What does Andrew Symonds need to do to cement a Test spot beyond the 2007/08 summer?

[likka]

Gunnar Longshanks, why do you speak so much about Katich? He had his chance, many chances, and proved he didn't have the mental capacity for international cricket. An Australian Hick perhaps.

Incorrect, he had one bad series against England in 2005 and was made a scapegoat. Freddie and Jones made him look a bit foolish at times as they were reverse swinging the ball massively. He wasn't Robinson Crusoe in that regard.

Has proven throughout his FC career he is talented and capable of making a lot of runs. Dave Hussey in in the same boat, just didn't get the opportunities Katich did.

 

[Gunnar Longshanks]

Gunnar Longshanks, why do you speak so much about Katich? He had his chance, many chances, and proved he didn't have the mental capacity for international cricket. An Australian Hick perhaps.

That's pretty tough.

He had a bad 2005 Ashes, but he was OK apart from that. Katich had a Test average of 44 after the First Test at Lord's in that series. Things unravelled from there, but he basically had a bad few months from August 2005. Very harsh to snuff out his career on the back of one fairly brief slump. Damien Martyn got a reprieve, but Katich got thrown on the scrapheap, despite being only 30 years old at the time.

You talk as though Katich consistently came up short in Test cricket, which isn't really the case. Last time India toured, Katich played two innings that went a long way to saving Australia from a rare series defeat.

http://www.howstat.com.au/cricket/Statistics/Matches/MatchScorecard.asp?MatchCode=1698

Also, he has an awesome FC record and is dominating domestically this season. Guys who make runs for their state should to be rewarded when opportunities open up.

I reckon Katich would score more runs than Symonds if he was batting at #6. He is a more accomplished batsman and is more suited to the demands of the lower order.

 

[DIG]

You're prepared to discount earlier failures. I'm not.

There were plenty of instances prior to his recall 12 months ago where he was part of middle order collapses. In my mind, those failures are still relevant and they contribute to my lingering doubts about his ability to do the job in those circumstances.

Symonds is such a better player now than he was in those earlier stints its not funny. He's also dug us out of the shit in one-dayers so many times that i'm not sure why you have doubts over his mental state under pressure, especially after his match saving 150 in this same test last year after our potent top order collapsed.

Clarke's only had a good 12 months or so also since his recall - you prepared to completely discount his earlier failures? Ponting and Hayden also started their test careers poorly, as did Langer, Martyn - the list goes on and on. And yes some like Jaques have had instant success too.

But what is most relevant for Roy is his form since his recall, which has been good to date. He's safe for now, and yes i agree a few failures will see the heat on him more so than some of the others but he hasn't failed us repeatedly yet.

 

[achancely]

Incorrect, he had one bad series against England in 2005 and was made a scapegoat. Freddie and Jones made him look a bit foolish at times as they were reverse swinging the ball massively. He wasn't Robinson Crusoe in that regard.

Has proven throughout his FC career he is talented and capable of making a lot of runs. Dave Hussey in in the same boat, just didn't get the opportunities Katich did.

Disagree. He was average in India too, and after the Ashes. Too slow and had a poor mindset.

 

[DIG]

I reckon Katich would score more runs than Symonds if he was batting at #6. He is a more accomplished batsman and is more suited to the demands of the lower order.

The only demands our lower order gets these days is to come in and smack the crap out of it.

Katich is ill-suited to our lower order except on those rare occasions where we need to dig in.

I'd take Roy in every other scenario. He keeps the strike rate up, the pressure on the bowlers and has that danger factor of potentially blowing the game apart like no other batsman bar Gilchrist.

 

[Gunnar Longshanks]

Symonds is such a better player now than he was in those earlier stints its not funny.

Why?

What is he doing differently?

He's also dug us out of the shit in one-dayers so many times that i'm not sure why you have doubts over his mental state under pressure, especially after his match saving 150 in this same test last year after our potent top order collapsed.

ODIs are a different game. He needs to do it in Tests.

And one good innings isn't sufficient to dispel doubts created by a string of early failures.

Clarke's only had a good 12 months or so also since his recall - you prepared to completely discount his earlier failures?

I don't discount his earlier failures at all.

But I'm not sure what parallel you're trying to draw there. Clarke's overall record is significantly better than Symonds'.

Ponting and Hayden also started their test careers poorly, as did Langer, Martyn - the list goes on and on.

