Australia - the aftermath of the Ashes

[GotSpin]

SL Tour

Khawaja
Watson
Clarke
Hussey
Ponting
Smith
Paine
Hauritz
Harris
Bollinger
Siddle

If Clarke can't and won't bat first-drop in a time like this, then see you later to him.

You still want to stick with Steve?

And get rid of Haddin?

I'd really prefer if he played some more FC cricket because at the moment him batting no.7 and not bowling until after 80 overs is helping no one.

 

[Spark]

SL Tour

Khawaja
Watson
Clarke
Hussey
Ponting
Smith
Paine
Hauritz
Harris
Bollinger
Siddle

If Clarke can't and won't bat first-drop in a time like this, then see you later to him.

DWTA. Why mess with your experienced players now? Get a solid middle order rather than shoving jobs onto people who clearly aren't ready for them. Usman is our future #3 - let him grow there.

 

[GotSpin]

Like all of this. If we're holding onto Ponting just for Lynn/Maddinson maybe he'll have a bit longer than we thought - those two are very very young IIRC and there's no reason to be rushing them into international cricket whilst extremely raw.

Maddinson only just turned 19 and Lynn is 20 so as long as Ponting, or Hussey for that matter, aren't blocking young talent from coming into the side I still think he has a year or two to offer Australian cricket.

 

[GotSpin]

DWTA. Why mess with your experienced players now? Get a solid middle order rather than shoving jobs onto people who clearly aren't ready for them. Usman is our future #3 - let him grow there.

I felt sorry for Khawaja being throw to the lions so to speak in the 5th test having to come in at first drop. Was a tough gig for sure

 

[Spark]

Yeah fair enough. I just think that, as we've seen with Hughes and Smith, you don't want to be learning and refining your core technique at test level.

I felt sorry for Khawaja being throw to the lions so to speak in the 5th test having to come in at first drop. Was a tough gig for sure

It's where he plays in FC cricket. He's a cool customer, he handled it fine tbh.

 

[GotSpin]

Yeah fair enough. I just think that, as we've seen with Hughes and Smith, you don't want to be learning and refining your core technique at test level.



It's where he plays in FC cricket. He's a cool customer, he handled it fine tbh.

Yeah of course, I know that, but it was a tough ask considering Ponting started his career in a far more comfortable position. Was just a side comment

Exactly. If Ponting can manage to average in the 40s for a year or two it'd really allow our emerging batsmen to get some matches and experience before being forced onto the test scene.

 

[social]

Bottom line is that if it were Bangladesh that had lost 6 of their past 8 tests and suffered 3 innings defeats in one ****ing series, there'd be a debate as to whether they should retain their test status

We can blame management, selectors and coaching all we like but the fact is that the current squad is **** and needs to be changed

IMO, Watson, Khawaja (on the basis of potential), Hussey, and Haddin are the only guys that deserve a spot based on this series

Clarke's form has been abominable but he is young enough and talented enough to come back

Hauritz is a must as he is so far ahead of the others as a total package that it almost defies belief that he didnt make one single squad

Everyone else needs to go back to shield cricket and perform to justify consideration

 

[Midwinter]

Everyone else needs to go back to shield cricket and perform to justify consideration

This is it ! "no more preferred options" earn the place in the team

While Hussy was the stand out batsman in the first three tests his failures in the last 4, mind you 4, innings revive the issues of last season. He is becoming inconsistent and the clock is ticking
He deserves to hold his place in the team for the first test of the next sreies but failure there will put him in the Ponting and Clark category - not enough runs to hold their positions
.

 

[Prince EWS]

SL Tour

Khawaja
Watson
Clarke
Hussey
Ponting
Smith
Paine
Hauritz
Harris
Bollinger
Siddle

If Clarke can't and won't bat first-drop in a time like this, then see you later to him.

Clarke at three would be the most epic of fails. I'm sure he'd do it if asked, but he'd be terrible at it IMO. I can't do anything but laugh at the fact that you've dropped Katich and Haddin.

 

[Spark]

Clarke at three would be the most epic of fails. I'm sure he'd do it if asked, but he'd be terrible at it IMO. I can't do anything but laugh at the fact that you've dropped Katich and Haddin.

Did it once in 09 during his run of good form, looked all kinds of fidgety. Didn't score too many, 25 IIRC.

