Bucking Beads
Brownlow Medallist
I'd like to see how the Chairmans XI games go before I pick my final XI. I doubt we will see many changes. Hughes is gone but that will almost be the only change by the looks of it.
-
AFLW 2024 - Round 10 - Chat, game threads, injury lists, team lineups and more.
Pick the XI for Boxing Day v India
- Thread starter Ian Dargie
- Start date
- Tagged users None
- Status
Ian Dargie
Premiership Player
- Jun 14, 2011
- 4,838
- 1,512
- AFL Club
- West Coast
- Thread starter
- Banned
- #352
How about Tom Cooper?
I've got a friend who knows heaps of stats and he reckons he's done well in ODIs for Holland. Scored a century against Afghanistan.
That's enough to get him into the Test side, right?
I've got a friend who knows heaps of stats and he reckons he's done well in ODIs for Holland. Scored a century against Afghanistan.
That's enough to get him into the Test side, right?
Bucking Beads
Brownlow Medallist
First picked surely...
Only if the century was scored in Afghanistan would it have any credibility.
With Marsh injured it would be the perfect time to give Cowan a game. Would help reallocate Watson down the order to either 4 or 6 and free him up into bowling more overs, if fit.
Gold
Even better gold
Gold
Even better gold
- Sep 15, 2007
- 16,178
- 16,687
- AFL Club
- Hawthorn
I still think Ponting is good enough to be in the side. I know it wont happen but I'd like him at 6 as a straight swap with Christian from the above line-up. No problems with the rest however I dont know enough about Wade to back him in
Look I'll type this slowly as obviously you're not the quickest
Can you not understand that it can take a few tests for a young player to find their feet.? Starc has played 2 tests and you want to throw him out because his performances havent been up to "scratch"
Can you also not understand that there is occasions where if as a selector you think players have a certain talent then you persevere with them.
Most of the successful sides of the past have picked young players they think have the talent and they've stuck with them.
Could you also please take some time to explain why the above is a "shitty" argument. to say you CBF answering something normally means you got nothing
KiwiRoo, you ignore the dozens upon dozens of young players who have been tried like that, played 3-5 Tests, and then have disappeared, never to be seen again.
You're picking arguably the best spinner, best quick and second best batsman IN THE HISTORY OF THE GAME, and using them as an example of what the norm should be.
It's a hell of a stretch.
Also, Cowan, 29, never dominated a shield season.... North Mk III?
You're picking arguably the best spinner, best quick and second best batsman IN THE HISTORY OF THE GAME, and using them as an example of what the norm should be.
It's a hell of a stretch.
Also, Cowan, 29, never dominated a shield season.... North Mk III?
a fair point Elvis..
Of course not every player is going to suceed.
I'm saying that if you dont give young players a bit of a stretch to prove themselves, then you end up with the old English type selection approach where if at first you dont succeed,then we'll throw another one in. English cricket started getting better when players such as Broad, Flintoff, Anderson etc were given longer runs than their initial successes deserved because it was believed they had talent.
A run of 3-5 tests isnt enough in my opinion.
and im not saying the norm should be give every test player 10 tests to prove themselves. Im saying players that you believe have talent should be given a period of time to prove themselves. The examples i provided before were of players where the selctors rightly believed they had something special and stuck with them.
People are too quick to see how someone else will go without having the patience to see how the incumbant might go with the extra confidence gained from an extended stretch in the team
I personally reckon Starc has got buckets of talent and therefore should be given a good go in the team.
You could carry Starc if you had McGrath and Warne backing him up as those blokes would more than cover for him.
Persevering is one thing, costing us big time is another as we want to win the Test series. Indian batsmen will have a picnic picking off Starc's bowling. Persevering is great if the other bowlers are stars as they can be carried as they develop but the rest of the cast is Siddle, a rookie quick and an inexperienced spinner so intead it may hurt. With Warne and McGrath Starc could afford struggle but with the current guys, no way.
That's the difference here.
Heisenberg_
17🏆19🏆20🏆
Starc isn't even a lock for NSW Shield side, has a long way to go before he should be considered for Test selection again.
Didn't even look vaguely threatening against NZ on two bowling friendly pitches, if the selectors are stupid enough to persevere with him against India he will get flogged and the other bowlers will have to much to do. Plenty of occasions a young player is worth persevering, however this isn't one of those occasions.
Didn't even look vaguely threatening against NZ on two bowling friendly pitches, if the selectors are stupid enough to persevere with him against India he will get flogged and the other bowlers will have to much to do. Plenty of occasions a young player is worth persevering, however this isn't one of those occasions.
Ian Dargie
Premiership Player
- Jun 14, 2011
- 4,838
- 1,512
- AFL Club
- West Coast
- Thread starter
- Banned
- #363
OK. If that's how you want it.
A few other posters have done a pretty effective job of knocking your shitty argument on its head but I guess I can fire off a few lazy shots if it makes you feel better.
This is not, in its own right, an argument for retaining Starc. There are other young players and other players not quite as young. Why should Starc be picked ahead of them?
You have to make the case to retain Starc on an individual basis. Does he deserve his spot? Are there better alternatives?
You don't just get to point to Warne and McGrath and make the banal observation that young players can take time to develop, as though that demonstrates that Starc should therefore keep his spot. That is a shitty argument.
