Jaques/Rogers ?

[Richard]

Mate, in six digs for Australia as opener, Hussey has only passed 40 once. Furthermore, his record for WA as an opener was, at best, only solid - not outstanding. By contrast, he is an absolute colossis in the middle order. To move him would be crazy.

This is something I'd really like an elaboration on - I asked Rob Cribb about it once and he didn't reply. Just exactly what is Hussey's record like (roughly - obviously you can't StatsGuru it) for WA in respective positions? I'd always presumed until pretty recently that he'd opened all his life.

 

[four_or_six]

Selectors will care more about 2 Pura Cup matches at the start of the season then an entire English 'winter' in county cricket.

Yes, I agree. I meant that if Jaques/Rogers both start poorly then if they'd had a stunning English season behind them they would have been more likely to hold off Watson/Hodge if they start very well. If either J/R start well, I would expect the English season to make no difference and Watson/Hodge not to get a look in.

 

[vic_orthdox]

If it was Hayden that had gone and Langer was still there, I'd have thought Jaques a shoe-in. I still though he was tbh until the summer he's had which has left the door open for a bolter if neither he nor Rogers start the season well.

I still think Rogers has had a much worse summer than Jaques. To start, Jaques is in division 1 and Rogers division 2 and there are better bowlers in division 1 (I think there's less difference in batting). Also, Jaques has been playing at Worcestershire who have had an absolute nightmare with the weather and the pitches and the floods, whereas Northants is much better for batting.

Therefore, I would say Jaques is currently ahead of Rogers.

All well and good, but I don't think that Australian selectors use County Cricket as a basis for selection. They see it as a way for players to develop, but they tend to wait to see the improvement in their game back in Australia, rather than pick the player for the side on the back of who went better last season in County Cricket.

 

[four_or_six]

All well and good, but I don't think that Australian selectors use County Cricket as a basis for selection. They see it as a way for players to develop, but they tend to wait to see the improvement in their game back in Australia, rather than pick the player for the side on the back of who went better last season in County Cricket.

I refer you to my post above... I obviously wasn't clear what I meant the first time round.

 

[Athlai]

A bit of a pickle this spot, since its been rock solid for so long, their aren't as many options around that Cricket Australia would hope for. Hussey isn't going to be moved, so says Ponting. So who's filling the spot (and on that same note how much longer is Hayden going to be around for?) Rogers and Jacques would be a great pair to throw in but they have reached the middle of their careers at 28 and 29 that means theres only a good 6 years to be counted on from them which is very different from the kinda of years they had in Hayden.

While I can see one of the two Jacques and Rogers filling this whole and playing for the remainder of their career in this position, I can't see them both doing it. And with Hayden being a left hander this makes it harder for Jacques.

Personally I would think quite hard about bringing in one of those players right now, and instead might be more inclined to throw in Hodge or Watson.

I hope that with the upcoming test series we will see a range of these options used as it may just dictate the face of Australian batting for years to come.

 

[iamdavid]

A bit of a pickle this spot, since its been rock solid for so long, their aren't as many options around that Cricket Australia would hope for. Hussey isn't going to be moved, so says Ponting. So who's filling the spot (and on that same note how much longer is Hayden going to be around for?) Rogers and Jacques would be a great pair to throw in but they have reached the middle of their careers at 28 and 29 that means theres only a good 6 years to be counted on from them which is very different from the kinda of years they had in Hayden. .

When Langer moved to opening the batting during the 2001 Ashes tour he was 30 closing in on 31, and he managed a further 63 tests with 5000 runs @ 48 so I dont imagine the age of Jaques or Rogers will stand in their way at this stage, players just seem to be maturing later these days, particularly batsman and particularly in Australia.

