Bring back Andrew Symonds!

[The Casey Cat]

He still has to be in form at domestic level. You can't pick a guy who is out of form in the test side, regardless of prior stats, and his stats are not that good.

Fair enough about the current form but as for the 'stats are not that good' in the recent tests he played - utter garbage. As said, averaged 72 since his recall. That's probably competitive with any bastmen in the world in that time, never mind any number 6. How can you say that's not 'good'?

For a time that Australia has dominated Symonds has hardly been racking up the hundreds has he..and I don't rate his bowling at all. As for Watson he would have played, would have been in the side ahead of White, and batted 7, Haddin at 8.

Racked up a good enough average either way. And his bowling has been excellent. Bowling up to 20 overs and rarely going for more than 60 from memory. Ignore his average he is more important to give the main bowlers a rest and keep things quiet and perhaps pick up a wicket or two here or there. Broke a few partnerships and provided a bit of a spark the main bowlers couldn't quite a few times. I think he did enough with the ball.

 

[LukeParkerno1]

Racked up a good enough average either way. And his bowling has been excellent. Bowling up to 20 overs and rarely going for more than 60 from memory. Ignore his average he is more important to give the main bowlers a rest and keep things quiet and perhaps pick up a wicket or two here or there. Broke a few partnerships and provided a bit of a spark the main bowlers couldn't quite a few times. I think he did enough with the ball.

That is the prime reason I don't rate him as a 6, his bowling is just containing that is it. Watson as much as the rubbish he gets on here is more threatening with the ball as seen in this series, and largely has kept it tight.

 

[The Casey Cat]

That is the prime reason I don't rate him as a 6, his bowling is just containing that is it. Watson as much as the rubbish he gets on here is more threatening with the ball as seen in this series, and largely has kept it tight.

As seen this series? Watson's test bowling average is over 50. Yeah it's been tough for all our bowlers this series but still that's what you are basing what you said on. Has an economy rate a bit under 4 runs an over. While Symonds average is 36 (low 30s since recalled) with economy 2.6 runs an over. That's better than a lot of specialist bowlers. You're not making much sense here.

 

[LukeParkerno1]

Watson is the 2nd most prolific wicketaker for us this series, he will offer more on hard decks than Symonds will ever do. Symonds is a batsman first and foremost and I do question whether he is the 6th best batsman in Australia when David Hussey and Jaques have many more big scores at FC level and in Jaques' point in test level as well. Watson is more a all-rounder than Symonds will ever be at test level.

 

[Gunnar Longshanks]

Watson is the 2nd most prolific wicketaker for us this series, he will offer more on hard decks than Symonds will ever do. Symonds is a batsman first and foremost and I do question whether he is the 6th best batsman in Australia when David Hussey and Jaques have many more big scores at FC level and in Jaques' point in test level as well. Watson is more a all-rounder than Symonds will ever be at test level.

Maybe Watson has an edge with the ball, but Symonds gives us greater variety and would allow us to pick four quicks instead of a shitty spinner.

Symonds has also shown he can score runs at Test level.

And his fielding is awesome.

 

[TheMightyPies]

Ronchi gave symonds a good smashing in his first over

 

[The Casey Cat]

And his second over begun with two wides well down leg side and another that was going the same way before the batsmen reverse swept (only way he could get to it). Plus he dropped a sitter (by his standards). God he looks awful right now.

 

[LukeParkerno1]

Maybe Watson has an edge with the ball, but Symonds gives us greater variety and would allow us to pick four quicks instead of a shitty spinner.

Symonds has also shown he can score runs at Test level.

And his fielding is awesome.

Variety, what variety, Katich is a better spinner and Watson is a better quick. Watson has shown on this tour he is capable at test level and he has shown a good temperment when he got his 70 odd. He'll be there as he is more of a all-rounder. Symonds is no better as a bowler to Katich and I rate Katich more. Fielding should not be a factor in tests as it has less of a influence on games. I frankly don't rate his bowling and I still do not think he is in the top 6-8 bats in 4/5 day cricket.

