every series at this point. Clearly our best spinner, and clearly a good enough spinner that we shouldn't be seriously considering not playing a spinner on any but the greenest of greentops. Which we won't be seeing anytime soon since no one is stupid enough to prepare them for our attack and we seem strangely reluctant to prepare pitches that strongly suit ourselves.
Haddin - got to go. I would have liked to see him have the series as a farewell, but he is batting like a number 9 and we just can't afford that. His keeping isn't so great that it compensates either, with the drop of Root being the biggest moment of the match. There were plenty of byes let through as well, only some of which should have been called wides.
Watson - as if in response to the 'we need his overs' line, Clarke didn't make much use of him with the ball. He was steady when he bowled, but nothing special. Nothing we couldn't happily live without. He is also batting like a number 9, or maybe a number 8 and we can't afford that in the top 6. Must go.
Warner - liked his effort to play watchfully. Unfortunately he didn't make many runs. I would back him to play a match-winning innings at some point though.
Rogers - really good knock in the first innings. When he got out in the second innings I figured we were pretty much shot. We needed him to get in and play a long innings again.
Smith - not his best match, but you can't make 100s every time you go out to bat as much as he has tried to prove that wrong. I will back him to make runs at Lord's.
Clarke - is in a bit of a lean-patch and at his age there will be people saying it is terminal. He still looks capable of making big scores to me, so we'll just have to see.
Voges - averages over 6 in Tests. Dissapointed that he did almost the opposite of what he's there to do, but there it is. Should be safe for now.
I'd have Neville and M. Marsh in for Haddin and Watson. Siddle to come in if Starc can't play which you'd have to say is likely. With Pattinson and Cummins both on the comeback trail you'd say this could well be Siddle's last chance to restore his spot in the side. Good luck to him. I read last night that Bird is in England with a county side. They should draft him into the squad as cover if Starc is injured and likely to miss more than the one match. You don't want a situation where your only spare quick hasn't played a FC match for 2 years.
Starc's performance should have silenced a few naysayers, but I get the feeling that they will come up with ways to make out that 7/174 is not a good return for a test in England on a pitch that did not suit him. They'll probably refer to that period where everyone bowled poorly to paint him as inconsistent. Whatever - he was easily our most threatening bowler and he bowled some real beauties.
Johnson bowled better than his figures suggest but he's been in something of a lean patch for a while now. Concerning. He needs to turn it around fast because he is a confidence player, and it will really help the overall campaign if he can reinstate that fear into the English lineup.
Lyon was excellent. He shouldn't really be the subject of selection speculation at the start of every series at this point. Clearly our best spinner, and clearly a good enough spinner that we shouldn't be seriously considering not playing a spinner on any but the greenest of greentops. Which we won't be seeing anytime soon since no one is stupid enough to prepare them for our attack and we seem strangely reluctant to prepare pitches that strongly suit ourselves.
Haddin - got to go. I would have liked to see him have the series as a farewell, but he is batting like a number 9 and we just can't afford that. His keeping isn't so great that it compensates either, with the drop of Root being the biggest moment of the match. There were plenty of byes let through as well, only some of which should have been called wides.
Watson - as if in response to the 'we need his overs' line, Clarke didn't make much use of him with the ball. He was steady when he bowled, but nothing special. Nothing we couldn't happily live without. He is also batting like a number 9, or maybe a number 8 and we can't afford that in the top 6. Must go.
Warner - liked his effort to play watchfully. Unfortunately he didn't make many runs. I would back him to play a match-winning innings at some point though.
Rogers - really good knock in the first innings. When he got out in the second innings I figured we were pretty much shot. We needed him to get in and play a long innings again.
Smith - not his best match, but you can't make 100s every time you go out to bat as much as he has tried to prove that wrong. I will back him to make runs at Lord's.
Clarke - is in a bit of a lean-patch and at his age there will be people saying it is terminal. He still looks capable of making big scores to me, so we'll just have to see.
Voges - averages over 6 in Tests. Dissapointed that he did almost the opposite of what he's there to do, but there it is. Should be safe for now.
I'd have Neville and M. Marsh in for Haddin and Watson. Siddle to come in if Starc can't play which you'd have to say is likely. With Pattinson and Cummins both on the comeback trail you'd say this could well be Siddle's last chance to restore his spot in the side. Good luck to him. I read last night that Bird is in England with a county side. They should draft him into the squad as cover if Starc is injured and likely to miss more than the one match. You don't want a situation where your only spare quick hasn't played a FC match for 2 years.
So, for the summer of Australian cricket in 2014/15 this 'titan of the game' Sayers' bowling average sits behind the following (ignoring the batsmen who've been chucked on for a couple of overs and snagged a wicket)...
Steketee
Hopes
Siddle
O'Keefe
Holland
Fekete
Rimmington
Ahmed
Bollinger
Starc
Behrendorff
Abbott
Moody
Harris
Coulter-Nile
Hogan
Mackin
Boland
Hilfenhaus
Agar
Those stats include test matches.
Butterworth played the grand total of two first class matches last summer.
Cummins' inclusion over a number of guys in that list is very questionable, not going to dispute that. But of all the guys you could have named...
And what exactly is the relevance of Marsh being selected ahead of either? Marsh made his debut in Pakistan late last year. As mentioned earlier, Butterworth barely got on the park all summer and Sayers doesn't even remotely pass as an all-rounder at domestic level.
Bradesmaen
TheBrownDog
I was referring to previous years.. you know there is more than the current time right? Starc played test matches in 2013, Cummins in 2012. Both times they were given free rides while Sayers had taken bags of wickets in the shield. A few years ago Butterworth was the same. This was my point, they pick on potential rather than actual performances. Learn to read.
Why do you think people - in this case Haddin - should get farewell tours? Either a player is up to it or he isn't.
