***Official*** Sri Lanka in Australia

[howardj]

Border and M Waugh's XI for the Tests on Inside Cricket, from memory:

Border's XI:

Hayden
Hussey
Ponting
Hodge
Clarke
Symonds
Gilchrist
Lee
Johnson
Clark
Tait

Mark Waugh's:

Hayden
Jaques
Ponting
Clarke
Hussey
Symonds
Gilchrist
Lee
Johnson
Clark
Tait

Hussey to open?

No MacGill?

 

[Nate]

Would go

Jaques
Hayden
Ponting
Clarke
Hussey
Symonds
Gilchrist
Lee
Johnson
Bracken
Clark

for the GABBA. Cheers Long Hop for mentioning Brack's outstanding Gabba work, again noticiably in all forms of cricket.

http://forum.cricketweb.net/showthread.php?t=20141 for my now quite outdated arguement before the Ashes.

 

[Nate]

Would like to speculate that I believe MacGill, if, and he most probably will be, selected will bowl a load as tripe as huge as Malinga's hair.

 

[chaminda_00]

Would back Sri Lanka to get an easy draw if MacGill doesn't play TBH. Would be an interesting choice Ponting would have to make at the toss (if he wins). Bowl first and give the seamers the best conditions, or bat first and don't let Murali bowl last and risk the chance of Sri Lanka getting an easy draw without a frontline spinner.

 

[vic_orthdox]

Don't think Tait will play. For mine, it'll be as such:

Haydos, Jaques, Ponting, Clarke, Hussey, Symonds, Gilchrist, Lee, Johnson, Clark, MacGill.

Just really looks a lot better balanced with Watson in there, TBH. Tait to be 12th man.

 

[Mister Wright]

Don't think Tait will play. For mine, it'll be as such:

Haydos, Jaques, Ponting, Clarke, Hussey, Symonds, Gilchrist, Lee, Johnson, Clark, MacGill.

Just really looks a lot better balanced with Watson in there, TBH. Tait to be 12th man.

Yeah, think that will be the side, possibly with Hussey batting above Clarke.

 

[pasag]

Thoughts on Hogg as the bolter? I'm not talking about whether should play or not, but do people think selectors will think he is an option?

 

[iamdavid]

Is MacGill going to get a FC game between now and when the team is announced ?
If not you'd really have to assume he wont be there, and same goes for Tait probably even if he does play between now and then, a bowler like him needs a little more than one match under his belt after such a long lay-off.

I think a squad of 12 or 13 will be named and it wouldnt suprise me much to see both MacGill and Hogg in there so as they can look at MacGills form and fitness in camp before making a decision. Also 4 quicks seems to be an option in the eyes of plenty of those close to the Aussie team (eg Border), and with Tait very unlikely I think one of Hilfenhaus and Bracken will be in the squad, hopefully the former.

Squad I believe will be announced for Brisbane -
Jaques
Hayden
Ponting
Hussey
Clarke
Symonds
Gilchrist
Lee
Johnson
Clark
Hogg
MacGill
Hilfenhaus (if he goes allright in game 7, otherwise probably Bracken )

 

[Mister Wright]

Thoughts on Hogg as the bolter? I'm not talking about whether should play or not, but do people think selectors will think he is an option?

Hope not. MacGill deserves first crack.

 

[chaminda_00]

Don't think his really a bolter anymore. His been talked about a fair bit really. If MacGill and Tait are not picked it would be a pretty close call between Hilf, Hogg and Bracken. Hilf lack of cricket going into the Test Series could hurt his chances. Will be interesting then to see who is seen a more of ODI specialist out of Hogg and Bracken, if it came down to those two.

 

[Nate]

Don't think Tait will play. For mine, it'll be as such:

Haydos, Jaques, Ponting, Clarke, Hussey, Symonds, Gilchrist, Lee, Johnson, Clark, MacGill.

Just really looks a lot better balanced with Watson in there, TBH. Tait to be 12th man.

Can't see it being anything other than this.

 

[four_or_six]

Can't see it being anything other than this.

Just think that imagine Bracks has a stonking match against Qld when he gets back and Tait's still struggling for fitness... I would think he could push his way to 12th man. And then he's just a niggle on the morning of the match away.

 

[Nate]

Trust me, it's that kind of eternal optimism I have as Bracken's number-one fan and lovechild. Gotta have faith.

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

Don't think Tait will play. For mine, it'll be as such:

Haydos, Jaques, Ponting, Clarke, Hussey, Symonds, Gilchrist, Lee, Johnson, Clark, MacGill.

Just really looks a lot better balanced with Watson in there, TBH. Tait to be 12th man.

Yeah that's exactly the team IMO.

 

[Matt79]

Agree with Jack as well, although I'm completely undecided as to whether MacGill should play or not.

 

[Prince EWS]

Hussey will bat above Clarke though, it should be noted. I'd be extremely surprised to see Clarke at 4 with Hussey at 5.

 

[Nate]

Hussey will bat above Clarke though, it should be noted. I'd be extremely surprised to see Clarke at 4 with Hussey at 5.

Haha. Went to find a scorecard to laugh at you, and got this.
http://content-aus.cricinfo.com/ausveng/engine/match/249224.html

Why does Clarke bat at four in ODIs then? Fair play son.

 

[pup11]

I would prefer to watch Clarke at 4 and Hussey at 5 for a simple reason that Hussey can bat really well with the tail, i don't think Gilly is now as good as he used to be so one shouldn't expect him to play the kind of brilliant knocks he used to play with the tail in the past.
Hussey can fit into the S.Waugh role very well and he has already shown it in his short test career that he can bat pretty well with the tail.

 

[Prince EWS]

Haha. Went to find a scorecard to laugh at you, and got this.
http://content-aus.cricinfo.com/ausveng/engine/match/249224.html

Why does Clarke bat at four in ODIs then? Fair play son.

He bats at 4 in ODIs because Hussey's such a good finisher. I'd much rather have Hussey coming in at 6 than Clarke to finish off the innings and/or save our ass in an ODI and Clarke has done very well batting 4 in one day cricket. He had his go at #4 in the test team though and struggled quite a bit - it actually eventuated in his dropping - so he came back in at #6 (and then moved to #5 when Marto retired). Hussey's a former opener and hence doesn't have the technical problems in tests that Clarke (at times) has with the moving ball, so he bats 4. Different requirements for different formats really.

 

[Nate]

Yeah, knew all of that, just forgot.

EDIT: Though I'd argue that Clarke wasn't dropped because he couldn't bat at number four, moreso just that he was about as useful as a bag of poop at that stage.