-
Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.
You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.
Room For Symonds in Aus test side?
- Thread starter Bodyline
- Start date
Prince EWS
Global Moderator
There is no point in having two players in your top six who wouldn't make the team if they could not bowl. This is what you get with Watson and Symonds. Watson might be a better cricket than Rogers, but he sure as hell isn't a better opening batsman, and with an allrounder in the team, his bowling becomes a non-issue.
That said, I can't see why people are saying Symonds is a must-pick. He might get picked - hell, he probably will, but he shouldn't. A couple of innings against a struggling bowling attack in a dominant series proves very little to me, and his test average is still only 27. Dire player, shouldn't be anywhere near the team - but he probably will be because he scored runs at the right time after failing over and over.
1. Hayden
2. Jaques/Rogers
3. Ponting
4. Hussey
5. Clarke
6. Watson
7. Gilchrist
If I see anything different, I won't be happy. I could cope with Hussey opening and Hodge at 4 I suppose, but I still wouldn't be overly happy. If Symonds is in the team, which he probably will be, expect this overdue rant to explode.
That said, I can't see why people are saying Symonds is a must-pick. He might get picked - hell, he probably will, but he shouldn't. A couple of innings against a struggling bowling attack in a dominant series proves very little to me, and his test average is still only 27. Dire player, shouldn't be anywhere near the team - but he probably will be because he scored runs at the right time after failing over and over.
1. Hayden
2. Jaques/Rogers
3. Ponting
4. Hussey
5. Clarke
6. Watson
7. Gilchrist
If I see anything different, I won't be happy. I could cope with Hussey opening and Hodge at 4 I suppose, but I still wouldn't be overly happy. If Symonds is in the team, which he probably will be, expect this overdue rant to explode.
Hmmm, I'm not completely convinced of that to be honest.
I know Watson has never opened in FC cricket, just in a few one days games for Tasmania where he did ok. But I've seen alot of Watson batting and a reasonable amount of Rogers and I'd have to say I'm more convinced by Watsons technique and his range of shots, I believe he has really developed his batting, from a player who seemed to only have two gears and looked very robotic (a bit of an Abdul Razzaq) into a very polished, competent top order batsman, he has always had a good technique but his temperament and ability to pace an innings has come on heaps and he looks far more confident than in earlier days. Not saying I dont rate Rogers, I'm sure he's capable of doing a job in test cricket, but I really think Watson could be an outstaning batsman at that level if things go right for him.
He may not be a better opening batsman than Rogers....but he is a better batsman...I think Watson would cop alot less flack if people viewed him (for the time being atleast), as a top order batsman who can bowl a little bit of quicker-than-your-average-part-timer seam up stuff, rather than a genuine allrounder.
Prince EWS
Global Moderator
Hahaha, you are sooooooooooooo preaching to the choir about Watson. I'm one of his biggest fans on here. But purely as opening batsmen options, Rogers and Jaques would/should definitely be ahead of him. Watson is only being considered to open so they can keep Symonds in the team.
Perm
Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Watson wouldn't be too far off the team if he couldn't bowl IMO, he'd certainly be in with a chance.
Prince EWS
Global Moderator
He'd make every other team team I'm sure. But given Brad Hodge can't make the Australian side at the moment, I doubt Watson would. Watson is superior to Hodge technically, but his concentration and temperament aren't great - or at least haven't been proven so. Jaques and Rogers are better candidates are pure opening batsmen that Watson - he'd only be selected to open for his bowling, which would mean Symonds would become un-needed as a player. Yet the only reason they want him to open is so they can squeeze Symonds in...
Johnners
Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
best post, good to see some more Watto love around the place 
That last paragraph is spot on too imo.
Richard
Cricket Web Staff Member
I've just never got why there's so much love-to-hate on him, personally.
NUFAN
Y no Afghanistan flag
So he's going bat at 6 or 7, bowl a bit if useful spin or seam and get picked mainly for his fielding.
Watson's FC average is 49.22, Rogers 48.56. Watson's technique is just as good as Rogers, arguably better, he has batted at number 3 in FC cricket on a regular basis meaning he's had to handle the new ball at times anyway. Only box he dosent tick is having opened in four day cricket and all signs are he'd handle it.
Prince EWS
Global Moderator
His batting is dire though. It isn't excellent - it is dire.
Prince EWS
Global Moderator
Yeah, Watson is probably on par or possibly even just better than Rogers as a batsman - but as an opening batsman, Rogers is superior, purely on the basis that he'd be so much more used to it. And, even if one could argue that Watson > Rogers as an opener, one would also have to argue that Watson > Jaques as an opener and Symonds > Watson as a bowler for the 1-Watson, 6-Symonds thing to actually have any purpose.
I'm not condoning the selection of Symonds at 6, in my opinion Watson opening and Symonds at 6 makes the whole order look a bit wishy-washy as you have two players who (despite Watson's batting potential) have yet to establish themselves. My point was just that I believe Watson is just about as likely as Rogers/Hodge/maybe Jaques to go well if he were given the chance to open, not even suggesting he should be given the chance just that if he were it wouldnt be as big a stuff-up as most people seem to think.
If it were my call I wouldnt pick Symonds for test cricket ever again let alone the first test of this summer, but in the name of consistency and fuelled by his media/fan popularity I think they will.