Australian XII for the Boxing Day Test (Official Ins: Watson, Hauritz, Hilfenhaus, Out: Krejza)

[Thommo 42]

Re: Australian XII for the Boxing Day Test

Because Klinger's career FC average is still only 37!! 37!!! He is a dead set plodder having a great year. Helped by the fact he has played a bunch of games on the flattest deck in Australia - the Adelaide Oval.

Katich averages 54 in FC Cricket. He has played for Australia before. He has done the job before and re-discovered his form.

While I agree with you, just FYI - Michael Clarke was averaging 36 in First Class cricket when he debuted in India and made 151...

 

[fraser25]

Re: Australian XII for the Boxing Day Test

Really?

I could have sworn that when Symonds was selected ahead of Hodge (you know the bloke who was dropped with a test average of 58, dropped 3 innings after scoring 200*) and Simon Katich (the bloke who had just scored 125 and 77* against India and had doubled Symonds aggregate shield runs the previous 12 months) it was because he was an all-rounder!

Now he is not bowling, nor scoring runs - he is suddenly a specialist batsman? Then why isn't Hodge batting 6? Or why isn't Rogers, North or David Hussey batting 6? All of these blokes are better specialist bats, and of course were only overlooked for Symonds in the first place because Symonds is an all-rounder! No now that he's an all-rounder that doesn't bowl, can we get a real batsman in there please? Or an actual all-rounder?

I'm with ya mate, but apparently we have to wait till they fail even if there are better options.

 

[Mario the Lothario]

Re: Australian XII for the Boxing Day Test

Katich
Hayden
Ponting
Hussey
Clarke
Symonds
Watson
Haddin
Lee
Johnson
Nannes

12th Hilfenhaus


Clarke and Symonds to provide some spin bowling. Lee and Hayden are on notice.

 

[Drugs Are Bad Mackay?]

Re: Australian XII for the Boxing Day Test

I wonder if our selection policy has played a role in the fact that there have been no obvious successors to McGrath, Warne, Gillespie, Clark and co?

Now we pick a line up specifically tailored to win one day matches. In past years we would use one dayers as a chance to blood a new bowler and see if they have what it takes before picking them in the test arena. Now we pick bowlers like Bracken and Hopes who are both effective in the one day arena but are never going to be test match options for us.

One dayers play no role in developing our test line up anymore. They are a completely separate entity. Whereas they used to be cricket's NAB Cup.

We've got a string of names throughout this thread - Bollinger, Siddle, Nannes, Hilfenhaus, MacGoffin.... but we don't know if any of them are any good. We've never seen them at international level in any form. No matter which one of them plays, the selectors will be going into the game with their hearts in their mouths and their fingers crossed.

 

[Thommo 42]

Re: Australian XII for the Boxing Day Test

Thats because the ODI game morphed first, not our selection policy. Anything they do at that level won't tell us much, and Bracken and Hopes are perfect examples of that.

 

[Drugs Are Bad Mackay?]

Re: Australian XII for the Boxing Day Test

If Siddle isn't dropped I'll be monumentally surprised, and pissed off as well, the Australian cricket team should not be used as a tool for development. Just select the best XI cricketers thank you.

Yes, you're right. Back in the early 90's the Australian selectors should never have picked Glenn McGrath or Shane Warne. Both had fairly average first class records and clearly weren't up to test standard in their first half a dozen tests.

Who were the selectors at the time?

What idiots they must have been.

 

[Jimthegreat]

Re: Australian XII for the Boxing Day Test

Funny, if you knew anything about cricket you would realise the crucial role a 5th bowler plays - especially when your attack doesn't have super stars like Warne and MacGrath.

Apart from the Windies in the 80's and the Aussies in the last decade, you'll struggle to find too many quality sides in the history of test cricket that didn't contain 5 bowlers and even the windies had spin option when they had their lethal pace batteries - they just didn't employ them much.

With a proper 5th bowler and not a part-timer, your striker bowlers don't need to be bowled into the ground like Johnson was today and are far more expensive when they do come on for shorter spells. Mitchell Johnson and Brett Lee are bowlers whose main strike weapon is pace, if they have to bowl 25+ overs, this weapon is seriously diminished. When you have a spinner who goes for 4+ an over on a good day, you find yourself bringing your quicks back before you want to and they end up bowling ineffective spells into the wind holding up an end, instead of conserving energy for a short sharp menacing spell of quick bowling.

