Watson to replace mike hussey

[91Jmay]

IMO would be a bad decision. Watson would add very little with the ball (a poor mans Tim Bresnan) and doubtful he is as good with the bat as Huss. Hussey is actually a pretty dynamic fielder to.

 

[dontcloseyoureyes]

(a poor mans Tim Bresnan)

 

[inbox24]

Can't believe the calls to drop to be honest. Cricket is a team game which thrives on quality players who are specialists at their craft, not half fit, out of form 'all rounders'. If you're going to pick an injured Watson, you might as well pick a fit McDonald, both are dire options. Hussey has been the rock of ages in the middle order and so what if he's had a bad 18 months, the point is quality players will get through troughs in the their career.

 

[91Jmay]

You ever seen Shane "85 MPH, no swing, no accuracy, no seam" Watson bowl?

Atleast Bresnan swings the ball, at a higher pace aswell.

 

[wfdu_ben91]

You ever seen Shane "85 MPH, no swing, no accuracy, no seam" Watson bowl?

Atleast Bresnan swings the ball, at a higher pace aswell.

You could say that Flintoff is a poor man's Shane Watson aswell. Really, Flintoff is just a fatter, uglier verison of Shane Watson and unlike Watson, gives up when he gets injured.

Got no swing? Ask Rahul Dravid.

 

[GIMH]

91Jmay and stfu_ben flying the flag for stupid people

 

[Prince EWS]

You ever seen Shane "85 MPH, no swing, no accuracy, no seam" Watson bowl?

Atleast Bresnan swings the ball, at a higher pace aswell.

I'll admit that Brenan's probably a better bowler than Watto, but the difference there certainly doesn't go anywhere close to making up the 18 run difference in their First Class batting averages. I guarantee you that Watson would make at least six current Test teams purely based on his batting if he was fit an eligible.

You can always spot a Watson-ignoramus when they start talking about his bowling as if it's his main discipline and comparing him to bowling allrounders.

EDIT: Hmm, perhaps I was being a little harsh. Looking back at the post that started this, you own really compared Watson's bowling to Bresnan and merely said that you doubted he'd live up to Hussey's standards with the bat... which I suppose is fair enough. I disagree strongly that such a cricketer wouldn't be an asset, though. A genuinely Test standard batsman who bowled like Tim Bresnan would be an awesome, awesome bloke to have around. I certainly wouldn't be dropping Hussey at this point but Watson coming in for a batsman - presuming he's fit to bowl - would hardly be the worst thing for the balance for the Australian team at the moment.

 

[Jakester1288]

I guarantee you that Watson would make at least seven current Test teams purely based on his batting if he was fit an eligible.

Could you please name these teams?

 

[dontcloseyoureyes]

Could you please name these teams?

Pretty much all of them bar South Africa, at a guess.

 

[91Jmay]

Can you please show where i compared Watson and Bresnans batting?

Of course Watson is a better allround player, and 10x better batsmen. But as a bowler he is completely average.

 

[91Jmay]

I'll admit that Brenan's probably a better bowler than Watto, but the difference there certainly doesn't go anywhere close to making up the 18 run difference in their First Class batting averages. I guarantee you that Watson would make at least six current Test teams purely based on his batting if he was fit an eligible.

You can always spot a Watson-ignoramus when they start talking about his bowling as if it's his main discipline and comparing him to bowling allrounders.

EDIT: Hmm, perhaps I was being a little harsh. Looking back at the post that started this, you own really compared Watson's bowling to Bresnan and merely said that you doubted he'd live up to Hussey's standards with the bat... which I suppose is fair enough. I disagree strongly that such a cricketer wouldn't be an asset, though. A genuinely Test standard batsman who bowled like Tim Bresnan would be an awesome, awesome bloke to have around. I certainly wouldn't be dropping Hussey at this point but Watson coming in for a batsman - presuming he's fit to bowl - would hardly be the worst thing for the balance for the Australian team at the moment.

He is an excellent squad player no doubt, and good enough IMO to bat 6 outright. Although i don't think he would add much with the ball at all to be honest. Although options are always good.

 

[Prince EWS]

Could you please name these teams?

I've edited it to six.

Bangladesh (Watto > the whole top order), New Zealand (they'd make him open and drop McIntosh), Sri Lanka (Dilshan), Pakistan (Manzoor), England (Bopara) and West Indies (Simmons).

I had India in there as well because I believe he's far superior to Yuvraj, but the Indian selectors are a different matter there so I'll stay on the safe side and run with six.

 

[91Jmay]

Yeah, i'd agree with that ^^^

Although i do think Ravi has the ability to become better than Watson - but at this moment its Watson for me.

 

[91Jmay]

91Jmay and stfu_ben flying the flag for stupid people

Your name suggests you are a member of our little group also?