It would be like me taking some kid who goes OK in the Big Bash but who has played bugger-all FC cricket and insisting he should be in the Test side because, hey, that's what happened with Cummins. One extreme, unrepresentative example doesn't make a rule.
Why are the examples of Warne and McGrath relevant? If we stick with a young player the way we did Warne and McGrath, do you expect to reproduce the results? Of course not, so why keep harping on those examples? These young players have to justify their selection case by case – the way Warne and McGrath cemented spots in the side nearly 20 years ago has absolutely nothing to do with anything.
So what about Beau Casson? Should we have stuck with him? I mean, we stuck with Warne for a few Tests early on, so we should have persevered with Casson, right?
What about Peter George? Should we have stuck with him? I mean, we stuck with McGrath for a few Tests early on, so we should have persevered with George, right?
That is the problem with taking the examples of two of our greatest players and extrapolating them to apply to every half-decent, or not so decent, prospect who comes along. It's a shitty argument.
In this case, though, it simply means you made a shitty argument, and the essential shittiness of it should have been self-evident to any sensible person.
Maybe type slower for me next time?
Ian Dargie
Premiership Player
- Jun 14, 2011
- 4,838
- 1,512
- AFL Club
- West Coast
- Thread starter
- Banned
- #364
- May 7, 2007
- 5,111
- 6,049
- AFL Club
- Adelaide
I actually think Warner could be the perfect fit at #3.
Khawaja
Cowans
Warner
Watson
Clarke
Christian
Wade
Peter Siddle
James Pattison
Nathan Lyon
Ryan Harris
12th man - Mitchell Starc
Khawaja
Cowans
Warner
Watson
Clarke
Christian
Wade
Peter Siddle
James Pattison
Nathan Lyon
Ryan Harris
12th man - Mitchell Starc
This is my TEST XI for Boxing Day and Aaron Finch is not in the side.
But, if he does score some runs in the BBL, i think he would be ins serious contention for a test match and 50 over birth.
Shane Watson
David Warner
Usman Khawaja
Ricky Ponting
Michael Clarke
Daniel Christian
Matthew Wade
Peter Siddle
James Pattinson
Nathan Lyon
Mitchell Starc.
But, if he does score some runs in the BBL, i think he would be ins serious contention for a test match and 50 over birth.
Shane Watson
David Warner
Usman Khawaja
Ricky Ponting
Michael Clarke
Daniel Christian
Matthew Wade
Peter Siddle
James Pattinson
Nathan Lyon
Mitchell Starc.
I still don't get why you would drop Hussey before Punter Gov.
Do we not also have a better option than Starc?
Credit where it's this is your least streaky side
Do we not also have a better option than Starc?
Credit where it's this is your least streaky side
- Mar 25, 2003
- 35,681
- 28,341
i just can't understand how anyone would think a players performance in hit and giggle cricket will put them into consideration for test cricket.
Dukes Of Hurley
Team Captain
Warner
Khawaja
Marsh
Ponting
Clarke
Christian
Haddin
Siddle
Pattinson
Lyon
Starc
Although id have christian out, and watto to come in at 2 and move everyone down one spot, if he's fit
Harris to come in for starc if fit
Khawaja
Marsh
Ponting
Clarke
Christian
Haddin
Siddle
Pattinson
Lyon
Starc
Although id have christian out, and watto to come in at 2 and move everyone down one spot, if he's fit
Harris to come in for starc if fit
Under the assumption Marsh and harris will be unfit
Watson*
Warner
Cowan
Khawaja
Clarke
Hussey
Haddin**
Siddle
Pattinson
Hogan (Cue laughter)
Lyon
* If watson's unfit everybody moves up one and Christian plays at 6.
**: ABC radioi mentioned Wade may have had hurt his hand from an errant thrown last night. Nobody should make their debut less than 100% fit.
Watson*
Warner
Cowan
Khawaja
Clarke
Hussey
Haddin**
Siddle
Pattinson
Hogan (Cue laughter)
Lyon
* If watson's unfit everybody moves up one and Christian plays at 6.
**: ABC radioi mentioned Wade may have had hurt his hand from an errant thrown last night. Nobody should make their debut less than 100% fit.
He'd be worth taking on the grounds that any bowler who can stay fit in the Warriors camp must have an iron constitution. Take him and bowl him all day as that's what we'll need against the Indians.
Edit: Watching the Scorchers' pile of shite, Mike Hussey is looking seriously stressed again, like he did for that long, long time before the Ashes. Nasty that.
Watson*
Warner
Khawaja
Ponting
Clarke
Hussey
Haddin
Siddle
Pattinson
Harris**
Lyon
*If Watson is unfit Ed Cowan should come in
** If Harris is still unfit Bollinger should come be in. We need at least one left hander in the bowling line up.
Warner
Khawaja
Ponting
Clarke
Hussey
Haddin
Siddle
Pattinson
Harris**
Lyon
*If Watson is unfit Ed Cowan should come in
** If Harris is still unfit Bollinger should come be in. We need at least one left hander in the bowling line up.
how can someone that hasn't scored a run all year. get a chance to be picked for the test team, because he scores runs in bbl. he's not good enough to be picked in the test team.
- Status
Similar threads
