• Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

*Official Third Test at Edgbaston

Uppercut

Uppercut

Request Your Custom Title Now!
Top_Cat said:
Right now, he's more likely to drown.

My initial reaction was right in line with what everyone here is saying. The more I think about it, though, the more I don't mind it. Watto seems to bat his worst when he comes in under the pump and has to shelve his natural play (e.g. India last year; looked clueless coming in at 7). Batting him first with Mr Stability at the other end has a decent chance of freeing him up to just play his natural game, which is when he plays best. Not saying this guarantees success but, without having to bowl, he's in with a better shot than batting him at 6 and not bowling.

That said, it's a confusing selection in other ways.

EDIT: Still no mention on the SMH site. Whenever there's something happening to a NSW player, they're usually all over it. Wonder if this was just a rumour?
Click to expand...
Yeah, this is where I stand. When I really think about it, I would expect more runs from Watson today than I would from Hughes. He's a quality player, and he's in excellent touch. If he's happy to open I have no problem with it.

Simon said:
Honestly of all the selection screw ups that have been made in the last three years this will be the worst. Watson is a gun player and will probably do well but this could set Hughes back a lot potentially.
Click to expand...
This is the other side of the coin. But it's the middle of an Ashes series and they're 1-0 down so it's no time to be thinking of potential long-term damage to a 20-year-old prospect. It could just easily help the guy's progress to take time out of the team and work on his technique.
 
zaremba

zaremba

Cricketer Of The Year
Well touch wood the weather here in Birmingham is pretty lovely this morning. No guarantee it won't chuck it down again, of course, but if the outfield is drying quicker than they thought yesterday we may have some play today after all. Fingers crossed.

Seriously hungover after a fundraising dinner with Shane Warne yesterday. Really funny guy, had a lot to say about "The Sherminator" and Javed Miandad among others. He must have told those stories a hundred times but he did it pretty damn well I have to say.

Anyhow I'm chuffed to see the Aussie selectors imploding by dropping Hughes.
 
Pizzorno

Pizzorno

State Vice-Captain
I've got a really uneasy feeling about Watson. We have a history of making average players look superhuman (Andrew Hall in 2003 for example) and I feel we'll do the same with Watson. Tipping him to make a first innings hundred to give his critics a punch in the face.

As for England, I seee Ian Bell on the teamsheet and I tremble with fear.
 
Matt79

Matt79

Hall of Fame Member
Pizzorno said:
Bradman could actually play legside bowling though tbf.
Click to expand...

No problem with Hughes being dropped really. He's been exposed and needs to sort this part of his game out. Players like Waugh, Ponting and Clarke have all been dropped and come back better.

Funny how people are howling for Johnson to be dropped and are annoyed that the selectors are hung up on his form vs SA, but then the same indulgance is being extended Hughes. Johnson has been better than Hughes so far this series.

That said, would have liked to see Clark in for one of Johnson or Siddle.
 
GIMH

GIMH

Norwood's on Fire
Matt79 said:
No problem with Hughes being dropped really. He's been exposed and needs to sort this part of his game out. Players like Waugh, Ponting and Clarke have all been dropped and come back better.

Funny how people are howling for Johnson to be dropped and are annoyed that the selectors are hung up on his form vs SA, but then the same indulgance is being extended Hughes. Johnson has been better than Hughes so far this series.

That said, would have liked to see Clark in for one of Johnson or Siddle.
Click to expand...
Not sure I agree with that. Hughes has simply succumbed to plans that were set for him, to which our opening bowlers should get a lot of credit. Johnson on the other hand has just looked all over the place, rather than batsmen working out a way to counter his bowling he has simply bowled poorly. My kid brother barely knows a thing about cricket and said after the second Test, "that Johnson's rubbish isn't he?"

That being said, I think part of the logic is that in cricket people generally seem to be prepared to give batsmen more of a chance than bowlers.

Also, I think if there was someone like Jaques in the squad, Hughes being dropped for him wouldn't be greeted with such outcry. The impression I'm getting is that people are happy to see Watto in the side but not at the top of the order.
 
Son Of Coco

Son Of Coco

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Matt79 said:
No problem with Hughes being dropped really. He's been exposed and needs to sort this part of his game out. Players like Waugh, Ponting and Clarke have all been dropped and come back better.

Funny how people are howling for Johnson to be dropped and are annoyed that the selectors are hung up on his form vs SA, but then the same indulgance is being extended Hughes. Johnson has been better than Hughes so far this series.

That said, would have liked to see Clark in for one of Johnson or Siddle.
Click to expand...
I'd say that's a borderline call at best. I'm not saying Hughes has been good, but Johnson's been really poor too. Watson in for Hughes and Clark in for Johnson would be completely understandable.

Johnson's been better with the bat than Hughes though :happy: (And the ball if we're comparing that area of their games).
 
I

iamdavid

International Debutant
Pizzorno said:
I've got a really uneasy feeling about Watson. We have a history of making average players look superhuman (Andrew Hall in 2003 for example) and I feel we'll do the same with Watson. Tipping him to make a first innings hundred to give his critics a punch in the face.

As for England, I seee Ian Bell on the teamsheet and I tremble with fear.
Click to expand...
There is nothing "average" about Watson's batting to be fair, I have no reservations in saying he's clearly a much better batsman than Andrew Hall. I can't really say I'm a fan of this move, we're facing one of the better fast bowlers of the past decade, seemingly at the top of his game, with only one specialist opener....and he's batting at number 4.

However while it's not a move I would've made myself, I do have faith in Watson. He's got the technical game and he's got the mental game, if he can stay fit and get an extended run in the test side then he will come good...would love to see him really grab his chance opening ala Katich in the Windies last year and I believe he's good enough.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Top