I don't expect anything about what you've written about the batting to change much. Someone might get lucky from time to time if the English team drops catches.
BEaston
Hungry
- Oct 9, 2013
- 12,074
- 16,565
- AFL Club
- Western Bulldogs
Haddin and Watson out surely...
Dont mind siddle in for starc if that happens
Dont mind siddle in for starc if that happens
It will be harsh dropping Haddin, the guy is the best keeper in the world at the moment. He is more talented than rest of the keepers combined.
The only change I would make is drop Lyon and pick Maxwell. Boom Boom
Aussie can't drop Starc for Siddle, Starc bowls at 150+, why drop a beast for a farmer who ploughs the field at 130 kph
The only change I would make is drop Lyon and pick Maxwell. Boom Boom
Aussie can't drop Starc for Siddle, Starc bowls at 150+, why drop a beast for a farmer who ploughs the field at 130 kph
You read some really ****ed stuff on the cricket board these days.
- Jan 13, 2001
- 15,903
- 6,945
- AFL Club
- Brisbane Lions
- Other Teams
- Man City
The talk of Siddle for Starc is purely if Starc doesn't back up with his ankle problems I don't think anyone is seriously suggesting it is a swap if Starc is fully fit.It will be harsh dropping Haddin, the guy is the best keeper in the world at the moment. He is more talented than rest of the keepers combined.
The only change I would make is drop Lyon and pick Maxwell. Boom Boom
Aussie can't drop Starc for Siddle, Starc bowls at 150+, why drop a beast for a farmer who ploughs the field at 130 kph
As for Haddin even sarcasm can't keep hiding his flaws. Still think the selectors will play him at Lord's
- Jan 13, 2001
- 15,903
- 6,945
- AFL Club
- Brisbane Lions
- Other Teams
- Man City
Looking at a broader problem in the Australian pace attack, what do we do to sort out our problem of leaking easy runs? Whilst Hazelwood is generally pretty good at keeping things tight, Johnson and Starc and notorious for leaking runs at times, as seen in the first test. If we really want to put the English batsmen under pressure then we need to be able to build pressure and the two lefties can't do it.
Are we in a situation where we sacrifice a genuine quick who can trouble batsmen when on, but is easy pickings when off for a Siddle who will bowl like Wood and keep it tight and reliable? This is not just a question for this series but also for the upcoming NZ series as well given they have very strong batting lineup.
Are we in a situation where we sacrifice a genuine quick who can trouble batsmen when on, but is easy pickings when off for a Siddle who will bowl like Wood and keep it tight and reliable? This is not just a question for this series but also for the upcoming NZ series as well given they have very strong batting lineup.
If Haddin was as unselfish as he is purported to be he would retire. Heck he would have retired before now.
- Jan 13, 2001
- 15,903
- 6,945
- AFL Club
- Brisbane Lions
- Other Teams
- Man City
Agreed, it's been very evident for over a year now that he is no longer the best keeper or keeper/batsman in Australia, he has continued on purely for the World Cup and this Ashes series not for the benefit of Australian cricket. (although one upside has been the fact we've seen Matthew Wade fall to 3rd choice behind Nevill now).
Its a genuinely tough question. Being behind in the series you have to win, so part of me says you have to go with the attacking option. On the other hand, lose one more and its virtually all over. The game was over in four days, suggesting a more conservative approach would still leave time for the win.
Unless the deck looks like having some pace in it I would seriously consider bringing Siddle in for Johnson. MJ is pretty much fodder on lifeless pitches.
Mitch Marsh coming into the side might provide that tighter option Watson was supposed to but the latter was hardly bowled. If so, then using the two genuine strike bowlers becomes a more palatable option.
I really don't know which way to go. At this point Aus only needs to win once in four games to retain the Ashes, provided there are no more losses. There won't be four draws, even with English weather that's unlikely. Maybe the conservative approach is the way to go, at least for now. Maybe.
- Jan 13, 2001
- 15,903
- 6,945
- AFL Club
- Brisbane Lions
- Other Teams
- Man City
The lack of overs for Watson, particularly in the first innings was a real concern for me, as I posted elsewhere Watson and Stokes play the absolute identical role for their sides, only difference is Stokes bowls a lot more overs, 22 (14 - 8) compared to 13 (8-5). England were scoring at over 4 an over in both innings, whilst Australia were around 3.5, it doesn't sound like much but the difference equated to 50 runs over a days play, which is half a session. What it also does is it relieved pressure on Ballance in the first innings, who whilst grinding out his innings, didn't have the pressure of seeing the scoreboard stagnating as Root was able to score freely at the other end.
When you look at the top bowlers you notice one thing they all have in common, the ability to dry up runs and build pressure. We just don't seem to have that ability currently. If we can't find it then remaining tests becomes a lot hard as we are allowing them to set totals of 400 plus instead of low 300s. If we were chasing down a first innings total of say 350 instead of 430, I'll bet Clarke would've batted differently as the need to up the run rate wouldn't of been an issue, because the way we were going it was going to take us until after tea on day 3 to get a lead at that run rate, which doesn't leave a lot of time to win a test match, especially when you know the forecast for the last day wasn't great.
In the medium term if we continue like this it will get no better, NZ have a batting line up which finds scoring at 4 an over for an innings normal and can easily go at 5 an over without really thinking about it. Serve up the tripe we did against England and you'll find that closer to 6 an over, which means a test match can literally disappear before your eyes in a couple of sessions in the field.
- Apr 15, 2008
- 7,996
- 10,100
- AFL Club
- Hawthorn
- Other Teams
- Roger Federer
And that decision to hand Cummins a debut clearly turned out to be the wrong call... oh wait. I think you might soon become the first person I've ever put on an ignore list on any forum ever.