And yes. Come back, Katman! We need the demoralising effect your crab shuffle has on opposition attacks...

 

[Furball]

Why keep Hughes in the team ?

Because he was brought into the side whilst in poor form and against the one team who a) seem to have figured out his weaknesses and b) have a bowling attack good enough to exploit those weaknesses.

Yes he has one or two technical things to iron out and would benefit from some more FC cricket. However, he already averages a shade under 50 in FC cricket (55 for New South Wales), and despite his Test woes, he averages a shade under 40 - which jumps to 62 when you remove matches against England. He's had an excellent career and shouldn't be discarded for failing to do well against the best bowling attack around. Dumping Hughes would be a poor move, particularly given how he's been shuffled in and out of the side so far.

Steve Smith is another who could benefit from more FC experience, but I think he has the mentality to do well in Test cricket. Judging against him at the end of this series is futile when a) the selectors don't seem to know what they want from him and b) he's slotted into an extremely fragile middle order. I've been extremely impressed from the little I've seen of him and I don't think he benefits at all from just being dumped from the side. Unfortunately with the way the international schedule is, he won't be able to go back to Shield cricket - he would definitely benefit from a County snapping him up. Smith has a lot to offer Australia.

 

[Prince EWS]

Because he was brought into the side whilst in poor form and against the one team who a) seem to have figured out his weaknesses and b) have a bowling attack good enough to exploit those weaknesses.

Yes he has one or two technical things to iron out and would benefit from some more FC cricket. However, he already averages a shade under 50 in FC cricket (55 for New South Wales), and despite his Test woes, he averages a shade under 40 - which jumps to 62 when you remove matches against England. He's had an excellent career and shouldn't be discarded for failing to do well against the best bowling attack around. Dumping Hughes would be a poor move, particularly given how he's been shuffled in and out of the side so far.

Steve Smith is another who could benefit from more FC experience, but I think he has the mentality to do well in Test cricket. Judging against him at the end of this series is futile when a) the selectors don't seem to know what they want from him and b) he's slotted into an extremely fragile middle order. I've been extremely impressed from the little I've seen of him and I don't think he benefits at all from just being dumped from the side. Unfortunately with the way the international schedule is, he won't be able to go back to Shield cricket - he would definitely benefit from a County snapping him up. Smith has a lot to offer Australia.

Hughes was only in as an injury replacement anyway, so it wouldn't really be a "dumping". He's not actually in the team, the way I see it - he was just filling in. He certainly didn't do anything to force his way in.

 

[BoyBrumby]

This thread has been rather depressing so I thought of some positives to emerge:

- No more North
- Siddle was impressive at times. Definitely improving his lengths
- Debut of Khawaja finally

That's about it unfortunately...

Can't help but think people are getting a wee bit carried away with Usman. While there definitely looks something about the boy he scored 37 & 21 in a losing cause. Surely the bar hasn't been lowered that far just yet?

It will be very interesting to see what the selectors do with Michael Beer. I believe he bowled as well as could be expected of him. This Sydney wicket had very little purchase for the spinners and even Swann only returned match figures of 2/112.

It would be so pointless if the selectors scrapped Beer now. If they believe he is the real deal, then give him such leverage to settle at this level.

Not convinced myself. He looked better than D'oherty and has a nice, high armed, easily repeated action but doesn't put much work on his deliveries and, frankly, I think he might chuck his quicker ball too. When you factor in duff batting and mediocre fielding I think there are better packages available. Two of whom play for NSW.

Also surprised at the free ride Clarke's been getting; Martyn was dumped after 2005 for far less and he'd been in the runs consistently for a coupla years beforehand too.

I'd be seriously questioning his position if I were an Aussie, tbh.

 

[Prince EWS]

Can't help but think people are getting a wee bit carried away with Usman. While there definitely looks something about the boy he scored 37 & 21 in a losing cause. Surely the bar hasn't been lowered that far just yet?

It's more the fact that he was actually picked than what he did. We're just glad it wasn't Ferguson, Marsh or a North recall instead.

 

[Prince EWS]

Not convinced myself. He looked better than D'oherty and has a nice, high armed, easily repeated action but doesn't put much work on his deliveries and, frankly, I think he might chuck his quicker ball too. When you factor in duff batting and mediocre fielding I think there are better packages available. Two of whom play for NSW.