 

[Gunnar Longshanks]

Variety, what variety, Katich is a better spinner and Watson is a better quick.

Right - Katich is an all-rounder now.

I forgot.

Good luck with that.

Watson has shown on this tour he is capable at test level and he has shown a good temperment when he got his 70 odd. He'll be there as he is more of a all-rounder.

You're just spinning this to suit your argument.

Symonds' recent record at Test level eclipses anything Watson has shown.

Don't pretend otherwise.

Symonds is no better as a bowler to Katich and I rate Katich more.

Bollocks.

This is just self-serving BS.

You're talking up Katich because it suits your pro-Watson bias.

Totally transparent.

Fielding should not be a factor in tests as it has less of a influence on games.

When we're talking about a fielder who is as exceptional as Symonds, it's a factor.

Sure, it's not of the same significance as batting or bowling, but you can't dismiss it entirely.

 

[demon21]

I think its a tough call Symonds has done very well the last 2 years at test level so its hard to keep leaving him out. But i think Watson is a step above Symonds when it comes to batting at the longer part of the game.

 

[Gunnar Longshanks]

But i think Watson is a step above Symonds when it comes to batting at the longer part of the game.

Based on what?

Do you think Watson is going to improve on Symonds' recent output with the bat?

Symonds has averaged 72 since being recalled during the 2006 Ashes.

You reckon Watson is going to do better than that?

If he does, good luck to him - he will be totally deserving of his spot. But I reckons that's a longshot.

 

[demon21]

Based on what?

Do you think Watson is going to improve on Symonds' recent output with the bat?

Symonds has averaged 72 since being recalled during the 2006 Ashes.

You reckon Watson is going to do better than that?

If he does, good luck to him - he will be totally deserving of his spot. But I reckons that's a longshot.

I think most people if they where honest could see that Watson is a better Batsman than Symonds, has a much better technique and moves his feet more at the 4 or 5 day matches.

Is Watson going to average 72 with the bat of course he wont but i think over time he would have a better average than Symonds at test level.

 

[Gunnar Longshanks]

I think most people if they where honest could see that Watson is a better Batsman than Symonds, has a much better technique and moves his feet more at the 4 or 5 day matches.

Is Watson going to average 72 with the bat of course he wont but i think over time he would have a better average than Symonds at test level.

If Watson, as you acknowledge, is unlikely to improve on Symonds' recent contribution with the bat, then he shouldn't be preferred.

If he's unlikely to improve on Symonds' recent contribution, then how can you just flatly state that he's "a step above Symonds when it comes to batting"?

Clearly, he isn't "a step above" Symonds, because Symonds has attained a standard that you concede Watson probably won't match.

You can't argue that Watson is clearly better, while admitting that he won't be able to match Symonds' performance. That makes no sense.

 

[demon21]

If Watson, as you acknowledge, is unlikely to improve on Symonds' recent contribution with the bat, then he shouldn't be preferred.

If he's unlikely to improve on Symonds' recent contribution, then how can you just flatly state that he's "a step above Symonds when it comes to batting"?

Clearly, he isn't "a step above" Symonds, because Symonds has attained a standard that you concede Watson probably won't match.

You can't argue that Watson is clearly better, while admitting that he won't be able to match Symonds' performance. That makes no sense.

What im saying is that Watson will not average 72 at test cricket but he will have a better overall average than Symonds. Just cause Symonds average 72 in is last 12 or so test matches dosent make him the better player.

 

[Gunnar Longshanks]

What im saying is that Watson will not average 72 at test cricket but he will have a better overall average than Symonds. Just cause Symonds average 72 in is last 12 or so test matches dosent make him the better player.

But you agree that Watson won't improve on Symonds' recent output?

With Watson in the side against NZ, we will have a weaker batting line-up than we did when we had Symonds last summer.

Do you agree?

 

[demon21]

But you agree that Watson won't improve on Symonds' recent output?

