***Official*** Commonwealth Bank Tri-Series

[Prince EWS]

Yeah princey you talk about balance of the side, if these part-time spinners start going for plenty or the four seamers get whacked then, what plan B does australia have?

Hogg is in the squad, pup.

You could say that about any team really. If all the frontliners and part-timers of a team get hammered, they better just hope they bat well!

 

[Prince EWS]

White gives no balance to our XI, batting as he is at number seven and not bowling.

Amazingly, no-one ever said that about Hussey or Clarke in recent times when they at seven and not bowling.

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

Watson's an unproven player in the top order in International cricket. That Hussey averages 80 batting at six or seven is far less relevant than the number of balls he faces batting down that low. Fair enough if he's batting down that low in deference to proven players like Clarke or Ponting - but not Watson. With a World Cup around the corner he doesn't deserve to take up one of the prime batting spots in the order, just because he is not comfortable during the 15-20 balls you get to face at number seven.

He's only "unproven" because he hasn't played there much. He averages 42 in 10 innings batting in the top 4, which is perfectly acceptable, and has scored 4 of his 5 half-centuries batting there, despite only batting there 10 times. Surely that indicates he is at least capable of batting in the top order like a batsman. By contrast, in 26 innings batting 6 and below (he has never batted 5) he has 398 runs @ 24.88 and one 50. I doubt his SR down the order is any better either.

Regarding team balance, the fact of the matter is that the players at 6 and 7 have to bat in the vast majority of matches, and it's a very important position. Hussey's batted in 41 of his 52 games. If Hussey turns 30 balls at the end of the innings into 40 or 50 and Watson turns them into 20, or worse, gets out cheaply and exposes Lee or Hogg, it hurts the team far more than Hussey only getting to face 30 balls instead of 50 or 100. In reality, if Hussey comes in at 4 he's probably going to play in a similar fashion to a Clarke or Watson in terms of run scoring, just be less likely to get out. Provided that Watson batting in the top order is making runs and doing so at a reasonable rate, there's no loss in playing him there and having someone who can take advantage of the late overs like Hussey down at 6-7. A Watson 50 at 4 is just as good as a Hussey 50 and is unlikely to come any slower, but Hussey at 7 is infinately better than Watson.

Assuming that A) Watson is crucial to the team for its balance and deserves to be picked, and B) Watson is scoring at a good average and SR when batting in the top order, it makes sense to pick him there rather than bring players like Hussey and Clarke who succeed down the order up. Since he's bowling well and has so far batted well in the top order, it makes sense to give him an extended run there. The same argument, incidentally, applies to Symonds. He's a good hitter and quite capable of batting down at 7, but he's a far better player when he has the opportunity to play a long innings. Hussey on the other hand is as good with 10 balls to bat as anyone in the world, and can also anchor a chase or play a rescue job. He's a perfect player to have down the order and bring up only when it's necessary.

 

[pup11]

I mean the aussies should have experimented a lot more with there batting and bowling in the dead rubber games in the CB series. What avenues have they left open for themselves if a batsman or bowler gets injured or they realize that 4 seamer attack is not working due to the conditions. Or would they be still be bull-headed and say even on a flat track our seamers could do the job for us.

 

[pup11]

I think white inclusion in the side has done no good to his career, he would have been better served playing for victoria. What his selection has probably indicated to him is that australian team doesn't require his bowling skills so don't worry about that, just concentrate on your batting thats all we want from you which is so wrong.

 

[pup11]

Why is hayden's spot being taken for granted his 117 was far from convincing, if he doesn't back it up with more good performances then i will not be thrilled to see him opening at the world cup.

 

[GIMH]

Why is hayden's spot being taken for granted if he doesn't back up his 117(which was far from convincing knock),
then i am not really thrilled to open with him during the world cup.

Didn't know you were in line to open tbh

 

[PhoenixFire]

Amazingly, no-one ever said that about Hussey or Clarke in recent times when they at seven and not bowling.

If you can't see the difference between Hussey and Clarke's batting, and that of white, then you have a serious problem mate.