If we had Watson bowling into the wind today thundering in bowling at around 130 into the breeze for 15 odd overs and not leaking at 5 an over. Johnson and Lee may have been able to bowl 18-20 overs at full pace, instead of 34 and 25 respectively at pedestrian pace - thus being FAR more effective.

When Symonds was selected in the first place, the line we were sold to justify the exlcusion of Brad Hodge is that Symonds is an all-rounder. Now that Symonds has been ignored for 120 overs in a 4th innings record run chase, we're sold the magic potion that he is actually a specialist batsman.

Exactly which one is he? As he certainly isn't the best all-rounder we have, and not many would rate him in the best 6 batsman this country has to offer either.

Funny, if you knew anything about cricket you'll know an all rounder is useless unless he can bat and bowl very well. In other words play at least as your 3rd seamer and average 40, not one who is your 5th bowler who averages 19. History has demonstrated that many times over. They 5th bowls bowls not that many overs so it doesn't justify a place for a guy with his average taking a spot at 6 over Symonds. Remind me how many times India we took 20 wickets. I'm waiting! Symonds is there to BAT NO. 6 and score runs, not play as an all-rounder. That has been mentioned a few times by the selectors and why Neilsen said Watson was way behind Symonds in the pecking order. 4 bowlers have always done the job in good and bad times in my lifetime in all conditions. Why, because it's usually enough to rotate. any more weakens the batting. Part timers give them occasional break. We need to improve our 4 bowlers not do patchwork jobs.

If it were Flintoff v Symonds, or Botham, or Wasim Akram, Imran Khan you might have a point but Watson???!!!!!! Historically the few great all-rounders have been a huge bonus to their teams, the others are usually more of a hinderance than a help. All the batting line-up needs is a bloke who averages 19 and bowls 10 overs, occasionally 15.

Most sides play with 4 genuine bowlers unless they have a great all rounder as those above. How come you don't know that. Always been the case. The Windies spin option was Viv Richards most times. Very occasionally Harper got a run. They nearly always just played the 4 quicks. As I said, how come you don't know that. I wouldn't be telling other's they know nothing about cricket.

At least one of us knows something about the game!!!!! Glad it's me!

 

[Drugs Are Bad Mackay?]

Re: Australian XII for the Boxing Day Test

Thats because the ODI game morphed first, not our selection policy. Anything they do at that level won't tell us much, and Bracken and Hopes are perfect examples of that.

Rubbish.

You're telling me you can't spot the difference between a bowler with test match credentials who bowls quick, generates bounce, hits the deck hard and gets balls past the bat versus a one day specialist bowler who bowls 125km/hr, puts everything on the spot and changes their pace well?

What our second-tier pace bowlers haven't had enough opportunity to do is to bowl at world class players.

 

[The_Reaper]

Re: Australian XII for the Boxing Day Test

Funny, if you knew anything about cricket you'll know an all rounder is useless unless he can bat and bowl very well. In other words play at least as your 3rd seamer and average 40, not one who is your 5th bowler who averages 19. History has demonstrated that many times over. They 5th bowls bowls not that many overs so it doesn't justify a place for a guy with his average taking a spot at 6 over Symonds. Remind me how many times India we took 20 wickets. I'm waiting! Symonds is there to BAT NO. 6 and score runs, not play as an all-rounder. That has been mentioned a few times by the selectors and why Neilsen said Watson was way behind Symonds in the pecking order. 4 bowlers have always done the job in good and bad times in my lifetime in all conditions. Why, because it's usually enough to rotate. any more weakens the batting. Part timers give them occasional break. We need to improve our 4 bowlers not do patchwork jobs.

If it were Flintoff v Symonds, or Botham, or Wasim Akram, Imran Khan you might have a point but Watson???!!!!!! Historically the few great all-rounders have been a huge bonus to their teams, the others are usually more of a hinderance than a help. All the batting line-up needs is a bloke who averages 19 and bowls 10 overs, occasionally 15.

At least one of us knows something about the game!!!!! Glad it's me!

Is Kallis third seamer for the Saffers?
Was Sobers a front line bowler for the Windies?
Our bowling attack is piss weak atm and to win the series we do need a patchwork job.

