*Official* First Test at the Gabba

[pup11]

Ward was saying in the Sky studio that's it's being reported that Hilditch asked Ponting if he wanted Hauritz or Doherty and the skipper went for his Tassie mate. Interesting if true.

Well Ponting is the only reason Doherty made it into the initial squad in the first place, but this is an absolutely stupid decision and one we're likely to regret.
Don't care how much Doherty has improved over the last two years, he is still largely a OD bowler and he shouldn't be anywhere near the baggy green.
Hauritz shouldn't lose hope though, knowing these selectors he could be back as early as the next test if Doherty doesn't perform, which pretty much likely to be the case.

 

[Ruckus]

I'm not a huge North fan but he's proven himself to be capable of making hundreds and that is what is required from a top 6 bat.

There is no way that Smith would be trusted batting ahead of Haddin, so he would bat 7 at the earliest.

If we need 2 spinners and Smith is one of the best two (I doubt he is, but who cares) he would bat at 7.

Smith is a better batsman than Haddin imo. Haddin is too one-dimensional.

 

[pup11]

No way could Smith bat at 6 and it be considered a smart selection. He bats behind Tim Paine so he'll bat behind Brad Haddin for sure.

Both teams will end up with:

6 batsman
1 keeper
3 quicks
1 spinner

Hopefully Johnson is back in form with the bat, because Hauritz is a better bat over Doherty.

Batting Smith at #7 is gonna work well, and his bowling eventhough has the risk of leaking runs, on a dry test wicket he could bowl some wicket-taking spells as well.
I think we have just dented our ability to take 20 wickets further by picking Doherty over Hauritz, and we really might have to look at all our options now if we are to take those 20 wickets.

 

[pup11]

Smith is a better batsman than Haddin imo. Haddin is too one-dimensional.

Don't disagree with what you basically are saying regarding Smith being a better bat, but at this point of their respective careers Haddin is likely to score more runs on a consistent basis than Smith.

 

[Sylvester]

Ward was saying in the Sky studio that's it's being reported that Hilditch asked Ponting if he wanted Hauritz or Doherty and the skipper went for his Tassie mate. Interesting if true.

Batsman's game, innit? North & Hussey get infinite patience and two ropey tests for Doogie gets his plug pulled.

Ponting to make call on spinner | Fox Sports

That article was posted before the squad was named.

 

[BoyBrumby]

Ponting to make call on spinner | Fox Sports

That article was posted before the squad was named.

Interesting then, as I said. Think the moral here is "Don't bad mouth the skipper".

No surprise to see Warne having a wee dig at Punter either; don't think there's too much love lost between them.

 

[howardj]

I'm not a huge North fan but he's proven himself to be capable of making hundreds and that is what is required from a top 6 bat.

.

Um yeah...who cares if he averages 37 across what is now a big sample of games.

 

[NUFAN]

Um yeah...who cares if he averages 37 across what is now a big sample of games.

Yeah but how the hell is a kid like Smith going to even be able to average 37 in Test Cricket batting at 6?

With Hauritz out of the team and most likely Doherty in our batting is slightly weaker. So moving Smith up from 8 to 6 would be madness as he hasn't shown enough signs to show that he would be able to handle the move up the order.

Smith's batting average is going down quickly which was always going to happen.

I don't completely mind the fact that Smith is in our plans, but surely Smith batting at 6 against a good English team at the GABBA is not the best circumstances for a cricket so unproven like he is.

 

[Prince EWS]

Good spinners will always play a part

Good spinners are irrelevant to Australia's selection balance.

 

[howardj]

I was more saying North shouldn't be there at all, rather than who should be in his place. But, now you raise it, yeah I would rather have Smith.

 

[social]

Is Smith actually a better spinner than North?

No

Is the Gabba likely to be a good surface for spin?

No

Is Doherty likely to perform as well as any of the seamers?