 

[Pup Clarke]

Watson a much better option than White IMO.Offers balance to the Aussie side with them bowling the 5 fasties+Symonds or replace Hogg for Johnson.White's bowling is a laughing stock.It really is that bad and Michael Clarke looks a far more assured slow bowler than White.

 

[Raghav]

Discussing about Vettori vs Hogg?

uhh? Vettori is far better bowler than Hogg. Vettori's variations, flighters, drifters are very special to watch and he is the difficult bowler to score runs. Hogg on the other hand bowls good balls in an over but it is nullified with a bad ball in his over. Thats his difference with Vettori. Vettori is very consistance and he is the consistent performer for NZ.

 

[howardj]

Amazingly, no-one ever said that about Hussey or Clarke in recent times when they at seven and not bowling.

Because:

(a) They're outstanding batsmen in their own right; and
(b) Watson was usually in the team, so we had a bowler in the top seven.

 

[Dick Rockett]

Vettori's has been great in his last 80 ODI's, bringing his average down significantly after his first 107 ODI's.

Wow, that really surprises me. It wasn't that long ago that I thought Vettori should be dropped. In my defence though, I have noticed what I thought was a marked improvement in his bowling this season so I'd kind of backed down from that viewpoint.

Anyway you look at it, those are impressive figures. And only two games vs Zimbabwe, three vs Bangladesh, and one vs the USA.

 

[Prince EWS]

Because:

(a) They're outstanding batsmen in their own right; and
(b) Watson was usually in the team, so we had a bowler in the top seven.

a) And that's what White is picked for. The myth that he is picked as a bowler really has to end now. He's picked on the back of good one day domestic performances with the bat, and his ability to score quickly from the moment he gets to the crease (hence his number 7 position.)

b) Watson wasn't usually in the team when Hussey or Clarke were occupying 7th position, actually. That only happened in the two series.

 

[Prince EWS]

If you can't see the difference between Hussey and Clarke's batting, and that of white, then you have a serious problem mate.

Obviously Hussey and Clarke are superior batsmen at this stage, but they are all picked for the same reason - their one day batting. Anyone who thinks White was picked for his bowling is kidding themselves.

 

[Fiery]

Obviously Hussey and Clarke are superior batsmen at this stage, but they are all picked for the same reason - their one day batting. Anyone who thinks White was picked for his bowling is kidding themselves.

I don't think he was originally selected as a specialist batsman. It's just that his bowling's so crap that Ponting doesn't bowl him

 

[Prince EWS]

I don't think he was originally selected as a specialist batsman. It's just that's his bowling's so crap that Ponting doesn't bowl him

If his bowling is so crap that the captain won't even bowl him, to suggest he was picked for his bowling would be ridiculous. White was picked on the back of his form with the bat in the domestic competition and his ability to score quickly down the order - nothing more.

 

[Fiery]

If his bowling is so crap that the captain won't even bowl him, to suggest he was picked for his bowling would be ridiculous. White was picked on the back of his form with the bat in the domestic competition and his ability to score quickly down the order - nothing more.

I doesn't say he was picked just as a bowler. He was picked as an allrounder. He was probably expected to fill in more overs than he has though

 

[pup11]

What i want to say is that white plays as an all-rounder for victoria and bowls pretty decent overs in Ford ranger cup. He will only improve with time if he works on his bowling, so its a wrong to thing to say that he is just a batsman. He just needs to get his leg-spinners right.

 

[Prince EWS]

I doesn't say he was picked just as a bowler. He was picked as an allrounder. He was probably expected to fill in more overs than he has though

I don't think he was picked as an allrounder any more than Michael Clarke and Andrew Symonds are. His bowling is a bonus but he was picked because of his batting.

 

[Prince EWS]

What i want to say is that white plays as an all-rounder for victoria and bowls pretty decent overs in Ford ranger cup. He will only improve with time if he works on his bowling, so its a wrong to thing to say that he is just a batsman. He just needs to get his leg-spinners right.

I don't think White's bowling has the potential to be much more than White Symonds's bowling is used as in one day matches. It's ordinary to be perfectly honest and I think it's actually become worse as time has gone on. His batting has huge potential and should be persisted with, but his bowling has little relevence to Australian cricket as far as I'm concerned.