***Official*** South Africa In Australia

[social]

I disagree.

Since 2008, Hussey has been prolific (even despite latest failure) at No.4, and No.5 even more than No.6.

I'd say let him remain at No.4. Chuck out Clarke, bring in Hodge. Australia's problem is mainly batting.

Even if there was any logic behind getting rid of Clarke for Hodge, it's not possible as........



BOTH ARE INJURED

 

[Precambrian]

Rather than calling Tait a poor bowler, i would say he is a bowler who depends heavily on rhythm, when his rhythm is good he can run through batting side in a jiffy, but when things aren't going right he can be really poor, but he is definitely a match-winner and should be in the ODI side whenever his body isn't troubling him.

Problem is, since the WC, he has hardly looked the matchwinning part in ODIs, let alone tests.

 

[duffer]

Ok, so Micky Arthur said they'd go with an experimental lineup next match, would you do the same if you were Australia or just try and get some momentum going into the NZ series by beating a weakened team?

 

[Flem274*]

Rather than calling Tait a poor bowler, i would say he is a bowler who depends heavily on rhythm, when his rhythm is good he can run through batting side in a jiffy, but when things aren't going right he can be really poor, but he is definitely a match-winner and should be in the ODI side whenever his body isn't troubling him.

Unfortunately he's in rythym less than James Anderson. He is a liability and until he can bowl straight consistently outside of 20/20, he doesn't have a long term future, especially with his injury concerns.

 

[dontcloseyoureyes]

Michael Clarke as captain and Phillip Hughes to open. Then we can start to re-build.

You mean Hughes, the man who's only boundary shots are through point and averages 30 in OD cricket this season, with a poor S/R of around 70?

Makes sense. Klinger perhaps the better option considering he's made OD runs for multiple seasons now, is in the form of his life (though it remains to be seen whether T20 has killed his form like I said it would) and is striking at pretty much exactly the same as Hughes at around double his average.

 

[Ernest]

Hughes to open? DWTA. Would want Jaques to step up.

Keep him for test matches in the short term. We need youth. We are looking like the British Home Guard in the early 1940's

 

[social]

Hughes to open? DWTA. Would want Jaques to step up.

Or Rogers

Both score thousands of runs year in, year out but are not apparently good enough to adapt to one day cricket

 

[pskov]

Ok, so Micky Arthur said they'd go with an experimental lineup next match, would you do the same if you were Australia or just try and get some momentum going into the NZ series by beating a weakened team?

Australia should pick their best team, or at least what they think their best team is. They need to win as many matches as possible and try to build some momentum.

 

[Precambrian]

Even if there was any logic behind getting rid of Clarke for Hodge, it's not possible as........



BOTH ARE INJURED

FFS I am talking about future series.

 

[Ernest]

You mean Hughes, the man who's only boundary shots are through point and averages 30 in OD cricket this season, with a poor S/R of around 70?

Makes sense. Klinger perhaps the better option considering he's made OD runs for multiple seasons now, is in the form of his life (though it remains to be seen whether T20 has killed his form like I said it would) and is striking at pretty much exactly the same as Hughes at around double his average.

Must be thinking of a different player the Hughes I've seen can play the ball anywhere he just wasn't coached into the "front foot down the wicket at all costs" type of malarkey.

North would be a good option but we should go for potential now we've proven to the world that we are even more bog average than the English Cricket Team.

 

[Precambrian]

Ok, so Micky Arthur said they'd go with an experimental lineup next match, would you do the same if you were Australia or just try and get some momentum going into the NZ series by beating a weakened team?

Play for pride. The existing lineup is an experimental, cannot imagine a more experimental one at the moment.

 

[inbox24]

Or Rogers

Both score thousands of runs year in, year out but are not apparently good enough to adapt to one day cricket

Well considering difference in dirty money paid in bribes to selectors between these two players and some others, I'd say it's well justified.

 

[Precambrian]

Play for pride. The existing lineup is an experimental, cannot imagine a more experimental one at the moment.

Botha, you rock! What a guy! So understated, yet did the job, inspired his team!!!

 

[social]

FFS I am talking about future series.

So you want to drop someone who is one of the best ODI players in the world - decision that has absolutely no basis on either form or in logic

Congratulations, you've just qualified to be an Australian selector

 

[Precambrian]

Ok since the series is settled, I cannot restrain myself from this, on behalf of some English guys here also

Australia

 

[TT Boy]

He-****ed on Australia day. Great.

Can now take a shower and go out for dinner. G/F is given me daggers...

Parnell, VB and Tsotsobe can now play at Perth and the big boys can have a rest.

 

[four_or_six]

Yeah I guess, all he had to do was save his country from defeat in both the match and the series with all the pressure in the world on him. Plenty of time.

Well, it's what he's paid to do. All I'm saying is he's had opportunity this series, come in in the 37th, 39th and 21st overs. It's not like he's batting at 7 and coming in with four overs to go, having to slog.

Anyway, I think the whole thing is resolved by Clarke in for White and shuffling the others down. It bolsters the bowling too. Clarke's fit for NZ isn't he?

 

[dontcloseyoureyes]

Must be thinking of a different player the Hughes I've seen can play the ball anywhere he just wasn't coached into the "front foot down the wicket at all costs" type of malarkey.

I said boundary shots, not scoring shots. The T20 final was perfect example the other day, stepped back and tried to slap everything through cover point. It worked for a while until he backed away and Nannes had it heading at the base of leg, so he had to adjust to try and swing to leg and missed.

 

[Precambrian]

So you want to drop someone who is one of the best ODI players in the world - decision that has absolutely no basis on either form or in logic

Congratulations, you've just qualified to be an Australian selector

Hello? Clarke among the best ODI players at the moment? Still 2006 at your place?

 

[pup11]

I disagree.

Since 2008, Hussey has been prolific (even despite latest failure) at No.4, and No.5 even more than No.6.

I'd say let him remain at No.4. Chuck out Clarke, bring in Hodge. Australia's problem is mainly batting.

Ok so you are saying drop Clarke all together and bring Hodge, and may i know why?

Anyways... i think those stats just show how good Hussey has been in terms of flexibilty, but my point is Hussey's ability to finish of an innings is awesome, and he can really help improve the standards of Australia's death batting, which have been piss-poor for sometime now, and even in case of a collapse he is the perfect guy to perform damage control, i don't think there is any other batsman in Australia who could play the role of the finisher as well as Mike Hussey,so that's why he should be batting in the lower middle order for me.