I'm sure Hodge will do competently if given the chance in the middle order, but it comes down to what would benefit the side more...a straight swap of Jaques/Rogers for Langer, not disturbing the balance of a succesful side. Moving Hussey from the middle order where he's done so splendidly to accomodate Hodge who is in my eyes a marginally better player than Jaques/Rogers, but would it effect Hussey's productivity? Or opening with Watson to accomodate six bowlers to cover Warne and McGrath's loss (although I wouldnt count Watson and Symonds as a bowler between them and Watson opening is untried although I like the chances of it succeeding.)

 

[andyc]

Not that fond of Watson opening really, still think that Symonds should make way for him and one of Jaques or Rogers come into the opening position. If the selectors can drop Brad Hodge after making a double century and still averaging 58, they shouldn't have any problems with dropping Symonds, averaging just over 27 after 13 tests and being largely ineffective with the ball. That said, given the amount of praise heaped on Symonds by the media and fans, I fear that this won't be the case, and that Watson's only chance would be as opener. I just don't think it'd be good for Watson himself, given the increased workload, and the fact that he's not all that experienced at doing it, while it also won't be good for Australia in general, as we'll be playing with two unproven allrounders and only one opener.

I've not seen any of Rogers, and seen very little of Jaques, but going from what I've read on other sites and in this thread, it seems that Rogers would be the best at complementing Hayden in the top of the order, given that Jaques seems to be more attacking and more likely to take risks. But then again, Hayden's not going to be on the scene for that much longer really, so this probably won't be all that much of a deciding factor, and Jaques may get the nod given that he's already played two tests.

 

[Matt79]

Given some of the discussions going on here I don't think you can say Australia's hard up for opening options. We've got two guys who look to have some class about them, albeit neither is in stunning form coming into our domestic season. We've got Watson as an option that they'll at least seriously consider. Between those three, plus one Matthew Hayden, I'm sure we can muddle through the next 12-18 months, by which time any of them might have established themselves or new options might have emerged.

 

[Johnners]

Big fan of Jaques, not the greatest on the eye but he is so effective and could easily make the grade at test level for mine.

I've not seen much of Rogers but his does have the benefit of calling home, two very flat wickets.

IMO that has played a big part in his run scoring feats in Australia in the past 2 seasons. Whilst i do agree that Rogers is a good player, i personally beleive his figures are inflated somewhat due to the batting paradise that is the WACA. Whilst he still obviously has to play well to score the runs, i think that Jaques has had to work that bit harder on the SCG pitch. It would be interesting to see just how many of Rogers' runs have been scored in high scoring draws, because iirc there has been a number at the WACA of late.

Aside from that, i'm a big fan of Jaques, as others has said, he has an unorthodox, yet effective style. He's pummelled the international attacks when given a chance in tour matches (see England for the most recent example, and iirc he did so to Pakistan in 04-05) and has generally been the dominant Australian opener outside of Hayden & Langer since 03-04 imo.

 

[howardj]

He opened in two Tests against the West Indies and had scores of 1,29,137 and 31*. Furthermore, he opened against South Africa and scored 89. Two scores above 40 with an average of 71.75, and I can safely assume that Richard isn't counting his two Tests opening the batting against Bangladesh. Brilliant numbers for a guy that has spent most of his domestic career as an opener IIRC, certainly a compelling case for him to be pushed up and Hodge come in at #4 and something I hope the selectors consider.

Then, including the Bangladesh matches, he doesn't have an average of 71, does he?. Rather, it's an average of below 60 with two scores over 40. As compared to an overall average of 80.

His record for WA as an opener:

2004/2005: Average 55
2003/2004: Average 41
2002/2003: Average 34
2001/2002: Average 35
2000/2001: Average 30

Is that domestic record as opener (combined with the disparity outlined above with respect to his Test record as opener v middle order) any sort of recommendation to move him up to Test Match opener, when weighed against his super-human feats in the middle order?

As I say, it would be crazy to move him, on the above evidence, when someone like Jaques is available.

 

[Richard]

Given some of the discussions going on here I don't think you can say Australia's hard up for opening options.

Have to rub it in don't you?

