Should we be patient with Michael Beer?

[Nate]

Former Pakistani spinner Saqlain Mushtaq suggests in this article that Australian Cricket should be patient with their spin bowlers.

As Michael Beer is our incumbent spin bowler, should we show him that courtesy? Should we have done the same with Beau Casson? Or Cameron White?

You know my thoughts on the issue. I want to hear yours. Discuss.

PS - Posters with less than 1000 posts or posters with no cricketing integrity are encouraged not to reply.

 

[benchmark00]

Yes we do. I don't think we should have been patient with Cameron White because he wasn't interested in being a spin bowler, but we definitely should have been more patient with Casson.

The thing with selecting a spinner is that you need to select who you think is the best available and stick with him for a period of time, not just one test if they fail or don't immediately succeed. Give them a chance to succeed or fail on their own accord.

Why should it be a different policy for batsmen and bowlers? If Usman failed first up would everyone be saying drop him and never give him another go?

If the selectors think he was the right man for the job, then stick with him.

 

[Jono]

PS - Posters with less than 1000 posts or posters with no cricketing integrity are encouraged not to reply.

?

 

[Jono]

Oh and in relation to the thread topic, I definitely think so. You can't be throwing away spin bowlers so easily.

 

[weldone]

Having Australia's present situation in mind, I think whosoever is selected as the next specialist spinner should be given at least one complete home series and one complete away series before they are thrown to the recycle bin.

 

[Furball]

The treatment of Casson was ****ing bizarre.

Picked as MacGill's backup after a good Shield season, thrust into the team for the 3rd Test after MacGill retires, bowls reasonably well. So far, all seems good, pretty sensible way to treat a future spinner.

So for him to be dumped and never to be heard of again is beyond bizarre.

Incidentally, I think Beer needs patience and should be kept around the system. Not in the Test side though. It's a nonsense that Hauritz was ever dropped in the first place.

 

[Shri]

Having Australia's present situation in mind, I think whosoever is selected as the next specialist spinner should be given at least one complete home series and one complete away series before they are thrown to the recycle bin.

Would love it if Beer plays India when we tour there later this year. Also send him over to the next Indian away tour.

 

[Debris]

It is alright to be patient but the spinner has to show signs of potential. I have not really seen a lot in the likes of Beer, Doherty and Hauritz. Casson was talented but he has turned out to be a bit of a headcase.

I have not totally given up on Smith although he rolls the ball out a bit too much for my liking. I would like them to take a bit more of a risk on someone like Cameron Boyce if they take the route of sticking with a bowler for a couple of series.

 

[Noble One]

Expressed my view on Michael Beer on a number of occasions. Michael Beer was selected on the basis that he has talent beyond his start to first class cricket suggested. He wasn't terrible on Test debut and it is hard to judge him after just one season at the top level. The selectors need to stand by him if they think he is an unfulfilled talent.

At the moment we don't have any star spinners roaming the Sheffield Shield, I would love for the selectors to simply back someone and stand by that decision. The mismanagement of spin bowlers in this country is disgraceful. Dropping Beer will only further prove the selectors have no idea.

 

[Spikey]

"It is alright to be patient but the spinner has to show signs of potential"

this pretty much. we shouldn't treat him like Casson but he should fairly obviously be behind Hauritz and O'Keefe. It's one thing to be patient, it's another thing to pick an inferior player and pick him again and again for the sake of looking patient. if hauritz misses SL due to injury I could perhaps stand Beer being picked but if he gets picked over hauritz....

 

[flibbertyjibber]

Personally think they should pick 2 guys and stick with them for a couple of years. There are tours when you need to take 2 spinners so if they go with Beer + 1 other (O'Keefe for example) then these 2 should be allowed to fight it out for a while and find out who is the best. From what i saw of the spinners on show last winter O'Keefe is the best for me and he can bat too which is a bonus.

Saqlain is bang on, no point picking a guy for 2 tests then dropping him and going for somebody else who then gets dropped too. England showed through the 80's and 90's that selections like this rarely work out well, yes you may accidently stumble across a good player but more often than not it means players are playing with fear instead of relaxing and doing what comes naturally.

Use the same policy for the batting too as that needs a shake up but Khawaja needs a run of games as does possibly Hughes to see if they are the class future players to take you forward.

 

[Spikey]

Michael Beer was selected on the basis that he has talent beyond his start to first class cricket suggested.

Also got picked with an eye on the world cup according to Hilbitch

 

[flibbertyjibber]

Also got picked with an eye on the world cup according to Hilbitch

I never knew that, that is abysmal selection policy.

Why the hell is that clown still in a job?

 

[Spikey]

i should probably post a link to that because despite absurd thing in the sega it got over-looked a bit

Hilditch said Beer had been chosen possibly with an eye to the World Cup on the sub-continent in February.

Michael Beer a gamble worth taking | Herald Sun

 

[MW1304]

I think they should go back on themselves for once and pick Hauritz. Never did anything to deserve dropping in the first place - everyone fails in India FFS. Stick with him, unless things go really badly wrong, cause he's the best they've got, unfortunately. Trouble is, having been dropped harshly, his confidence may be a bit lower now, so really they should have stuck with him throughout.

Oh and massive apologies for not meeting your thread-answering requirements...

 

[Noble One]

Looking beyond all the selection theories, does anyone on this forum rate Beer as a chance to become a Test class bowler?

I have watched Beer live in a Shield match at the MCG, watched him bowl in a couple of club games and viewed on TV his Test debut. I believe he has most of the basics right (half the spinners in this country can hardly land a leg/off break) but he lacks any real spark in his bowling. He will take wickets through probing accuracy over 20-30 overs, but never looks likely to run through a lineup. Australian wickets are so tough for a bowler like Beer to impress on, and he has a large challenge to prove a decent bowler.

I'm not sold yet, but I would like to see him given a chance.

 

[TumTum]

Yes, at least for 1 more Test. To me he looked quite impressive in the Ashes doing a containment job on the pitches with no spin support at all, lets see what he can do in SL.

We went with Doherty because he was a left armer and we needed a containing bowler to support our quicks (since our attacking spinner Krezja had hardly any control). But he was simply too flat and hence at Test level wasn't containing at all. But Beer gave good flight and the batsman seemed to genuinely struggle playing him despite the flat wickets.

 

[TumTum]

Looking beyond all the selection theories, does anyone on this forum rate Beer as a chance to become a Test class bowler?

Only one way to find out, let him play a game in SL.

 

[Spark]

Whilst I accept benchy's argument, the simple facts are this.

- Hauritz knows how to bowl in Test matches, and knows how to pick up Test match wickets
- Hauritz is hardly too old
- Hauritz is also quite a reasonable batsman to boot
- Hauritz is simply a better bowler

I see very little reason Hauritz should not be our specialist spinner tbh. Aside from O'Keefe's superior FC record. Beer has nice flight and reasonably accuracy but very little drift or turn, and not that much dip. I honestly think Michael Clarke and Simon Katich would be more threatening at Test level.

 

[Spikey]

Only one way to find out, let him play a game in SL.

Another way to find out could be to have him play a full season for WA. if he hadn't been called up to the test team would have he even played out the season for WA? he was hardly in stellar form.