***Official Australia in India***

[aussie]

Not seeing why Johnson has to be able to swing the ball to be effective anywhere, let alone India. Glenn McGrath has a great record in India and he barely swung a ball. Johnson has never been much of a swing bowler, any success he's had has been when he just tried to bowl quick, aggressive lines and lengths with the odd bit of movement away. Certainly he should be adding to his armory as time goes by but his stock ball has always been about hitting the seam and trying to change this diminishes his wicket-taking ability by heaps.

As Jack said, it could be the ideal scenario for him this series with the lines the Aussies are looking to bowl. But not if he tries to swing it. Personally, if the field is set to suffocate scoring (as the Aussies appear to be trying again), Johnson sticks to trying to hit the seam and there's a bit of uneven bounce, that would be bloody tough to score off and damn tough to face in general. Can see a few stumps going bye-byes.

Although i agree Johnson should not try to be a swing bowler, he at least needs to be able to reverse it & he can't thus making really as useless comodity in India ATM. Thats why i hope Bollinger is as solid as you guys make him sound.

In the 2001 & 04 tours to India all conditions expect for Mumbai 01 & Nagpur/Mumbai 04 gave nothing for the quicks but in the other test matches, pigeon was still able to be dangerous with the new-ball i.e his classic dismissal of Tendulkar & Das in the 2nd innings of Kolkatta 01.

 

[Johnners]

Johnson can reverse it, showed that with a few spells in the Aust v India series last summer.

 

[silentstriker]

Well, I hope Australia play a spinner. It's ridiculous that they think it will actually help them, but obviously I'll take it.

 

[NZTailender]

Katich and Clarke imo.

 

[Jakester1288]

Katich and Clarke imo.

Finally someone who speaks some sense!

I have been getting at these two all series, and Katich ahead of the over-rated hack Watson. Whilst at the moment I think we need to wait to see Krejza bowl some more, I will admit I had him in the side after McGain's injury. But after the first day alone, I am definitely leaning towards the option of having 4 seamers (Lee, Clark, Johnson and Bollinger) and some handy spin from Katich and Clarke. Still looking decent at the moment, we just need to see what Krejza can do with the tail and in the second innings, where there will be cracks as wide as a railway track, and spinning as much as possible.

 

[Burgey]

2 left arm quicks for Australia (much as I've been pushing Doug's barrow and would love him to play) = muchos footmarks outside RH off stump for HBS to bowl into.

Personally, I wouldn't let that affect my selection, and after Krezja's day out yesterday, he's likely to be so low on confidence that even if he can bowl better, he likely won't. On balance, I think the attack you mention is the way to go.

I don't think Watson's a hack though. But, if they ran with 4 quicks, would they shift back to Jaques with Katich at 6? Seems to me if you have 4 quicks you don't need a 5th as cover, and the support would come from part timers like Clarke, Katich for spin and some dibbly-dobblers from Hussey.

Won't matter anyway. Lee & Clark will get the job done, making the worry about long stints in the field a moot point

 

[Top_Cat]

2 left arm quicks for Australia (much as I've been pushing Doug's barrow and would love him to play) = muchos footmarks outside RH off stump for HBS to bowl into.

Don't think that's a massive factor although it wouldn't hurt. HBS's line is a bit straighter because he doesn't turn the ball all that much (barely remember him clean-bowling anyone, even in 2001) and he's quick through the air so unless the footmarks were quite close to the stump line, reckon the Aussie batsmen would be alright.

 

[Jakester1288]

2 left arm quicks for Australia (much as I've been pushing Doug's barrow and would love him to play) = muchos footmarks outside RH off stump for HBS to bowl into.

I can see your point, but with the way we performed today, and Bollinger has performed in India of late, they are the best bowlers we have at the moment, and if they will get us 20 wickets without farting around the Krejza undoubtedly will, then so be it. They should be selected, regardless of the fact that they are all seamers.

after Krezja's day out yesterday, he's likely to be so low on confidence that even if he can bowl better, he likely won't.

All the more reason not to select him in my opinion.

But, if they ran with 4 quicks, would they shift back to Jaques with Katich at 6? Seems to me if you have 4 quicks you don't need a 5th as cover, and the support would come from part timers like Clarke, Katich for spin and some dibbly-dobblers from Hussey.

