Changes for the Second Test vs England (Adelaide, Dec 5-9)

[Black Diamond]

Define "barely offering a whimper" ?

When he first came on to the scene he clearly had deficiencies in his technique against an outswinging ball, hence why his averaged dropped a little. Has corrected this flaw and is a lot better off now that he was dropped back when he was so young. However, now there is no reason for him not to be in the team

He scored two pretty spectacular hundreds when he was first selected and then was found out pretty quickly. Hughes was then picked again in the 2010-11 Ashes and did very little. He went to Sri Lanka after that and managed a hundred (his third and so far final of his career) in the third test of that series. He managed 80-odd against SA IIRC in that game Cummins took 6 on debut, and then did nothing against NZ that summer and was dropped. He got called up again last summer to play a fairly hapless Sri Lankan outfit and he managed a few decent scores, but followed it up with a horrific tour of India and ordinary form in England.

Interestingly Hughes averages 54 in the Sheffield Shield, but ultimately this is irrelevant if he can't go some way toward backing this up in the test arena.

By the way your comments about Smith above are interesting. It's also funny how you use Bailey's FC record to deride his test selection but at the same time talk up Shaun Marsh.

 

[WhiteMagic]

By the way your comments about Smith above are interesting. It's also funny how you use Bailey's FC record to deride his test selection but at the same time talk up Shaun Marsh.

Pot calling Kettle black?

Hughes has been belting Shield attacks for years and then barely offering a whimper for Australia. I'm not saying he should never get another chance but there is not compelling reason to think this trend will change.

Marsh may be "talented" but he also wastes it. He has 8 FC hundreds in a career spanning 13 seasons. By comparison Steven Smith has 9 hundreds from 30 less matches and George Bailey has 14 from 17 more. Talented or not, Marsh's numbers are incredibly underwhelming for a player who is continually on the cusp of Australian selection.

Yet, I was merely stating that his record doesn't help, noting the difference in averages between red and white ball cricket. I never said he didn't deserve an opportunity to show what he has got.
Actually, i'm fairly sure i did the opposite, and said he should get a crack.

 

[Kram]

In - Norf

 

[WhiteMagic]

But he's averaged mid-20s over his last 45 innings, which span 4 years. At a certain point you have to give up on the bloke

Your stats make it look worse than it is, seeing as he's only had 49 innings in his career and you cut out two of his hundreds, but i get what you are saying.

No use giving up on a kid at 24 who absolutely churns out runs at state level, and even ODI's to an extent.

Fairly sure he is also coming off a double hundred as well.

 

[Caesar]

Perhaps 'give up' was the wrong phrase. But you can't carry someone with those numbers indefinitely. 45 innings is a bloody long time to stick with a player you're getting very little return from.

Yeah he's currently dominating in the Shield. But he's always dominated in the Shield. It hasn't helped a whole lot when he's made the step up. Despite his hard work, his weaknesses against the short ball and spin are still pretty profound. Until he gets them sorted out he's never going to be more than a liability against international attacks.

I really hope he can spend a couple of years sorting out his issues and come back and have a long career in the Test team. But I think Test selection is not really an option right now for him.

 

[WhiteMagic]

Rogers
Warner
Hughes
Marsh
Clarke
Watson
Haddin
Johnson
Harris
Siddle
Lyon


If it was my team, that's how it would look. With Watson only playing if he is bowling.

But what would i know, i don't even watch test cricket apparently

 

[The Falcon Strike]

Depends on the pitch

Watson our for Marcus North if it looks like taking turn.

Don't need 4 quicks and an extra spinner would be handy (particularly if Clarke isn't bowling).

Then Watson back for the WACA

 

[The Falcon Strike]

We have 3 part time spinning options already in the side: Smith, Warner and Clarke (albeit unlikely)

Smith and Warner you bring on to go for a few runs and hopefully break a partnership.

You aren't exactly going to roll them out for an 8 over spell.

Clarke and North on the other hand you might. If Clarke is bowling (which would be ideal) then North's spin is superfluous. If not, then North provides a realistic option for Adelaide.

Still, teams pick bowlers based on the pitches, why not pick the batsmen. North would be the ideal style of player to bring in for Adelaide.

 

[Badesumofu]

Its not dropped for bad performances. Read my post instead of reading a few words. Some people on this forum really need to go back to school and learn reading comprehension.

I was taking issue with dropping them at all. It would be idiotic. I gave some reasons why I thought it was an idiotic suggestion, that doesn't imply that I misread you as wanting to drop them for bad performances rather than on a horses for courses justification. Reading comprehension yourself. It would be extremely stupid to drop a player who has just performed as well as Johnson in the first Test. Especially a confidence player like Mitch. It beggars belief that anyone could think that would be a good idea.

 

[Doodlesweaver]

IMHO, the problem with the win in Brisbane is that none of the serious issues with the team structure were really addressed.

* The top order is still susceptible to collapses
* There is still too much reliance on Clarke
* Warner can be brilliant, but still needs to prove he can be consistent
* Johnson at his best is brilliant, but still inconsistent
* Lyon is tidy but unmenancing
* Harris is brilliant, but he's 34 years old, with no cartilage in his knees... so it's just a matter of time before he breaks down

The team should be unchanged. But Rogers, Watson, Smith and Bailey are all seriously unconvincing at this point. And as for the Johnson "revival", I'll believe it is real when he performs for at least three tests.

