***Official*** New Zealand in Australia 2011

[hazsa19]

Long term I suspect the key to the whole thing is what role they settle on for Watson.

While he can open in tests, I really don't think it's the answer for him as an all rounder or for the team. If he settles into either four or six (Clarke hopefully stays at five where he seems to thrive) it would mean he could bowl more overs, hopefully.

In Khawaja and Marsh there seem to be two young blokes who put a high price on their wicket, though the latter having a chronic back condition at so young an age is not a good sign at all. Were he fit, I can't see why Marsh couldn't open either.

Just some thoughts.

I agree on Watson. He's never going to realise his potential as a batsman or as a bowler if he opens. He should bat 6.

May as well just forget about Hughes now. He'll never make it as a Test Match opener. And Khawaja looks vulnerable for a guy who puts a high price on his wicket. Bowl outside off and wait for him to nick off seems to be the way to bowl at him.

 

[Furball]

Do you have faith in him being able to sustain (injury-wise) being an allrounder though (regardless of where he bats)?

It just seems to me as soon as Clarke made Watson bowl more, he started getting niggles and proper injuries. Given his past I see it as a pretty perilous road to go down...

This is Watson's first majorish injury for 3 years. For a guy who was previously an injury risk everytime he got out of bed, that's bloody impressive.

 

[Spark]

Watson at 4 IMO at the lowest.

Him starting against spin...

 

[Burgey]

Watson at 4 IMO at the lowest.

Him starting against spin...

Would love our number four to be always starting against spin tbh

 

[Furball]

Watson at 4 IMO at the lowest.

Him starting against spin...

...would be hilarious.

 

[Ruckus]

This is Watson's first majorish injury for 3 years. For a guy who was previously an injury risk everytime he got out of bed, that's bloody impressive.

But it's also the first time he has had to bowl a lot of overs in a long while. Injuries are accumulative as well...once they start coming they tend to keep coming unless the cause is removed. He has had to stop bowling a couple of times now mid spell due to niggles, and that alarms me a bit. I'd also question the need to have Watson as an allrounder...If we can somehow muster a really good bowling attack in the next year or two (and I have to say at this stage it looks promising), we could afford to be less reliant on Watson's bowling. The main reason his bowling has been so valuable in recent times is because Siddle/Johnson etc. just haven't been doing their job. I'm actually hoping that if Watson is encouraged to be a full allrounder, his bowling will just naturally be needed less and less due to a good frontline attack.

 

[diteras aka.]

nice that Australia have had some value in going with ''yoof''. Pattinson is definitely the better bowler - even if he looks like his big brother. We nicked the wrong one there.
Cummins and Pattinson are the future of Australian cricket - as far as the bowling goes - and thats good - good for Australia and ultimately good for cricket. Keep them away from the IPL, get them to care for their backs and things will be cushty.

The batting is a different matter. The current top three are unconvincing on a good day. I would be worried if I were Australian. Watson needs to be in the team to bat and not be called on to bowl until that's sorted.

 

[GotSpin]

hehe NZ. Too good

 

[flibbertyjibber]

That's true but 'eye' batsmen like Sehwag and Gayle have flourished with minimal foot movement though admittedly get exposed in difficult conditions.

They haven't had such a flaw for nicking off outside off stump though. Basically with Hughes, bowl it just short of a length outside off and wait for the chances as they will come often.

 

[Furball]

But it's also the first time he has had to bowl a lot of overs in a long while. Injuries are accumulative as well...once they start coming they tend to keep coming unless the cause is removed. He has had to stop bowling a couple of times now due to niggles, and that alarms me a bit. I'd also question the need to have Watson as an allrounder...If we can somehow muster a really good bowling attack in the next year or two (and I have to say at this stage it looks promising), we could afford to be less reliant on Watson's bowling. The main reason he his bowling has been so valuable in recent times is because Siddle/Johnson etc. just haven't been doing their job. I'm actually hoping that if Watson is encouraged to be a full allrounder, his bowling will just naturally be needed less and less due to a good frontline attack.

I'm fairly certain that's wrong, but I cbf investigating it either way.

 

[stephen]

Hughes is probably the worst handled player in Australia's recent history.

Hughes sets the world on fire in domestic cricket.
He gets picked for South Africa.
He has an awesome series against South Africa.
He goes to England, gets a couple of starts but gets out to Flintoff a couple of times and all of a sudden the hierarchy drops him and tells him that he doesn't have the technique for test cricket and to remodel his action.
Hughes' form drops sharply after this.
He spends time in the domestic competition reworking his action and has an extended run of bad form.
In the middle of this form slump he's picked a few times and never sets the world on fire.
He finally gets a few scores in the domestic competition.
Gets picked for Australia again.
He makes a few starts and then an important hundred against Sri Lanka.
Two test series against South Africa and he gets a couple of starts and an 88.
One test against NZ and now everyone is calling for his blood.