Firstly, those guys were all in their early 20s when they started out. Symonds is a mature player. And I wouldn't say that Ponting's failures ever matched Symonds'.

http://www.howstat.com.au/cricket/Statistics/Players/PlayerProgressBat.asp?PlayerID=2041

Secondly, I have no problem with players struggling, getting dropped and then being recalled. That's fine. That's how it should work if players earn a second chance. But Symonds hasn't convinced me that he's the right fit at #6. He was terrible in that role when he started out, and those legitimate doubts haven't been completely dispelled by his performances since.

But what is most relevant for Roy is his form since his recall, which has been good to date.

It has been quite good, although I don't set much store in the innings he played against Sri Lanka.

Had he gone on and made a big total in either innings against India at the MCG, I would have been more impressed.

 

[Gunnar Longshanks]

Disagree. He was average in India too, and after the Ashes. Too slow and had a poor mindset.

His performances in India weren't enough to drop him.

And his struggles after the Ashes were part of the same brief form slump. Very harsh to throw a guy on the scrapheap after one lean trot. He was only 30 years old. He could easily have come back and contributed at Test level.

What does "a poor mindset" mean? That's pretty vague.

He had a Test average of 44 before he entered a slump in 2005. Don't pretend that he had this long history of failing at Test level.

 

[achancely]

His performances in India weren't enough to drop him.

And his struggles after the Ashes were part of the same brief form slump. Very harsh to throw a guy on the scrapheap after one lean trot. He was only 30 years old. He could easily have come back and contributed at Test level.

What does "a poor mindset" mean? That's pretty vague.

He had a Test average of 44 before he entered a slump in 2005. Don't pretend that he had this long history of failing at Test level.

Poor mindset - spoke about how mentally damaged he was after being dropped before Sri Lanka, then the same thing after the Ashes, then the whinging in the press, then the stuff about his ODI strikerate and how he was sleepless over the criticism.

The guy can't handle the pressure. That's the reality.

 

[Gunnar Longshanks]

The only demands our lower order gets these days is to come in and smack the crap out of it.

That won't always be the case.

Katich is ill-suited to our lower order except on those rare occasions where we need to dig in.

But those are the situations that matter.

The ability to grind out a score when the bowlers have momentum is worth far more than Symonds' ability to flay an attack that has already been knocked around.

 

[Gunnar Longshanks]

Poor mindset - spoke about how mentally damaged he was after being dropped before Sri Lanka, then the same thing after the Ashes, then the whinging in the press, then the stuff about his ODI strikerate and how he was sleepless over the criticism.

None of that has anything to with whether he has the right mindset to bat at #6 in Test cricket. It's just peripheral crap that you've chosen to dredge up.

I agree that he is unsuited to ODI cricket.

The guy can't handle the pressure. That's the reality.

If he was a failure from the start you could make that claim, but he averaged 44 in Test cricket at one point and saved our bacon last time India toured.

You're just ignoring all the facts that don't suit your argument.

He had a brief slump where he struggled, and was immediately and permanently thrown on the scrapheap. Very harsh on a guy who has made a stack of runs domestically.

 

[achancely]

None of that has anything to with whether he has the right mindset to bat at #6 in Test cricket. It's just peripheral crap that you've chosen to dredge up.

I agree that he is unsuited to ODI cricket.

Not at all silly-billy! It all shows a mental weakness. You need to be mentally tough to do well at Test cricket. Katich's whinging proves he is not!

If he was a failure from the start you could make that claim, but he averaged 44 in Test cricket at one point and saved our bacon last time India toured.

You're just ignoring all the facts that don't suit your argument.

He had a brief slump where he struggled, and was immediately and permanently thrown on the scrapheap. Very harsh on a guy who has made a stack of runs domestically.

Where did I say 'from the start'?

 

[Cousin Jed]

His performances in India weren't enough to drop him.

And his struggles after the Ashes were part of the same brief form slump. Very harsh to throw a guy on the scrapheap after one lean trot. He was only 30 years old. He could easily have come back and contributed at Test level.

Completely written him off Gunnar?

 

[Gunnar Longshanks]

Not at all silly-billy! It all shows a mental weakness. You need to be mentally tough to do well at Test cricket. Katich's whinging proves he is not!

He had a Test average of 44, so at some point, he was obviously good enough.

Your analysis is pretty simplistic. Cliched, even.

Where did I say 'from the start'?

Well, did he mysteriously develop these shortcomings halfway through his career?

 

[Gunnar Longshanks]

Completely written him off Gunnar?

Katich?

