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

[Prince EWS]

Yeah and as much as it hurts, I think the selectors need to look beyond Rhino.

It's obviously not great to build your attack around a man who only plays one out of every three Tests but by the same token I don't think that means they should discard him. They should play him when he's fit and treat his fitness as a bonus. Look to a new attack leader and composition by all means but he should still play when he's fit.

 

[robelinda]

Would be just beyond painful if Harris hobbles off on day 1 of the MCG test, i'd probably rather Siddle be there.

 

[Top_Cat]

It's obviously not great to build your attack around a man who only plays one out of every three Tests but by the same token I don't think that means they should discard him. They should play him when he's fit and treat his fitness as a bonus. Look to a new attack leader and composition by all means but he should still play when he's fit.

Define 'fit'. 'Not injured' isn't really good enough to build a Test attack around, especially with good options on the way up.

Besides, he's good is Harris but he's no bowling genius. You'd not move heaven and earth just to pick him. Good solid team man but he's not going to scare the Indians in the same was a McG would.

 

[howardj]

Could harm Rhino's Boxing Day chances that there's no pre-Christmas round of Shield cricket (there's usually a full round of games from December 17-20 or so, but not this year with the Bash).

 

[howardj]

In fact, that could harm his chances for the whole Indian series, as there is no Shield cricket being played at all.

 

[Prince EWS]

Would be just beyond painful if Harris hobbles off on day 1 of the MCG test, i'd probably rather Siddle be there.

Yeah, this is the main problem, really. If it was just a continuity issue - that Harris was going to play some games and miss some games - I'd still just pick him whenever he was available, no questions asked. The issue is that he'll play and then hobble off, which really does hurt the side.

 

[howardj]

Define 'fit'. 'Not injured' isn't really good enough to build a Test attack around, especially with good options on the way up.

Besides, he's good is Harris but he's no bowling genius. You'd not move heaven and earth just to pick him.

High time you stepped down as co-president of his fan club. I'm happy to assume this post solely.

 

[Top_Cat]

As long as I maintain 1st-hand knowledge of his toolbox, I shall remain his president/biggest fan.

 

[Prince EWS]

Could harm Rhino's Boxing Day chances that there's no pre-Christmas round of Shield cricket (there's usually a full round of games from December 17-20 or so, but not this year with the Bash).

India play a couple of tour games against a Chairman's XI or something equally random; he could play those to prove his fitness.

 

[robelinda]

We will need 5 bowlers for India, the last 2 tours we have struggled the get through that middle order anywhere close to cheaply, and forget how impotent our attack has been in India. Cant see Christian for instance being anything but fodder against Laxman, Sachin etc, I think we'll need Watson bowling plus another quick, but i doubt it would happen, Haddin would have to bat 6. Adelaide and Sydney have been painful for our bowling attack vs India, we need firepower, and lots of it.

 

[Prince EWS]

We will need 5 bowlers for India, the last 2 tours we have struggled the get through that middle order anywhere close to cheaply, and forget how impotent our attack has been in India. Cant see Christian for instance being anything but fodder against Laxman, Sachin etc, I think we'll need Watson bowling plus another quick, but i doubt it would happen, Haddin would have to bat 6. Adelaide and Sydney have been painful for our bowling attack vs India, we need firepower, and lots of it.

Six bowlers with someone like Siddle batting seven?

Reckon that's a terrible idea myself; diminishing returns and all that.

 

[robelinda]

All depends how Waston bowls, and he aint great in Australia.

 

[howardj]

With Cummins and Pattinson so raw (yet exciting) and the selectors seemingly looking at the third paceman as someone who has experience and is a steady hand on the tiller, the contenders for this spot I reckon are some of the 'older guys' such as:

- Siddle (huge opportunity in Hobart to nail down this spot for the Summer)

- Hilfenhaus (now that he won't be bowling in the same attack as Siddle, he comes back into contention I reckon, as a steady bowler who can churn out the overs into the wind)

- Harris (first picked among this lot, but the selectors may turn away from having their cornerstone so injury prone)

- Bollinger (offers left arm variety, and but for his fitness has acquited himself well at Test level)

 

[SteveNZ]

Scuse me chaps, there is still another Test.

 

[Nate]

CumminsPattersonTrentlandmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm

Patto's interview on IS was exceptional btw. WAG

 

[Furball]

It's obviously not great to build your attack around a man who only plays one out of every three Tests but by the same token I don't think that means they should discard him. They should play him when he's fit and treat his fitness as a bonus. Look to a new attack leader and composition by all means but he should still play when he's fit.

I don't think it does the team any favours at all if one of Siddle, Pattinson or Cummins is constantly shifted in or out of the side depending on Harris' fitness. And it's not like Harris has just been unlucky with one injury; his knee is, to use the technical medical term, completely ****ed, and he constantly breaks down with niggling injuries which means that he has failed to complete 3 games in a row for Australia and has missed 8 of the 16 Tests Australia have played since his debut with some sort of injury or fitness problem.

It's a shame for him, because I'd definitely have him as the first bowler down on the teamsheet otherwise.

 

[Furball]

All depends how Waston bowls, and he aint great in Australia.

Absolutely owns Asian teams though.

 

[Furball]

- Bollinger (offers left arm variety, and but for his fitness has acquited himself well at Test level)

A no-go for exactly the same reasons as Harris. Completely unreliable fitness-wise.

Reckon he's been blacklisted by the selectors as well; IIRC he's been picked constantly in ODIs whenever he's been fit but hasn't been picked for a single Test squad, never mind XI, since Adelaide.

 

[Prince EWS]

I don't think it does the team any favours at all if one of Siddle, Pattinson or Cummins is constantly shifted in or out of the side depending on Harris' fitness.

I really don't agree. As long as the attack isn't too reliant on Harris being there to function then I don't think someone who isn't one of the best three quicks in the country should be repeatedly selected merely for continuity reasons. I don't think continuity is that important as long as you can keep the roles within the attack reasonably consistent.

The only argument I can see against sticking Harris in whenever he's available (and it's not a bad argument at all, mind) is that his fitness concerns may see start a match but not finish it. That would be disastrous and perhaps outweigh the difference in bowling ability between someone like Pattinson and himself.

 

[Flem274*]

Scuse me chaps, there is still another Test.

We should have a chat about South Africa then.

Will Smith still be Marto's bunny?