 

[Richard]

Then, including the Bangladesh matches, he doesn't have an average of 71, does he?. Rather, it's an average of below 60 with two scores over 40. As compared to an overall average of 80.

Thing is, though, I find it almost inconceivable that he'd not have gone similarly had he got more opportunities at the top of the order. You're not going to get the chance to score many 40+ scores if you only play 5 innings (which he has in games that are worthy of Test-status). If someone told me "Hussey is going to open the batting and is going to bat as well as he has of late" I'd back his record to carry along on the same lines as it has so far.

What troubles me, though, is that I can't see it doing so, regardless of where he bats. He surely has to have a lean trot somewhere or other. Maybe it might be better for that to come in the middle, then have him move to open.

Trouble then would be, of course, Rogers or whoever would already have had their records soured, otherwise the gap wouldn't be there.

His record for WA as an opener:

2004/2005: Average 55
2003/2004: Average 41
2002/2003: Average 34
2001/2002: Average 35
2000/2001: Average 30

Is that domestic record as opener (combined with the disparity outlined above with respect to his Test record as opener v middle order) any sort of recommendation to move him up to Test Match opener, when weighed against his super-human feats in the middle order?

As I say, it would be crazy to move him, on the above evidence, when someone like Jaques is available.

But how about if Jacques' recent record is as average as Hussey's? Which, at the current time, it has been.

And hadn't Hussey had a few decent seasons opening before the 2000\01-2002\03 period?

 

[aussie]

Well big Rick has made his decision. Personally though i definately would have rathered Hussey to open & Hodge to come in the middle order, but then again hopefully which of Jaques/Rogers gets the nod does well since in this new era for Australia they in the near future anyway will be Australia's new opening pair.

Talk of Watson opening is not totally out of the question but given we cannot say for sure his body is a safe base & the role he has in the team in the future its a bit of a tough task to bowl 15 overs a day & open.

 

[NUFAN]

I've changed my tune and no longer want Hussey opening. I like him in the middle, he can be aggressive or defensive and gives our team a safer but positive look at the same time.

I haven't made my mind up yet on Rogers or Jaques, slightly leaning to Rogers but this is the team I would like to see.

1 jaques/rogers
2 hayden
3 ponting
4 hussey
5 clarke
6 hodge
7 gilchrist
8 lee
9 clark
10 hilfenhaus
11 macgill

12 tait

 

[vic_orthdox]

Replace Hodge with Watson (as much as it disappoints me, because I'd love Hodge to get a proper run again) and that's the side that I'd like.

For mine, they need to take Watson as bowling insurance, because of doubts over Hilfenhaus' youth, MacGill's form over the past year or two, and Lee being off the boil at times.

 

[NUFAN]

Replace Hodge with Watson (as much as it disappoints me, because I'd love Hodge to get a proper run again) and that's the side that I'd like.

For mine, they need to take Watson as bowling insurance, because of doubts over Hilfenhaus' youth, MacGill's form over the past year or two, and Lee being off the boil at times.

Yeah your right that could easily happen. It probably is a smart move too. The team I picked doesn't have a fourth seamer at all. I wouldn't mind Watson in the side, but I guess I'm just assuming he gets injured again like every other summer.

 

[Matt79]

See today in the paper that Hodge has revealed he's been asked by the selectors to have a think about whether he'd like to be considered for an opener's slot, as well as a middle order position.

Unsurprisingly, he said yes he would.

Thoughts?

 

[NUFAN]

See today in the paper that Hodge has revealed he's been asked by the selectors to have a think about whether he'd like to be considered for an opener's slot, as well as a middle order position.

Unsurprisingly, he said yes he would.

Thoughts?

Everyone will say that he doesn't move his feet enough against the swinging ball. I think he could get away with it given the fact he played a lot of 3 for Victoria,

He's the best right hand opening option IMO if that makes any difference in selecting a partner for Hayden.

 

[Richard]

.........

 

[Matt79]

Missed that first time around - just saw this story this morning. Anyone got new thoughts?