Watson averages 50 in first class
his batting is not as poor as you suggest

 

[The_Reaper]

Re: Australian XII for the Boxing Day Test

Yes, you're right. Back in the early 90's the Australian selectors should never have picked Glenn McGrath or Shane Warne. Both had fairly average first class records and clearly weren't up to test standard in their first half a dozen tests.

Who were the selectors at the time?

What idiots they must have been.

Winning teams can afford to play youngsters
A team that is facing a series lost must play the best possible XI

We have 5 more tests against the South Africans to come, followed by the Ashes

Pick our best team for these games and develop youngsters later against the West Indies or Bangladesh

 

[The_Reaper]

Re: Australian XII for the Boxing Day Test

Rubbish.

You're telling me you can't spot the difference between a bowler with test match credentials who bowls quick, generates bounce, hits the deck hard and gets balls past the bat versus a one day specialist bowler who bowls 125km/hr, puts everything on the spot and changes their pace well?

What our second-tier pace bowlers haven't had enough opportunity to do is to bowl at world class players.

Who is this bowler that isn't currently in our test team?

 

[fraser25]

Re: Australian XII for the Boxing Day Test

Watto averages 44 in FC.

I think they will select him to bat 8, most likely Krejza 12th man. Don't like it much though.

 

[The_Reaper]

Re: Australian XII for the Boxing Day Test

I wonder if our selection policy has played a role in the fact that there have been no obvious successors to McGrath, Warne, Gillespie, Clark and co?

Now we pick a line up specifically tailored to win one day matches. In past years we would use one dayers as a chance to blood a new bowler and see if they have what it takes before picking them in the test arena. Now we pick bowlers like Bracken and Hopes who are both effective in the one day arena but are never going to be test match options for us.

One dayers play no role in developing our test line up anymore. They are a completely separate entity. Whereas they used to be cricket's NAB Cup.

We've got a string of names throughout this thread - Bollinger, Siddle, Nannes, Hilfenhaus, MacGoffin.... but we don't know if any of them are any good. We've never seen them at international level in any form. No matter which one of them plays, the selectors will be going into the game with their hearts in their mouths and their fingers crossed.

FWIW the person who stuffed up the succession was Gillespie
If Gillespie had aged as well as our other bowlers we wouldnt have the problem we have now

 

[The_Reaper]

Re: Australian XII for the Boxing Day Test

Watto averages 44 in FC.

I think they will select him to bat 8, most likely Krejza 12th man. Don't like it much though.

well damm
his average dropped a lot
can blame the stint as an opener for that

 

[Drugs Are Bad Mackay?]

Re: Australian XII for the Boxing Day Test

FWIW the person who stuffed up the succession was Gillespie
If Gillespie had aged as well as our other bowlers we wouldnt have the problem we have now

So our succession plan was based around a 30+ year old who'd had a series of serious injuries throughout his career remaining at his peak well into his thirties?

Maybe we should have come up with a Plan B, just in case that didn't work.

 

[Thommo 42]

Re: Australian XII for the Boxing Day Test

Flintoff averages 32 with the bat and 30+ with the ball. He is not in England's best 6 batsmen, but he bats 6 so they can play 4 bowlers. When fit he is clearly their best bowler though.

Using Watson's average of 19 in test cricket is a moot point. Everyone knows he can bat, everyone knows Symonds numbers were worse after the same amount of tests. Watson has played 3/4 of his innings in India on Indian wickets (where Ponting averages 17).

4 bowlers have always done the job in good and bad times in my lifetime in all conditions. Why, because it's usually enough to rotate. any more weakens the batting.

I don't know ho wold you are, but in your lifetime the two great sides have probably been Australia and the West Indies. Both exceptions to histroy and both sides contained peerless bowlers that didn't need support.

Go back as far as you like, the great sides all contained all-rounders - some of them not so famous names, but they all did a job.

Have a look at South Africa's 4th innings.
Johnson - 35 overs
Lee - 27 overs
Siddle - 26 overs
Krezja - 24 overs
Clarke - 8 overs

If that was 5 years ago and a side made 400+ it would have been more like
Pidg - 20 overs
Diz - 20 overs
Lee/Kasper - 15 overs
Warne - 45 overs

We don't have a quality spinner anymore and we certainly don't have Warne.

With someone like Watson in the side, Johnson, Siddle and Lee can bowl closer to 20 overs. Krezja can probably be more attacking in a shorter spell, so we don't bleed runs and Watson sends down 20 as well.

