first test of the aussie summer 23/24

Remove this Banner Ad

Just on Bancroft people seem to forget his article from a couple of years ago basically alleging the bowlers knew about the sandpaper plan, considering Cummins is now captain and the response from all the bowers at the time, it would be hard to imagine they'd be overly keen on letting him back into the fold. Personally think Renshaw would be better suited and he is younger.
Test average of 26 has more to do with it, wouldn't it?

He's repeatedly been chosen in A teams and PM's XI, and if the captain didn't want him near the test side, they simply wouldn't bother doing that.
 
He has criticised Cummins relentlessly ever since he was appointed. Can't find a positive thing to say even after his successes as captain.

It seems personal.
Some of what Johnson has said has been on the mark, but he is really starting to come off as bitter and twisted now.

Also not sure Mitch is the best one from that era to be throwing stones, given how hot and cold he ran and how many chances he got.

No doubt he's got an axe to grind.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

For all the pearl clutching from Conn, Brettig, Horne et al, it's hard to disagree with any of Johnson's key arguments.

  • Warner's current form doesn't justify his spot in the test side
  • Warner's sketchy record doesn't justify his guaranteed farewell tour
  • Bailey is arguably too close to the current playing group

Test average of 26 has more to do with it, wouldn't it?

This argument falls over when you consider Warner has been averaging sub 30 for the better part of three years.
 
For all the pearl clutching from Conn, Brettig, Horne et al, it's hard to disagree with any of Johnson's key arguments.

  • Warner's current form doesn't justify his spot in the test side
  • Warner's sketchy record doesn't justify his guaranteed farewell tour
  • Bailey is arguably too close to the current playing group



This argument falls over when you consider Warner has been averaging sub 30 for the better part of three years.
Maybe, but I still think I'd back Warner to outscore his replacement.

Anyway, it's three more tests and he'll be done and we can all move on. Bancroft is clearly next in line and he'll be backed in till at least the next "major" series we have (India in Aus 24/25 I believe) and probably through to the end of it.

The only change to the plan I can see is if Bancroft has an absolute nightmare upon his return to the test team and Pucovski's form takes a significant upswing and Puc is deemed ready to take on the pressures of international cricket again. Outside chance they pivot to Renshaw and almost zero chance they pivot to Harris.

Bancroft should have a minimum of 9 more tests to show whether he is capable of forging out a test career. He may get more just because his potential replacements aren't much chop and it'll also be around this time we're going to start needing to think about a replacement for Khawaja.

Despite what McDonald said, I think the selectors will be very reluctant to get too inventive by shoehorning Head or Green into an opening role and if they do so, it'll be after that Indian series (or maybe for the final test if it's a dead rubber).
 
For all the pearl clutching from Conn, Brettig, Horne et al, it's hard to disagree with any of Johnson's key arguments.

  • Warner's current form doesn't justify his spot in the test side
  • Warner's sketchy record doesn't justify his guaranteed farewell tour
  • Bailey is arguably too close to the current playing group



This argument falls over when you consider Warner has been averaging sub 30 for the better part of three years.
I don't disagree. Just thinking of reasons why the selectors haven't made the call yet, as I don't believe the conspiracy theories.

I can see the selectors just going for the devil they know, tbh. Because none of the next lot are banging the door down, really. Bancroft's two hundreds from nine shield innings this summer, with a highest of 122, is nice, but not mind-blowing.

So, say, Bancroft does come in and fail, they're looking for another new opener very quickly, and given the rest of them have been quite poor, then what happens?
 

Umm love you as a player ussie...but leave the selections to the selectors please....not your job dude
TBF, its not like he is pushing for a certain player.
He's just saying pick an opener and don't mess around with numbers 3 and 4.

And he's 100% right.
 
For all the pearl clutching from Conn, Brettig, Horne et al, it's hard to disagree with any of Johnson's key arguments.

  • Warner's current form doesn't justify his spot in the test side
  • Warner's sketchy record doesn't justify his guaranteed farewell tour
  • Bailey is arguably too close to the current playing group



This argument falls over when you consider Warner has been averaging sub 30 for the better part of three years.

His key argument was warner doesn't deserve a farewall series due to something he was punished for 5 years ago, i certainly wouldnt have commented on it it if he just said hey warners out of form dump him and move on as shitloads of people are saying that and thats a pretty sound argument.
 
Last edited:

Lol handbags at 10 paces.

I think Mitch started this bonfire by attacking Candice 8 months ago.

You can argue she is a dribbler but Warner has every right to be an angry at an ex-team mate attacking his wife in an article no matter what you think of her.

