**Official** Australia in West Indies

[dontcloseyoureyes]

Where did I say he was ignorant? And he didn't accept money from a bookie. That's pretty much a fact.

 

[Burgey]

I've always rated Michael Clarke as a good bowler. Ever since I saw how much respect he received from Brian Lara in 2006.

Is that tongue-in-cheek, coz I don't remember the incident or incidents you're speaking of?
But I think Clarke is very much an under-rated bowler, esp. in the shorter formats.
He's one of those guys who have a happy knack of picking up vital wickets in tests too. Knows how to break a partnership, a la Doug Walters.

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

Is that tongue-in-cheek, coz I don't remember the incident or incidents you're speaking of?

I was being serious. In this match.

 

[Perm]

Similar things were said about Marshall. He did alright.

Yes, he did, but are you really advocating picking players with very little FC experience or runs/wickets under their belts to play Test and ODI games just because they look alright? It may just been a personal preference thing, but I've always liked picking players based on domestic performances, otherwise what use is FC and List A cricket?

 

[Perm]

For a minute I thought you were in a box, under a rock in the middle of Wales. I mean, the Samuels story was pretty huge news.

Haha, just had a memory lapse when I made that first post. All good now.

And Fletcher is picked on potential rather than performance. Much like Xavier Marshall and, to a lesser extent, Mitchell Johnson. He's shown genuine talent at domestic level and an aggressive mindset. Could be something special if handled well, and I don't have a huge problem with him playing this ODI series. Especially considering that the next best options are Runako Morton and Lendl Simmons. That said, Dale Richards isn't half bad, if a bit old.

TBF you've probably seen Fletcher bat before, which I most certainly haven't, but I can't help but feel selecting him is a ridiculous move. Sure, he might be an excellent batsman as his career develops, but why would you pick him against Australia in an ODI series? In all honesty the only thing he stands to gain is experience, whereas the possibility of failure and mental scarring is quite high. I just feel it's a needless selection.

 

[Top_Cat]

Haha, just had a memory lapse when I made that first post. All good now.



TBF you've probably seen Fletcher bat before, which I most certainly haven't, but I can't help but feel selecting him is a ridiculous move. Sure, he might be an excellent batsman as his career develops, but why would you pick him against Australia in an ODI series? In all honesty the only thing he stands to gain is experience, whereas the possibility of failure and mental scarring is quite high. I just feel it's a needless selection.

When you have a strong, truly professional FC system in place such as Aus's, England's or India's, sure that should be the case. In the WI case though, I can understand if they wanna chuck orthodoxy out the window a bit. And even then, let's face it, the Aussies essentially did that when they picked Casson. It could have been a disastrous first Test of his and after the first innings, it was headed that way. But he took a couple of poles in the second and who knows, there might be some flow-on effects. Fortune favours the brave is what I'm trying to say, I guess.

 

[pasag]

Casson was one of the 'best' spinners in the domestic scene though wasn't he?

I agree though, when you've got nothing to work with you have to sometimes make the hard and out of the box decisions, as far as I'm aware it's not like there was someone with a stunning FC/OD record that missed out in either case.

 

[Burgey]

When you have a strong, truly professional FC system in place such as Aus's, England's or India's, sure that should be the case. In the WI case though, I can understand if they wanna chuck orthodoxy out the window a bit. And even then, let's face it, the Aussies essentially did that when they picked Casson. It could have been a disastrous first Test of his and after the first innings, it was headed that way. But he took a couple of poles in the second and who knows, there might be some flow-on effects. Fortune favours the brave is what I'm trying to say, I guess.

Inzy and the 92 WC - wasn't he plucked from nowhere? At least, that's the story we've heard about him over here.

 

[roseboy64]

Was talking about Gelman and Samuels in the two separate sentences in my last post. The bookie thing was that Kochar was declared not a bookie but a gambler.

 

[Top_Cat]

Inzy and the 92 WC - wasn't he plucked from nowhere? At least, that's the story we've heard about him over here.

Yeah I've heard that too. Geez, he batted well. Was thinking after that tournament he was going to be better than Sachin.

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

Yes, he did, but are you really advocating picking players with very little FC experience or runs/wickets under their belts to play Test and ODI games just because they look alright? It may just been a personal preference thing, but I've always liked picking players based on domestic performances, otherwise what use is FC and List A cricket?

