Who should Australia leave out for 1st Test vs NZ?

[Matt79]

On the other hand, they need to sort the allrounders spot before the Ashes, and preferably before the South Africa tour. A couple of matches vs. NZ is probably as good a time to let them compete directly against each other as any.

 

[Mister Wright]

Or it could be a good trial to see if they can both play in the same team. They do so for QLD, so can't see why they can't for Australia. Given there's only one real battle for one middle order spot it's probably not going to happen, but if they both contributed in the side it could be an option the selectors could consider in the future.

 

[Matt79]

Will help relieve the tension on them to at least think about putting Hodge in the squad...

 

[Woodster]

On the other hand, they need to sort the allrounders spot before the Ashes, and preferably before the South Africa tour. A couple of matches vs. NZ is probably as good a time to let them compete directly against each other as any.

Yes possibly, but they are different all-rounders in terms of styles, and I'm not sure playing them together in direct competition will tell the selectors anything they can not deduce now.

Symonds is the more naturally attacking batsman in Test cricket, and when they are both on form, Symonds is the one they would edge towards. His abillity to take the game away from the opposition in limited time is proven (in more recent times).

Symonds bowling is generally non-threatening, but he has the knack of breaking up the odd established partnership, whether with spin or seam. Watson is more useful with the ball, but not particularly threatening either, although a few decent spells in India where he managed to get a little reverse swing was promising.

Symonds is obviously the most outstanding fielder of the two.

 

[Rant0r]

Magoffin's probably nowhere near selection because he's pretty average. He may have got cheap wickets in Australian domestic cricket but he hasn't done so anywhere else. Johnson's playing Tests is clearly mostly based on his ODI success, which flatters him to no little degree.

"Recent" is generally taken to mean the last year or so.

no wickets in the australian domestic scene are 'cheap' the country is stack full of top batsmen and flat pitches, he's certainly done more than johnson, yet he seems to be that far back in the cue it's not funny.

maybe he needs to move to the eastern states or hang out with some fishing buddies already with cricket australia contracts.... or be blonde... or be less of a bowler

and where else does he need to take wickets other than the australian domestic scene to be considered for selection ? perhaps he should do an offseason in the hong kong sixes or bully some amatuers in holland

 

[Woodster]

Or it could be a good trial to see if they can both play in the same team. They do so for QLD, so can't see why they can't for Australia. Given there's only one real battle for one middle order spot it's probably not going to happen, but if they both contributed in the side it could be an option the selectors could consider in the future.

I jus think unless you drop a batsman, which is a) not likely, and b) will only weaken the batting anyway, the two should not be considered for a Test match in the same side. There are much better bowlers around than Watson (presuming he would bat 7 and Symonds 6), and he would be taking up their place, unless a longer than normal batting line-up is necessary, but such is the batting prowess in this side, I don't believe that needs to be the case.

FWIW, I think it should be a straight shoot-out between the two.

 

[Rant0r]

their obsession with an allrounder is confusing the issue, there needs to be 6 batsmen, if watson can average at least in the mid 30's and bowl anything like he did in india then he is it, if not, then it should be symonds or another batsmen and just trundle with part timers. haddin might want to clear his head and bat like he has the potential to as well, oh and stop keeping like a backstop.

flintoff has a lot to answer for.

 

[Matt79]

their obsession with an allrounder is confusing the issue, there needs to be 6 batsmen, if watson can average at least in the mid 30's and bowl anything like he did in india then he is it, if not, then it should be symonds or another batsmen and just trundle with part timers. haddin might want to clear his head and bat like he has the potential to as well, oh and stop keeping like a backstop.

flintoff has a lot to answer for.

But Symonds isn't in the team only as a batsman either. Otherwise one of Katich, Hodge or D. Hussey would have been selected ahead of him some time ago.

 

[Woodster]

flintoff has a lot to answer for.

As does Adam Gilchrist, who has put similar pressures on sides, certainly England, to find a batsman-keeper that scores rucks of runs at 7 and opens the ODI innings! Of which England have currently found no-one that can do either, successfully anyway.

 

[Rant0r]

But Symonds isn't in the team only as a batsman either. Otherwise one of Katich, Hodge or D. Hussey would have been selected ahead of him some time ago.

yeah but he still averages 40 odd, not bad for a batsman who bowls a bit, and hodge is a tosser, think they'd rather a loose cannon in symonds than a compulsive masterbator in hodge... sorry, he just is, bats like a mofo though, wouldnt be the first to miss out in a strong era see lehmann, siddons and cox

hussey will get his chance soon though, chris rodgers has fallen off the tree, and who knows about jacques, by the time he comes back they could throw phillip hughes to the wolves.