I don't buy it. It's a bad way to handle a long term player. He's 23 FFS. Give him a good run. It's the form of Ponting and Hussey we should be watching far more closely than Hughes (who seems to be the new Damien Martyn - the perennial scapegoat).

 

[Son Of Coco]

eh...

Yeah, I think Hughes tends to make it look better by squaring himself up.

 

[Flem274*]

Hughes is the new Sinclair; Young man with iffy technique who tore up in his first few tests, got found out and lost form, got dropped, then brought back to score a few before losing it again, will get dropped, will get called back, will get dropped, will...

 

[Flem274*]

in b4 benchy sinclair joke

 

[TT Boy]

NZ

Also don't think in any context Ross Taylor's words were smart.

When I first saw the headline I thought it meant Taylor would love Hughes in the Kiwi side which I thought was bang on as Hughes would walk into their side.

McCullum and Guptil is an adequate opening combo on wickets with zero pace and bounce but McCullum can't get away with walking out to guys bowling 145kph+ on these wickets while Guptil in the second innings was so slow to react to one delivery that he started fishing once the ball was already in Haddin's gloves.

 

[hazsa19]

But it's also the first time he has had to bowl a lot of overs in a long while. Injuries are accumulative as well...once they start coming they tend to keep coming unless the cause is removed. He has had to stop bowling a couple of times now mid spell due to niggles, and that alarms me a bit. I'd also question the need to have Watson as an allrounder...If we can somehow muster a really good bowling attack in the next year or two (and I have to say at this stage it looks promising), we could afford to be less reliant on Watson's bowling. The main reason his bowling has been so valuable in recent times is because Siddle/Johnson etc. just haven't been doing their job. I'm actually hoping that if Watson is encouraged to be a full allrounder, his bowling will just naturally be needed less and less due to a good frontline attack.

From what i've seen of Australian cricket, I couldn't disagree more. He's a decent batsman, an average opener. He can smash all the cover drives in the world to mid-off, but he doesn't construct and craft an innings.

His bowling is quality. A step above the rest at the moment. You've had a couple of decent debuutants, but they're obviously not ready to be part of a 3 man pace attack against the better sides. Watson could be invaluable.

 

[Ruckus]

I'm fairly certain that's wrong, but I cbf investigating it either way.

It's ok I'll do it for you. Within the last year, under Clarke's captaincy he has bowled long spells (20 overs or more) 3 times. The last time he has had to bowl spells 20 overs or more was back in 2008, when he wasn't opening. On average he has also bowled around 4 more overs per innings, that last year.

 

[stephen]

Hughes is the new Sinclair; Young man with iffy technique who tore up in his first few tests, got found out and lost form, got dropped, then brought back to score a few before losing it again, will get dropped, will get called back, will get dropped, will...

Hughes was never really found out though. What really happened is that the Australian selectors were being complete dicks and dropped him after 3 poor innings and then proceeded to blame it on his technique. This shattered his confidence and he subsequently went on an extended run of bad form. It's not his fault that the selectors totally screwed him.

 

[TT Boy]

Hughes is probably the worst handled player in Australia's recent history.

Hughes sets the world on fire in domestic cricket.
He gets picked for South Africa.
He has an awesome series against South Africa.
He goes to England, gets a couple of starts but gets out to Flintoff a couple of times and all of a sudden the hierarchy drops him and tells him that he doesn't have the technique for test cricket and to remodel his action.
Hughes' form drops sharply after this.
He spends time in the domestic competition reworking his action and has an extended run of bad form.
In the middle of this form slump he's picked a few times and never sets the world on fire.
He finally gets a few scores in the domestic competition.
Gets picked for Australia again.
He makes a few starts and then an important hundred against Sri Lanka.
Two test series against South Africa and he gets a couple of starts and an 88.
One test against NZ and now everyone is calling for his blood.

I don't buy it. It's a bad way to handle a long term player. He's 23 FFS. Give him a good run. It's the form of Ponting and Hussey we should be watching far more closely than Hughes (who seems to be the new Damien Martyn - the perennial scapegoat).

Starts? He was out three times before the 7th (6th, 7th, 3rd) over, top score 11, two scores under 10. Not really starts, more like abject failure.

 

[Flem274*]

Hughes was never really found out though. What really happened is that the Australian selectors were being complete dicks and dropped him after 3 poor innings and then proceeded to blame it on his technique. This shattered his confidence and he subsequently went on an extended run of bad form. It's not his fault that the selectors totally screwed him.

Still sounds like Sinclair.

The argument of whether Skippy was found out or lost confidence by being dropped all the time still rages on. I should really have mentioned it in the post above.