Yeah, Beer doesn't look a visibly worse bowler to me than Hauritz or O'Keefe, but he doesn't look better either, and he's done a lot less in Shield cricket than both (certainly O'Keefe anyway - you could make the argument that Hauritz averaging 50 over the first seven years of his career counts as a negative) and he'll never be within two leagues of either as a batsman.

Also surprised at the free ride Clarke's been getting; Martyn was dumped after 2005 for far less and he'd been in the runs consistently for a coupla years beforehand too.

I'd be seriously questioning his position if I were an Aussie, tbh.

The difference here is that Australia had much stronger depth in batting when Martyn was dropped. They brought Hodges and Hussey in then; now they'd have to bring in Ferguson, or stick with Smith in the top seven.

Clarke's last two series have been poor but his form between when he came back into the team and then was outstanding - and that was a three-year period. I'll also throw it out there (again) that this is the second time he's been absolutely killing it at five only to be moved to four and experience a sudden and sharp decline to a point where his place was questioned (he was actually dropped last time). Steve Waugh batted five, Laxman bats five, Inzamam batted five, Border batted five - there's no shame in it, and I think we should be getting him back there ASAP.


#4 - 24 innings, 467 runs @ 20.30, 0 hundreds, 2 fifties
#5 - 68 innings, 3416 runs @ 56.00, 11 hundreds, 16 fifties

Those are ridiculous stats. Whether it's mental or technical, the sample sizes are too big to ignore them IMO, especially since it's actually happened twice now over two very different parts of his career.

To use an English example - if Trott had a career-ending injury and you experimented with Bell at three again, and he failed, would you drop him or would you move him back to five?

 

[robelinda]

Whats interesting is how many England guys have come straight into test cricket and just own it- Cook, Strauss, Pietersen, Trott, Prior, Tremlett, Swann. Sure a few were dropped at some point but all debuted REALLY well. Our guys havent had many stellar debuts last few years, in fact its been dismal.

 

[Spark]

North had a very good first 5 or 6 tests tbf. And PEWS: three years, just over.

 

[Prince EWS]

North had a very good first 5 or 6 tests tbf. And PEWS: three years, just over.

Hughes's first series was awesome too. Harris bowled well on debut.

So we're basically talking about Smith, Khawaja, and a thousand dire spinners.

 

[Spark]

Also surprised at the free ride Clarke's been getting; Martyn was dumped after 2005 for far less and he'd been in the runs consistently for a coupla years beforehand too.

I'd be seriously questioning his position if I were an Aussie, tbh.

If there was another Khawaja or something of the like in the frame then I'd (reluctantly) see that dropping him isn't a bad decision. There isn't though, so IMO it would be.

PEWS is dead on though. It's of prime importance that he goes back to five and stays there.

 

[BoyBrumby]

The difference here is that Australia had much stronger depth in batting when Martyn was dropped. They brought Hodges and Hussey in then; now they'd have to bring in Ferguson, or stick with Smith in the top seven.

Clarke's last two series have been poor but his form between when he came back into the team and then was outstanding - and that was a three-year period. I'll also throw it out there (again) that this is the second time he's been absolutely killing it at five only to be moved to four and experience a sudden and sharp decline to a point where his place was questioned (he was actually dropped last time). Steve Waugh batted five, Laxman bats five, Inzamam batted five, Border batted five - there's no shame in it, and I think we should be getting him back there ASAP.


#4 - 24 innings, 467 runs @ 20.30, 0 hundreds, 2 fifties
#5 - 68 innings, 3416 runs @ 56.00, 11 hundreds, 16 fifties

Those are ridiculous stats. Whether it's mental or technical, the sample sizes are too big to ignore them IMO, especially since it's actually happened twice now over two very different parts of his career.

To use an English example - if Trott had a career-ending injury and you experimented with Bell at three again, and he failed, would you drop him or would you move him back to five?

Hate to focus on one part of a well-constructed post, but, to my way of thinking, that isn't true. There are better batsmen available (Rogers, Hussey minor & Cosgrove off the top of my head) than Ferguson to bring in but, for whatever reasons, all have the "do not select" LED illuminated.

As I said in the Cosgrove thread, I'm not convinced Aus can be quite so choosy with its talent now. &, as you've argued often, there are solid reasons to select the best team for the next test rather than with an eye on some spurious and potentially illusory future.