I think it's unlikely that he'll get another crack unless someone gets injured.

He's not going to open, so he's basically behind Ponting, Clarke, Hussey and Symonds for a middle order spot. Symonds is the only one I can picture being dropped anytime soon, and even then, Hodge, David Hussey or Watson might be preferred.

 

[achancely]

He had a Test average of 44, so at some point, he was obviously good enough.

Your analysis is pretty simplistic. Cliched, even.

Oh dear silly! You accuse me of being simplistic while saying a once-off average off 44 is proof he was good enough! Tee hee!

Well, did he mysteriously develop these shortcomings halfway through his career?

Career high-point of 44? OK.

 

[Gunnar Longshanks]

Oh dear silly! You accuse me of being simplistic while saying a once-off average off 44 is proof he was good enough! Tee hee!

Yeah - until the 2005 Ashes, Katich gave every indication that he could cut it at Test level.

Then he had a brief slump and his career was over.

He didn't get any of the second and third chances afforded other players, despite having a better FC record than many of them.

Feel free to show me where I'm going wrong.

Career high-point of 44? OK.

He's got Symonds covered so far.

 

[achancely]

Yeah - until the 2005 Ashes, Katich gave any indication that he could cut it at Test level.

Then he had a brief slump and his career was over.

He didn't get any of the second and third chances afforded other players, despite having a better FC record than many of them.

Feel free to show me where I'm going wrong.

Brief slump? The majority of his career was mediocre and he battled most of his innings. Looked like a scrapper, not a competent Test batsman.

He's got Symonds covered so far.

Symonds offers better fielding and useful bowling.

 

[Gunnar Longshanks]

Brief slump? The majority of his career was mediocre and he battled most of his innings. Looked like a scrapper, not a competent Test batsman.

This is too much of a generalisation to take seriously.

He obviously made some decent scores on the way to averaging 44 in mid-2005.

Symonds offers better fielding and useful bowling.

That's true.

But if the comparison was on batting alone, Katich would have the edge.

 

[achancely]

This is too much of a generalisation to take seriously.

He obviously made some decent scores on the way to averaging 44 in mid-2005.

If you think visual perception of a batsman is a 'generalisation', most people would have to question your cricket knowledge.

 

[Gunnar Longshanks]

If you think visual perception of a batsman is a 'generalisation', most people would have to question your cricket knowledge.

Oooh, "visual perception".

That sounds really considered and thoughtful.

Keep trying.

On his way to a Test average of 44, Katich obviously made some decent scores. Stop avoiding the facts.

 

[achancely]

Oooh, "visual perception".

That sounds really considered and thoughtful.

Keep trying.

On his way to a Test average of 44, Katich obviously made some decent scores. Stop avoiding the facts.

Your reliance on one statistic is a little painful. To repeat - 'one swallow does not a summer make'.

Now run along and mark up your chalkboard sonny.

 

[Gunnar Longshanks]

Your reliance on one statistic is a little painful. To repeat - 'one swallow does not a summer make'.

A Test average reflects a number of performances.

I'm not sure what the "one swallow" cliche means in this context, as Katich played more than one good innings at Test level.

Try to post something sensible instead of just babbling ambiguities.

 

[achancely]

A Test average reflects a number of performances.

I'm not sure what the "one swallow" cliche means in this context, as Katich played more than one good innings at Test level.

Try to post something sensible instead of just babbling ambiguities.

Funny - babbling ambiguities seems to be your specialty.

Katich was average. His average reflects this.

 

[Gunnar Longshanks]

Funny - babbling ambiguities seems to be your specialty.

Is there a post you've had trouble understanding?

If not, what are the ambiguities you're referring to?

Katich was average. His average reflects this.

He wasn't a superstar and deserved to be dropped.

But I don't think he was so bad that his career deserved to be ended permanently, and he's done enough domestically to suggest that he should still be in the frame.

I'd back him to score more runs at #6 than Symonds.

 

[achancely]

Is there a post you've had trouble understanding?

If not, what are the ambiguities you're referring to?

All this sentence construction nitpicking.

He wasn't a superstar and deserved to be dropped.

But I don't think he was so bad that his career deserved to be ended permanently, and he's done enough domestically to suggest that he should still be in the frame.

I'd back him to score more runs at #6 than Symonds.

Fortunately, the Australian selectors are looking forward at more mentally strong cricketers.

This means strugglers like Katich and Watson will have to bash it out at first class level. Although I suspect Watson's youth will result in further chances.