I'm advocating picking Fletcher ahead of Morton, more than anything else. Take a look at West Indies domestic cricket. There aren't many options. Floyd Reifer is over the hill and Dale Richards is considered too old. Aside from Daren Ganga, all the experienced performing batsmen are already in West Indies colours.

 

[roseboy64]

Agreeing with Camps. Can't really find any fault with who's in the squad based on who's available and their records.

 

[Laurrz]

Watson is a better cricketer than Marsh at the moment plus he can bowl

yea probably
as much as i love Puddle i think its just me being pretty excited about him

But.. so is there room for Hopes? or do we play a spinner instead... a proper one
or Fraz (a specialist quick)

I'm a bit in between, massive fan of Hopes, but i just don't know if there's room for both him and Watson...
I feel there could be, both allrounders are so handy.. but you have to ask, when Hopes played it was because of his handy bowling as we needed a 5th bowler
now we have Watson... can Hopes hold his spot? would his bowling be better than someone like Clark anyway? what if Tait comes back? Hauritz?

 

[Burgey]

yea probably
as much as i love Puddle i think its just me being pretty excited about him

But.. so is there room for Hopes? or do we play a spinner instead... a proper oneor Fraz (a specialist quick)

I'm a bit in between, massive fan of Hopes, but i just don't know if there's room for both him and Watson...
I feel there could be, both allrounders are so handy.. but you have to ask, when Hopes played it was because of his handy bowling as we needed a 5th bowler
now we have Watson... can Hopes hold his spot? would his bowling be better than someone like Clark anyway? what if Tait comes back? Hauritz?

Depends where you're playing, imo. If you've got a side with Hopes and Watson in it, Clarke and Symonds can get the spinning job done on most surfaces, because if they bowl meh, you have the two all rounders to cover their overs.
In really spin-friendly conditions, though, you'd ideally want a spinner. Question for Australia atm though is, Who?

 

[Laurrz]

Depends where you're playing, imo. If you've got a side with Hopes and Watson in it, Clarke and Symonds can get the spinning job done on most surfaces, because if they bowl meh, you have the two all rounders to cover their overs.
In really spin-friendly conditions, though, you'd ideally want a spinner. Question for Australia atm though is, Who?

yep agreed, South Africa show that it is possible to do well with just a barrage of fast, fast mediums, mediums..

But yea im not sure if its too early to be looking at the world cup, because its in Asia, there's bound to be turning tracks
I think a good spinner is extremely handful on every pitch in ODI's.. when batsmen are on top, so often its the spinner that reels them in.. not least teams with gun batting lineups
and if a pitch is a turning one, and the team utilises the conditions and you don't, then you most likely will lose (unless its a way ****ter team which is not the case now as teams are more closely packed)

I suppose for this tour they didn't expect turning tracks which is fair enough, just thought they could've brought atleast one spinner
Hauritz? has an ok record

Steve Smith for the future

good time to be a decent (and/or young) spinner in this country though

 

[sideshowtim]

I'm back from my third banning. Ponting is God.

 

[Perm]

I'm back from my third banning. Ponting is God.

Haha, welcome back. I hope things calm down.

 

[Jnr.]

I'm back from my third banning. Ponting is God.

You're back just in time for Punter's 300th ODI. Nice timing.

 

[NZTailender]

It's not like Australia needs the batting depth. Trying out a specialist spinner should be the way to go. I still don't rate Hopes that much - prefer Watson as a batsman and a bowler over him.

Think Xavier Doherty is worth a shot IMO. Had a good FRC season in 07/08, and if you're so inclined, isn't a total mug with the bat.

I'd pick once Hayden retires:
1. S Marsh
2. S Watson
3. R Ponting*
4. M Clarke
5. A Symonds
6. M Hussey
7. B Haddin+
8. B Lee
9. X Doherty
10. M Johnson
11. N Bracken

Plenty of batting and bowling options.

 

[brockley]

Hi NZ tailender you seen xavier bowl have you,i am a bit of xavier fan altho don't know if he is a one day international player,i guess you never know.
He ha taken over 10 wkts in the last 2 one dayer seasons,more than anyone else he may deserve his due.
Funny to see a kiwi recomment him tho,altho tasmania is near new zealand .