Not a snowflake's chance in hell

In summary: Go with our strengths and let North bowl a few overs if needed

 

[social]

Personally I'd go with Tremlett, at this stage in his career , he offers a bit more than Finn. As we've seen today, he keeps it real tight and has got the ball reversing at good pace.

Well known as a pea-heart

Tremlett will only get a game if Finn gets injured/dropped

 

[Prince EWS]

No

Is the Gabba likely to be a good surface for spin?

No

Is Doherty likely to perform as well as any of the seamers?

Not a snowflake's chance in hell

In summary: Go with our strengths and let North bowl a few overs if needed

McDonald would've been so perfect four the fourth seamer's role if
a) he was in the squad; and
b) he didn't break his hand

As it stands, Watson's probably going to be as useful as Siddle, so he probably wouldn't offer that much. Butterworth?

 

[Ruckus]

As it stands, Watson's probably going to be as useful as Siddle, so he probably wouldn't offer that much.

What makes you say that? If the Gabba pitch stays similiar to how to it was in the ODI vs Sri Lanka, I think Watson could be the top wicket taker out of both teams (provided he is given enough of an opportunity to bowl). Watson can really take advantage of swing and seam movement, where as Siddle just tends to hit the deck hard and relies on intimidation bowling. Even when a pitch is offering a fair bit for the quicks, I haven't ever seen Siddle extract much movement.

 

[Prince EWS]

What makes you say that? If the Gabba pitch stays similiar to how to it was in the ODI vs Sri Lanka, I think Watson could be the top wicket taker out of both teams (provided he is given enough of an opportunity to bowl). Watson can really take advantage of swing and seam movement, where as Siddle just tends to hit the deck hard and relies on intimidation bowling. Even when a pitch is offering a fair bit for the quicks, I haven't ever seen Siddle extract much movement.

I meant it in a good way for Watson bowling - ie. Siddle's unlikely to offer more than Watson as a fourth seamer so he'd be a bit of a waste as a pick.

 

[Pothas]

No

Is the Gabba likely to be a good surface for spin?

No

Is Doherty likely to perform as well as any of the seamers?

Not a snowflake's chance in hell

In summary: Go with our strengths and let North bowl a few overs if needed

Doherty bound to get KP out though. may as well pick him just for that. Will not pretend to be an expert (have not seen Doherty bowl) but don't really understand why they are not going with O'Keefe.

 

[Ruckus]

I meant it in a good way for Watson bowling - ie. Siddle's unlikely to offer more than Watson as a fourth seamer so he'd be a bit of a waste as a pick.

Oh right haha sorry, I interpreted it as "As it stands, Watson's probably going to be as useful as Siddle, so he [Watson] probably wouldn't offer that much".

 

[Ruckus]

Will not pretend to be an expert (have not seen Doherty bowl) but don't really understand why they are not going with O'Keefe.

Because the selectors are simply stupid. As boorish as it sounds, there is no other reason I can think of.

 

[social]

I meant it in a good way for Watson bowling - ie. Siddle's unlikely to offer more than Watson as a fourth seamer so he'd be a bit of a waste as a pick.

Point is that a "poor" performance from Siddle will almost undoubtedly be better than anything either Doherty or Smith serve up so why bother with either of them

 

[Spark]

What makes you say that? If the Gabba pitch stays similiar to how to it was in the ODI vs Sri Lanka, I think Watson could be the top wicket taker out of both teams (provided he is given enough of an opportunity to bowl). Watson can really take advantage of swing and seam movement, where as Siddle just tends to hit the deck hard and relies on intimidation bowling. Even when a pitch is offering a fair bit for the quicks, I haven't ever seen Siddle extract much movement.

Nah, Siddle can get seam movement. Which I suspect will be handy at the Gabba. Disagree completely that Watson will be the top wicket-taker even if he does bowl his share of overs.

But yeah, with Watson a genuine 4th seamer - Could see why a spin option could be handy. Shame they've picked the wrong two, though.