That is indeed what I am getting at. I would want a side like this, and the bowlers as follows.

1. Jaques
2. Hayden
3. Ponting
4. Hussey
5. Clarke
6. Katich
7. Haddin
8. Lee
9. Johnson
10. Clark
11. Bollinger

And my bowling attack would look like this:

Lee
Clark
Johnson
Bollinger
Clarke
Katich

You would easily get enough overs out of them, and you would get 30 overs of service out of Clarke and Katich if required. It is a well balanced side, and there are really no other options, provided Jaques is fit, Krejza is dire, McGain is injured and Johnson is bowling well.

 

[Top_Cat]

We should, however, be wary of relying on the part-timers too much. Greg Blewett did a lot of bowling in 1998 and it fairly drastically affected his batting. Given Clarke bowls spin but still, it's folly to give him too many overs. Particularly disagree with him providing cover for a failed 4th bowler.

 

[sanga1337]

We should, however, be wary of relying on the part-timers too much. Greg Blewett did a lot of bowling in 1998 and it fairly drastically affected his batting. Given Clarke bowls spin but still, it's folly to give him too many overs. Particularly disagree with him providing cover for a failed 4th bowler.

Particularly as he has also had some back injuries in the past, which has prevented him from bowling more.

 

[Burgey]

Loving TC's new avatar here. Quality.

 

[Mister Wright]

Katich won 'bat-off': Nielsen

 

[Top_Cat]

Katich won 'bat-off': Nielsen

"Mainly the selectors thought that Katto and Jaquesy pretty much had a bat-off in the West Indies,” Nielsen said.

 

[Jakester1288]

FFS, I hate that. Jaques has done nothing wrong whatsoever, and is a much better opening option than Katich in my opinion. He is a specialist opener, who has made 3 100's and 6 50's in 11 matches at an average of over 47. What more could you want? Sometimes I give up of these selectors. First, bringing Krejza over better spinners. Leaving Symonds out. Ignoring Bollinger all last season. And now that Jaques, who has done nothing wrong at all, being left out for an in form Katich. I want Katich in the side at 6, and Jaques opening, but Katich opening and Watson at 6 is just stupid.

I hope he gets ducks until he is dropped, so Jaques can restore his rightful place at the top of the order.

 

[howardj]

I want Katich in the side at 6, and Jaques opening, but Katich opening and Watson at 6 is just stupid.

.

Why is it st00pid?

It gives the team more options.

Katich is a proven top order player.

 

[Jakester1288]

Why is it st00pid?

It gives the team more options.

Katich is a proven top order player.

It's more the fact that we have dropped a proven test player, who had a great summer last season, and put in an injury prone, over-rated player who will pull a hamstring if he bowls a few overs. Plus, his form when he returned for the Bulls last season was terrible, he got around 3 ducks on the trot. I'm disappointed with the coach and selectors.

 

[Johnners]

Katich is clearly in better form than Jaques, and both Katich & Watson add more to the team than Jaques, so It's really not a stupid decision at all. Especially considering the fact that Jaques hasn't been playing because of Injury. I'm a fan of the big fella, but taking everything into consideration (bowling options, Jaques injury meaning he hasn't had a chance really to get used to conditions, Katichs form, Watsons better all-round game) I don't think he's part of our best 11.

 

[tooextracool]

Wonder when the last time was that Australia went into a test match series as serious underdogs as they are in this series? Maybe against India in 97?

 

[sanga1337]

Agree with Jakester, would much rather have Jaques and Hayden opening with Katich down at number 6 instead of Watson. Would rather have a specialist batsman at 6 than an allrounder (who's also got a very good FC batting record mind) who's prone to getting injured nearly all the time and who's bowling is likely to be no more than useful at best. Seriously Jaques has done nothing wrong and if anything has had a very solid start to his test career, theres no reason to drop him him when someone who is unproven in tests and prone to getting injured like Watson can get into the side ahead of him.

 

[silentstriker]

Wonder when the last time was that Australia went into a test match series as serious underdogs as they are in this series? Maybe against India in 97?

India are +125, Australia are +138, Draw is +300.