Johnson suddenly finds a couple of yards of pace and can bowl proper short spells and full pace, Lee suddenly isn't bowling 135km/h nude pies and Siddle isn't forced into such a workload. Not to mention, Watson actually takes wickets and also sends them down at 140 and can move the old ball.

On the other hand, the jaarpies who have 5 bowlers got a much more even spread, and their 5th bowler picked up 3 wickets.

 

[Thommo 42]

Re: Australian XII for the Boxing Day Test

Rubbish.

You're telling me you can't spot the difference between a bowler with test match credentials who bowls quick, generates bounce, hits the deck hard and gets balls past the bat versus a one day specialist bowler who bowls 125km/hr, puts everything on the spot and changes their pace well?

What our second-tier pace bowlers haven't had enough opportunity to do is to bowl at world class players.

I think people underrate the shield competition.

There are plenty of world class players at shield level. In the past few years, they've bowled at blokes like Katich, Bevan, Hodge, Elliot, Blewett, Love etc etc. All of these players would have had long fruitful test careers if they weren't Australian.

We still have 3 players in the test side with better test averages than they do shield averages and blokes like Brendon Nash who couldn't get a game for the QLD 2nd XI last year are knocking out test half-centuries on debut...

 

[DeadlyAkkuret]

Re: Australian XII for the Boxing Day Test

Respect for you Thommo, seem to know what you're talking about.

 

[chrisjie]

Re: Australian XII for the Boxing Day Test

I hope we lose the Boxing Day Test just so I can see Hayden retire. But he's a protected species so we'll see what happens.

 

[PowerForGood]

Why Hayden? Each Aus batsman avg - last 10 tests avg.

Katich 59.50
Symonds 54.56
Clarke 52.56
Hayden 40.70
Ponting 40.05
Hussey 35.77

Surprise anyone?

Even last 5 tests
Katich 68.57
Clarke 55.75
Hussey 34.37
Symonds 31.87
Ponting 31.37
Hayden 30.00

 

[DeadlyAkkuret]

Re: Why Hayden? Each Aus batsman avg - last 10 tests avg.

That's no suprise, everyone knows Hussey and Ponting haven't been at their best, but they aren't 37/38 and Ponting is the captain.

I think Hussey is allowed a little drop in form, there's no way he could keep averaging 70+.

 

[DaRick]

Re: Why Hayden? Each Aus batsman avg - last 10 tests avg.

Some differences:

1) Hussey had a stellar India tour and was incorrectly fired for a duck at home
2) Hussey's mobility is not limited, nor is his age a problem
3) Ponting has been average due to various factors, but not warranting dismissal
4) Hussey had a bad WI tour, whereas Hayden did not tour the West Indies, stretching his last 10 Tests back over last year
5) Hayden has not scored a century for 11 months and only a few 50's

Matthew Hayden is my favourite player, but his time is running out.

 

[LIONS then DAYLIGHT]

Re: Why Hayden? Each Aus batsman avg - last 10 tests avg.

No its not a surprise really when you consider that we have lost 3 test matchs in that period and drawn a few more.

Hayden is copping it i guess because his the oldest and the fact that when we continually get bad starts then it is hard to get the platform going.

 

[LIONS then DAYLIGHT]

Re: Australian XII for the Boxing Day Test

I was too busy scooping the pool in the Biggest Dick category.

No argument from me, your the biggest pric on these boards mate.

 

[LIONS then DAYLIGHT]

Re: Australian XII for the Boxing Day Test

I hope we lose the Boxing Day Test just so I can see Hayden retire. But he's a protected species so we'll see what happens.

WTF?

You go against your own country just so some player you dont know personally gets dropped?

Do you get some sort of perverse satisfaction of seeing other peoples misfortune?

Has Hayden offended in you in some way?

I cant understand this ideology that is so present in wider society where people get satisfaction from seeing other, normally successful, people struggle in their chosen field.

Is it Tall Poppy Syndrome? Yeah probably, but i see it on these boards all the time. Sure there is the odd occasion where i partake in a bit of English bashing but who doesnt do that? I love seeing England get hammered but id rather see Australia win then England get hammered, the latter happens so often that it eventually losses its novelty.

We saw it when the Hawks beat Geelong. Streams of cats fans were shattered and people got their jollys out of seeing this, WHY?.