What did mitch expect that Warner wouldn't send him a text.

I think we are seeing what a prima doma Mitchell Johnson really is.

If he stuck with the form angle no one would have batted an eyelid.
 
TBF, its not like he is pushing for a certain player.
He's just saying pick an opener and don't mess around with numbers 3 and 4.

And he's 100% right.
right or wrong Tuggs I just think current players shouldn't talk about selection issues

leave that to the selectors for me....

thats just me
 
For all the pearl clutching from Conn, Brettig, Horne et al, it's hard to disagree with any of Johnson's key arguments.

  • Warner's current form doesn't justify his spot in the test side
  • Warner's sketchy record doesn't justify his guaranteed farewell tour
  • Bailey is arguably too close to the current playing group



This argument falls over when you consider Warner has been averaging sub 30 for the better part of three years.
His (Johnson) article today does him no favours, comes across as a bitter simpleton. He clearly has a dog in this fight.

I don’t disagree with all of his points, but I would say it’s hard to argue with Brettigs points from his article in Tge Age/SMH.
 
There seems to be lots of people who did not give a **** when Australia won the WTC or World Cup now very very angry that David Warner might be selected for a Test match against Pakistan.

It's good to see they care so much about the team now that they get so emotional about a borderline selection that will have a negligible effect on the result of said Test match.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Is Warner a guarantee to move on after Sydney. I thought I heard something from him a while back that he would play on if he could.
 
Its very unusual a ex star blasts a current star but you can't really argue with Mitch Johnson, you have 2 sides which more then likely our batsmen will fill there boots against this summer, therefore it'd be the perfect time to blood our next opener to build there confidence. That aside Warners form in Tests has been woeful.

Last 9 series dating back to 2020.

1275 runs with 1 hundred and 6 fifties averaging 29.63

He'll more then likely smash Pakistan and Windies around the park but its a missed opportunity to blood a opener when there isn't alot of pressure on.
 
Is Warner a guarantee to move on after Sydney. I thought I heard something from him a while back that he would play on if he could.

Definitely retiring, he has made comment a few times how him and Khawaja have made a agreement they won't leave Australia in the lurch which may indicate Khawaja plans on going on.
 
For all the pearl clutching from Conn, Brettig, Horne et al, it's hard to disagree with any of Johnson's key arguments.

  • Warner's current form doesn't justify his spot in the test side
  • Warner's sketchy record doesn't justify his guaranteed farewell tour
  • Bailey is arguably too close to the current playing group



This argument falls over when you consider Warner has been averaging sub 30 for the better part of three years.
I think Tim Paine put it well.

His article does ask valid questions that should be thought/talked about. However, he gets so personal that it undercuts his own article and makes the discussion about Mitch and the article itself rather than the questions raised in the article.

It's a shame because he did ask the questions that most people are thinking about Warner and his farewell tour that no one except he and Candace want, but then goes too far and loses credibility.
 
I'm not against old farts playing on if there performing, I don't agree with picking on reputation, so if Khawaja keeps scoring good luck to him, you simply can't keep Warner when his averaging in the 20's.
I agree Wicket

With warner for me he should never of gone to england and should of retired after his double last summer. Then a new opener could of partnered Ussie who is in form

Ussie is still in good form IMO and I can see him retiring next summer against the indians...which I think would be perfect for him ....but he has to be in form of course
 
I wonder with all this controversy around his selection, whether at the end of the Sydney Test, Warner turns around to the selectors and says he wants to continue playing test cricket. His recent posts on Instagram seem to feel like he’s out to prove everyone wrong that he still has it. Certainly would make things awkward.
 
I agree Wicket

With warner for me he should never of gone to england and should of retired after his double last summer. Then a new opener could of partnered Ussie who is in form

Ussie is still in good form IMO and I can see him retiring next summer against the indians...which I think would be perfect for him ....but he has to be in form of course
Absolutely, it would’ve been the perfect time to bring in an opener to cement their spot over the last year but now we could be faced with potentially 2 unproven openers at the beginning of next summer again Bumrah and Co if Ussie decides he wants to pull the pin too.
 
I wonder with all this controversy around his selection, whether at the end of the Sydney Test, Warner turns around to the selectors and says he wants to continue playing test cricket. His recent posts on Instagram seem to feel like he’s out to prove everyone wrong that he still has it. Certainly would make things awkward.
He might, but I doubt they would select him.

However, at this point I see no reason for him to do that, as it would most likely lead to him getting heave ho.

Can anyone point me to an article where he demands selection until the Sydney test, rather than him just stating that he will retire after it?
 

Remove this Banner Ad

first test of the aussie summer 23/24

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top