But one test was never going to change any of that. Just be glad we won despite the still obvious frailties of the team.

I hope the Monster Johnson turns up again at least once more in the series.

 

[Taylor]

I would like to see Watson dropped for a batsman, a genuine batsman. Not a batsman who can bowl a bit, a batsman who will score runs at number 3 without throwing his wicket away.

 

[Black Diamond]

* Lyon is tidy but unmenancing

Lyon was very menacing. Could well be a symptom of the quicks bowling well at the other end.

 

[KissKiss]

I was taking issue with dropping them at all. It would be idiotic. I gave some reasons why I thought it was an idiotic suggestion, that doesn't imply that I misread you as wanting to drop them for bad performances rather than on a horses for courses justification. Reading comprehension yourself. It would be extremely stupid to drop a player who has just performed as well as Johnson in the first Test. Especially a confidence player like Mitch. It beggars belief that anyone could think that would be a good idea.

A bit like Grant Thomas? talking about dropping Milne after he kicked 10 the week before because he was a poor traveller. If I remember that right. Sometimes you are better off resting them from a game where they might struggle to save for a game where they should play well. But then as someone pointed out earlier Johnson actually has a good record at Adelaide

 

[KissKiss]

I would like to see Watson dropped for a batsman, a genuine batsman. Not a batsman who can bowl a bit, a batsman who will score runs at number 3 without throwing his wicket away.

There arent really any pure batsman like that demanding selection at the moment. North would probably be the guy in the best form at the moment

 

[Badesumofu]

It's not 'resting' a player if he is still fresh. It would be straight up dropping. That would stupid, especially when we are talking about Mitch Johnson. It's not like we have someone else demanding a spot, either. I doubt we can play the same three quicks for the entire series, but it's too early to be resting anyone just yet. In particular we should wait until we have someone like Pattinson available to come in, or at least Bird or Starc.

 

[Black Diamond]

Pot calling Kettle black?

Not really. I'm looking at the entire package here: Shield performances, test performances, other qualities like mental toughness. You said Marsh was talented, but what does this even mean? His performances have been ordinary for a long time and he is injury prone.

Yet, I was merely stating that his record doesn't help, noting the difference in averages between red and white ball cricket. I never said he didn't deserve an opportunity to show what he has got.
Actually, i'm fairly sure i did the opposite, and said he should get a crack.

Not even sure who you're talking about here.

 

[Taylor]

There arent really any pure batsman like that demanding selection at the moment. North would probably be the guy in the best form at the moment

We are in a bit of a pinch here aren't we. It's a perfect time for someone like Hughes to take over at three for Adelaide, put on a 120 and 110 in a batted out draw then keep his spot into the WACA test.

Ideally (short of an Adelaide win), we win the toss at Adelaide and bat for two and a half days, score 650, put England in roll them with a day to go - 400 behind. Bat again. End the test.

Go into Perth with a fresh set of bowlers and win that test in four days. Can't lose the series from there.

 

[Doodlesweaver]

We are in a bit of a pinch here aren't we. It's a perfect time for someone like Hughes to take over at three for Adelaide, put on a 120 and 110 in a batted out draw then keep his spot into the WACA test.

Ideally (short of an Adelaide win), we win the toss at Adelaide and bat for two and a half days, score 650, put England in roll them with a day to go - 400 behind. Bat again. End the test.

Go into Perth with a fresh set of bowlers and win that test in four days. Can't lose the series from there.

we can dream of ideal worlds

 

[LukeParkerno1]

However, now there is no reason for him not to be in the team

Has Swann passed away? Otherwise that is a good reason! He can't play spin, full stop!

 

[LukeParkerno1]

Rogers
Warner
Hughes
Marsh
Clarke
Watson
Haddin
Johnson
Harris
Siddle
Lyon


If it was my team, that's how it would look. With Watson only playing if he is bowling.

But what would i know, i don't even watch test cricket apparently

So glad you are not a selector! Hughes is woeful, and 3 left handers in the top 3...dear oh dear! Half the reason we won in Brisbane was our treatment of Swann who bowls rubbish to right handers! We don't need more left handers...and especially one that couldn't play spin to save his life!

 

[WhiteMagic]

Has Swann passed away? Otherwise that is a good reason! He can't play spin, full stop!

Suppose Trott shouldn't get a game either because he's struggling with the short ball.

 

[WhiteMagic]

So glad you are not a selector! Hughes is woeful, and 3 left handers in the top 3...dear oh dear! Half the reason we won in Brisbane was our treatment of Swann who bowls rubbish to right handers! We don't need more left handers...and especially one that couldn't play spin to save his life!

Hughes and Khawaja are the future of Australian top order batting, and they are both left handed. While Khawaja may not deserve a spot right this second, Hughes is a different story

 

[Doodlesweaver]

Hughes and Khawaja are the future of Australian top order batting, and they are both left handed. While Khawaja may not deserve a spot right this second, Hughes is a different story

Bomber is right. Swann is far more deadly against lefties and he may be our big bogie man in Adelaide. No reason to give him any uppers for the match by picking lefties, especially ones that he has made a mickey of before.

 

[WhiteMagic]

Bomber is right. Swann is far more deadly against lefties and he may be our big bogie man in Adelaide. No reason to give him any uppers for the match by picking lefties, especially ones that he has made a mickey of before.

That is how i feel the team should be, however we are obviously not going to change it after winning the first test

 

[Kram]

lol, Marsh shouldn't be anywhere near the Test side.