With Watson in the side against NZ, we will have a weaker batting line-up than we did when we had Symonds last summer.

Do you agree?

No cause i think Watson would get just as many runs than Symonds would against NZ just cause Symonds was averaging 72 in last 12 test matches dosent mean he would continue to do that.

If symonds dosent play in the 1st test match against NZ he only has himself to blame.

 

[Gunnar Longshanks]

No cause i think Watson would get just as many runs than Symonds would against NZ just cause Symonds was averaging 72 in last 12 test matches dosent mean he would continue to do that.

Hang on.

You're avoiding the question.

It's not about how many runs Symonds might score against NZ. It's about whether Watson replacing Symonds makes the batting weaker than it was last summer.

You've said you don't think Watson will match Symonds' recent output with the bat, so you must then concede that the side's batting with Watson will be weaker than it was with Symonds last summer.

There's no twisting out of that.

You expect Watson to score less heavily than Symonds has in recent times. Hence, you expect the batting to be weaker with Watson than it has been with Symonds.

 

[saj_21]

Moving forward or atleast until we find a decent spinner Australia should lpay both Symonds (at #6) and Watson (at #7) together in the same team and push haddin to 8. Symonds would do as good as job with his off spin than Krezja or white will do with their spin.

 

[Gunnar Longshanks]

Moving forward or atleast until we find a decent spinner Australia should lpay both Symonds (at #6) and Watson (at #7) together in the same team and push haddin to 8. Symonds would do as good as job with his off spin than Krezja or white will do with their spin.

I agree that's an option, but don't you think we should be picking our best bowling line-up before padding out the batting with an extra all-rounder?

Who are our four best bowlers? Which four guys will most enable us to take 20 wickets in a match.

Pick those guys, and then worry about the rest of the side.

 

[Chops_a_must]

Lets drop everyone not averaging 72 in their last 12 tests.

 

[J-Train]

Symonds out for 3 and 0/31 from 3 overs in the rain affected one day v WA. His heart isn't in it.

 

[saj_21]

I agree that's an option, but don't you think we should be picking our best bowling line-up before padding out the batting with an extra all-rounder?

Who are our four best bowlers? Which four guys will most enable us to take 20 wickets in a match.

Pick those guys, and then worry about the rest of the side.

I think our best pace bowlers are Lee, Clark and Johnson. We don't have any spinners warranting australian selection, so thats where i see symonds coming into the team with his spin. Then you could chose one of Watson, Bollinger, Siddle, Noffke, Tait or if you want a spinner then Casson, Hauritz, White, Krejza.

Of that lot bollinger probably has the most potential to take wickets especically in australia but will he or the other mentioned do that much more damge than watson who can offer a lot more with the bat.

I agree pick the 4th bowler whould come down to wickets taken, but if it hard to split watson batting give him a big advantage. Maybe Noffke is worth a show has had such a good 18 months a very good bowler more so in Aus NZ and Sa conditions and also handy with the bat.

 

[Gunnar Longshanks]

I think our best pace bowlers are Lee, Clark and Johnson. We don't have any spinners warranting australian selection, so thats where i see symonds coming into the team with his spin. Then you could chose one of Watson, Bollinger, Siddle, Noffke, Tait or if you want a spinner then Casson, Hauritz, White, Krejza.

That doesn't sound like Watson is part of our best bowling attack.

It's sound like you either pick four quicks and Symonds, or three quicks, a specialist spinner and Watson.

Picking Symonds and Watson together seems unnecessary.

If Symonds is in the side, then we should have our four best quicks. I don't think that includes Watson.

 

[J-Train]

Bump.

Well he's back this Friday night for the hit n giggle game. Hope he can show a bit of form. He's been really ordinary at domestic level so far. Good luck Symmo.

 

[legend166]

I can't see how they're going to fit him in the team. From the last test, all I'd do is drop White and bring in Clark. Watson gives us too much with the ball to get dropped for Symonds. Hopefully he can get that reverse swing back here.

If they drop Watson for Symonds, I'll be very annoyed.