 

[Jakester1288]

I've edited it to six.

Bangladesh (Watto > the whole top order), New Zealand (they'd make him open and drop McIntosh), Sri Lanka (Dilshan), Pakistan (Manzoor), England (Bopara) and West Indies (Simmons).

I had India in there as well because I believe he's far superior to Yuvraj, but the Indian selectors are a different matter there so I'll stay on the safe side and run with six.

I agree with this. I had the same teams but I was trying to work out who the seventh team was.

 

[Prince EWS]

Can you please show where i compared Watson and Bresnans batting?

Yeah, sorry, see my edit.

He is an excellent squad player no doubt, and good enough IMO to bat 6 outright. Although i don't think he would add much with the ball at all to be honest. Although options are always good.

Yeah, this is where we differ, I guess. I'm not a huge fan of Watto's bowling myself either despite him being one of my favourite players, but while he'll more than likely never be a Test standard specialist bowler, I think his bowling can definitely be quite useful to the team. He showed in India that, if he's fit (which admittedly is a pretty big if) he can genuinely perform as the fourth seamer in a side, bowl good spells and take key wickets. He doesn't have the consistency to be a specialist bowler but he's proven that he can contribute positively and bowl incisive spells on flat pitches.

I think the fifth bowler is becoming increasingly important for Australia. Firstly because of the way pitches around the world are heading, and secondly because the team is now carrying a bowler with no record to speak of at any level of cricket merely for variety who is going to be ineffective at taking genuine wickets in most circumstances. If Australia want to play Hauritz (or Krejza, or Bailey, or whoever) in most of their games in an attempt to develop a frontline spinner, I think they need the insurance of a fourth seamer who can - even if not consistently - bowl good spells and relieve the pressure on the spinner to take wickets if the conditions prove unsuitable. I certainly wouldn't be dropping Hussey - it'd be North I'd drop TBH and I do realise how ridiculously harsh that sounds and it really can't and shouldn't happen at this very moment for obvious reasons.

Frankly, my preference on all but the squarest of square turners is to play four specialist quicks and use Marcus North as a fifth bowler, but it's quite obvious that's not going to happen, so I'd much rather Watto in there if he was fit to bowl. There's only one player I'd rather have play the "bat top 6 and bowl second change as part of a five man attack with an unproven spinner" role in world cricket today and that's Kallis.

Getting Watto fit to bowl is a completely different matter, though...

 

[Uppercut]

You ever seen Shane "85 MPH, no swing, no accuracy, no seam" Watson bowl?

Atleast Bresnan swings the ball, at a higher pace aswell.

One of my absolute pet hates on cricket forums. There's not a ****ing fast bowler in the world who hasn't swung a ball or seamed a ball, but it's a bull**** line wheeled out to criticise every player in the world at some stage. I'm guessing you probably saw him bowl once, and he didn't move the ball much, and hence you've concluded that he never can and never will.

 

[91Jmay]

Well clearly at some stage in his life he has swung and seamed a ball. Clearly i have exaggarated. However, do you consider Shane Watson a swing bowler?? If the answer is yes i do have to question wether YOU have watched him bowl much at all. Is he a bowler who will get more than 1 ball per over to seam at the batsman? Doubtful.

So stop trying to act like i am doing some great swing merchant a disservice. Yes i was exaggerating, however 99% of these comments are exaggerated. I'm sure i could find an example in atleast one of your last 5 posts.

@ Prince EWS.

I concor he is a good enough test batsmen, although needless to say his test record so far is useless, he is far better than that (257@19.76 with 1 fifty). However i just don't see him as a 4th seemer. As the 5th choice in your bowling attack, i think he would be a solid option but statistically he is no more than solid at 14 wickets at 36 a piece. I don't think that can be a 4th bowler for a test side as good as Australia.

EDIT - I see you want him as a 5th bowler. 100% agree there. I have no problem with that.

Injuries have no doubt played there part though.

 

[Prince EWS]

@ Prince EWS.

I concor he is a good enough test batsmen, although needless to say his test record so far is useless, he is far better than that (257@19.76 with 1 fifty). However i just don't see him as a 4th seemer. As the 5th choice in your bowling attack, i think he would be a solid option but statistically he is no more than solid at 14 wickets at 36 a piece. I don't think that can be a 4th bowler for a test side as good as Australia.

EDIT - I see you want him as a 5th bowler. 100% agree there. I have no problem with that.

Injuries have no doubt played there part though.

Yeah, I meant a fourth seamer in an attack comprised of three specialist seamers, a specialist spinner and Watto.

 

[91Jmay]

Yeah no doubt that would be a strong team. To be fair he does have to justify his position with the bat. His average in his first 8 tests certainly doesn't. I do rate him as a batsmen though.