 

[Flem274*]

yeah but he still averages 40 odd, not bad for a batsman who bowls a bit, and hodge is a tosser, think they'd rather a loose cannon in symonds than a compulsive masterbator in hodge... sorry, he just is, bats like a mofo though, wouldnt be the first to miss out in a strong era see lehmann, siddons and cox

hussey will get his chance soon though, chris rodgers has fallen off the tree, and who knows about jacques, by the time he comes back they could throw phillip hughes to the wolves.

How many times have players dropped him or he's been let off?

And Hodge being a compulsive masturbator, whether true or not, shouldn't have any bearing on his selection. Try criticizing his batting.

 

[Richard]

Players not allowed to improve over time in your strange world?

I don't know why anyone continues to say this to me, because I've probably said "players almost never stay the same all career" more than anyone else in the history of this forum.

Magoffin, however, doesn't appear to have done anything of the sort.

 

[Richard]

no wickets in the australian domestic scene are 'cheap' the country is stack full of top batsmen and flat pitches

Cheap wickets = wickets at a low average. Though tail-end wickets are always "cheap wickets" in the other sense, ie, taken without any great effort required.

and where else does he need to take wickets other than the australian domestic scene to be considered for selection ? perhaps he should do an offseason in the hong kong sixes or bully some amatuers in holland

Taking wickets in county cricket would be a good start, and maybe Australia A too.

 

[Richard]

But Symonds isn't in the team only as a batsman either. Otherwise one of Katich, Hodge or D. Hussey would have been selected ahead of him some time ago.

Not if he averaged 70-odd in 12 Tests (even though most of that was only scored through Umpiring error).

 

[four_or_six]

Whoever it was who dropped those catches in Symonds big ton at the MCG has a lot to answer for.

 

[Richard]

No-one dropped any catches, he was just out lbw to Monty Panesar on 56 and Rudi Koertzen didn't give it.

Same way Steve Bucknor didn't give him 3 times at regular intervals when he should have in that 165* or whatever it was. And same way he was given not-out when he was out lbw about 3 times in the series in West Indies.

 

[Top_Cat]

Like Symonds did?

Different scenario. Symonds was selected on the basis of world-class and consistent performances with the bat in ODI cricket and some fairly handy ones with the ball. I'd suggest had Watto done the same with his chance in ODI's, he'd be in the side no question.

I'd suggest that whilst there are no questions about his raw ability, there are still a few about his temperament.

I do agree with you though. Although I think it's a bit much asking him to pull a Freddie with bat and ball in his first test series, so I'd rate him as unlucky to be dropped.

Wasn't expecting Freddie-like heights. not even expecting that from Freddie any more.

Reality is, though, he had an ideal opportunity to cement his place. Not in his first test series, by the way, and he's also been around the Aussie set-up for about 6 years now, training and playing with some of the best players we're ever seen so should be well aware of what it takes. But he had a plumb spot batting at 6 and knew he'd be getting plenty of work with the ball in a struggling attack. He had the ideal opportunity to shut Symonds out completely and I think whilst he'd be happy with some incremental progress in his game, he'd also be ruing that missed opportunity, particularly with the bat.

So now, I think he needs some runs under his belt more than anything. Because he should know that Symonds doesn't have long to go and is probably on his very last chance attitude-wise. If Symonds has a fairly short run of outs or another brain explosion, he'll be out and Watto will be in. If Watto has any pride in his game, he'll want to be ready for that chance rather than just getting it by default. Like I said, a player that good, more should be demanded of him than the average player.

 

[NZTailender]

No-one dropped any catches, he was just out lbw to Monty Panesar on 56 and Rudi Koertzen didn't give it.

Same way Steve Bucknor didn't give him 3 times at regular intervals when he should have in that 165* or whatever it was. And same way he was given not-out when he was out lbw about 3 times in the series in West Indies.

What about that delivery that he blocked? If it had been an inch to the left he would've edged it and would've been possibly out! Possible-alternate-delivery-trajectory-chance-theory! Average=5.

 

[Mister Wright]

^Haha.

Given the pictures they've shown of the pitch I'd be very surprised if Krezja plays. That is unless he has brought his lawn bowls set.

 

[Rant0r]

How many times have players dropped him or he's been let off?

And Hodge being a compulsive masturbator, whether true or not, shouldn't have any bearing on his selection. Try criticizing his batting.

it's a valid point, there's nothing wrong with his batting, but look back in history (well my living memory) of people who deserved to be there on form but weren't, for whatever reason, they will not pick, or are very loathe to pick anyone who doesn't fit in with their clique or someone who has p1ssed them off, eg, dean jones