Bracken's test chances

[chaminda_00]

One thing about Symonds' FC batting average is since about the 2003 WC it is mid 40s in FC cricket, basically the same as Watson during the same period. He had a pretty average start to his domestic career where he low 30s.

 

[iamdavid]

Ask the Lankans or Indians who they would prefer to bowl to... you can bet who they will choose... and also they would like the half volleys Watto would dish to them to relieve the pressure too..
and who they would prefer to hit the ball to in the field..

Thats actually a very good point and one which I believe is overlooked alot.

 

[chaminda_00]

Meh the thing is Watson is very good fielder himself. Its not as if his going to drop many catches or let through many easy singles.

 

[Prince EWS]

The fact that this Watson/Symonds thing is even as issue people consider close enough to debate makes me absolutely sick to my stomach. How such a good team like Australia with such great depth would ever have to consider picking someone like Symonds is beyond me. He wouldn't make the England team and Australia just beat them 5-0. Pathetic. That's the last I'll ever say on the topic though; the prospect of it coming up and me getting angered arguing over it makes me not want to come on here sometimes, so it's really best for me if I say no more on it.

 

[Richard]

Symonds is perfectly good enough to play test cricket, he's been a while settling in but he's playing as well now as he ever has and I would be suprised if he didnt contribute nicely in the longer form this summer.

I mistook you for Rob again there and almost had a heart-attack!

 

[andyc]

honestly cant remember and i was there.. who cares though, good batsmen make the most of their chances.. KP also had a lot of chances in his 150 at the Oval

So is that why it took him till his 12th to make his first 100? And why he still averages under 30 despite playing 13 games?

 

[Laurrz]

So is that why it took him till his 12th to make his first 100? And why he still averages under 30 despite playing 13 games?

i'm talking about dropped catches during an innings

 

[pup11]

Watson needs to prove first that he can play consistently over a long period of time without getting injured, and then only can he be considered as a better option than Symmo.
Watto obviously has more talent and potential than Symmo as a test cricketer but that talent is of no good for the team if he breaks down in middle of a game.

 

[Mister Wright]

Love how Bracken's thread has been hijacked.

It's an irrelevant issue anyway. Watson is not playing in Queensland's next Pura Cup game which is the last round before the test side is announced, so Symonds will be playing in the first test. Johson would also have to bowl pretty badly to bowl himself out of a certain test debut. I also think the only thing stopping Jaques from resuming his test career is injury or massive bowling efforts from both Johnson and Tait in the round in the Pura Cup round before the test.

 

[Nate]

TBH, I only remember 1, but that's all you need - he was patently lbw to MSP on 56 (I think - might have been 58).

Haha yeah, remembering it now, cheers. At the time I was so hyped I probably said it was close, but memory has it being pretty plumbish. Difference between you and me of course being that I take the good with the bad and believe it pretty much evens out. Top century, loved it.

Thats actually a very good point and one which I believe is overlooked alot.

Really? Don't believe you can look at it like that. Lehmann was a gun OD/ODI bowler, and on occasion in Tests, but you wouldn't bet hearing batsmen say "Crap, not Lehmann again" and such. Not saying this is the case between Watson and Symonds, but I don't tihnk you can say "Who would you rather face?" as an arguement, because blokes'll creep up on you and get ya.

 

[Ikki]

Well, the truth is that if Symonds is to be in the side, he has to be better than just an average test-class cricketer...because he'll be playing for Australia remember? Symonds is inferior to Watson in both facets of the game. Sorry, Laurzz, I find it laughable that someone who is worse in a weaker competition is going to be better in a stronger one, when the person we're comparing him was and is a much better bowler at that standard.

The truth is, as it is, Symonds could not crack into any of the other top test sides as a batsman, bowler or all-rounder...it's tough to see why he is still there for ours.

 

[Nate]

Watson is an unknown at Test Level, and you can't use his limited appearances to back him up. Symonds has just come off a very good Test Series and is in superb ODI form. Their batting records are extremely close, especially in the last five years, where a massive change has evoked in Symonds' game.

I strongly disagree that other top Test sides would not have Symonds in their side. Hypothetical of course, but just my opinion.

 

[pup11]

As Wrighty said that this thread is meant to discuss Bracken's test prospects but now it has shaped up into Symmo vs Watto, Watto isn't playing in the 1st test and Symmo is and if Symmo starts performing well in tests then only this debate would make any sense, so just wait and watch how Symmo goes in the first test.

 

[Nate]

...if selected.

 

[Laurrz]

The truth is, as it is, Symonds could not crack into any of the other top test sides as a batsman, bowler or all-rounder...it's tough to see why he is still there for ours.

time will tell.. i believe there is a spot for him as batsman alone.. and with the rich form he is in.. in ODI's.. its a challenge to bring it to tests..
i certainly wouldn't think Watto would crack into a top test team either tbh, so yea..

 

[Ikki]

time will tell.. i believe there is a spot for him as batsman alone.. and with the rich form he is in.. in ODI's.. its a challenge to bring it to tests..
i certainly wouldn't think Watto would crack into a top test team either tbh, so yea..

He's pretty much always been a great ODI player, that's not the argument here. Even if you say Symonds will do well...but how well? To me, and dare I say most people, he will be an average bat, and inadequate bowler...whereas Watson has the potential to be one of the best all-rounders ever seen. For me, it's a no-brainer. Not only is Watson better as a batsman he is better as a bowler, is hardly inferior as a fielder, and is 6 years younger. Their test records speak little either way so it's largely down to what they've done in first-class cricket and again...Watson comfortably. It's not just potential, it's what they've actually done.

 

[vic_orthdox]

One thing about Symonds' FC batting average is since about the 2003 WC it is mid 40s in FC cricket, basically the same as Watson during the same period. He had a pretty average start to his domestic career where he low 30s.

Think this is a very good point.

This is just a personal hunch, but I don't think that Symonds would ever have become nearly as good a player as he is if he weren't playing for Australia. That he has been carried at times because of the strength of the side, and it has allowed him to develop as a player technically and mentally, is something that I don't think would have happened if he were playing at another nation at this time, and he would have been another player with "potential" who never made it.

 

[Prince EWS]

I mistook you for Rob again there and almost had a heart-attack!

My post a couple below that one restored your sanity I'm sure.

 

[pasag]

The fact that this Watson/Symonds thing is even as issue people consider close enough to debate makes me absolutely sick to my stomach. How such a good team like Australia with such great depth would ever have to consider picking someone like Symonds is beyond me. He wouldn't make the England team and Australia just beat them 5-0. Pathetic. That's the last I'll ever say on the topic though; the prospect of it coming up and me getting angered arguing over it makes me not want to come on here sometimes, so it's really best for me if I say no more on it.

Lol, melodramatic much?

 

[Manee]

One thing about Symonds' FC batting average is since about the 2003 WC it is mid 40s in FC cricket, basically the same as Watson during the same period. He had a pretty average start to his domestic career where he low 30s.

As mentioned before, this is a great point. People must look at averages in the last 3-5 years rather than overall averages when looking to make any sort of judgment over current ability. Anyone who saw Yuvraj's ODI average would think he were average, it is only upon further analysis that you see that he has averaged 45 in the last 3-4 years.