Shane Watson- massively overrated test cricketer

[pup11]

But I don't think there's much evidence to suggest he is. He might look ungainly, but that doesn't mean he isn't capable of being effective.

Not only was he was averaging 20 something while batting in the middle order, the fact that he only basically has three viable shots against spin (front-foot forward press, back-foot defense and slog sweep) makes him a sitting duck against any half decent spinner, he might get away with it against the spinners in limited overs cricket but in test cricket on wearing tracks he can do very little other than delay the inevitable while facing spin.

 

[Burgey]

Not only was he was averaging 20 something while batting in the middle order, the fact that he only basically has three viable shots against spin (front-foot forward press, back-foot defense and slog sweep) makes him a sitting duck against any half decent spinner, he might get away with it against the spinners in limited overs cricket but in test cricket on wearing tracks he can do very little other than delay the inevitable while facing spin.

Yeah but was he getting out to spinners consistently when he batted there?

Anyway look, the point is this. Watson seems to think that getting somewhere between 40-60 is good enough when you're batting in the top three at test cricket. it isn't. And the selectors are indulging this abominable attitude by continuing to pick him there. If there are blokes at the top of the order who are averaging well domestically and the selectors think they're up to it, then provided they aren't Victorian, they deserve a shot and let him drop down the order.

Look who we're playing in the immediate future. We've got SA and SL here ffs. If he's getting knocked over by bloody Tahir consistently then he isn't a test player at all. Then we go to England, and it's a seamer's delight unless your name is Warne or Murali. Sure Swann is ok, but he's not in those blokes' class.

I want my openers and number three to have an appetite for big scores, not being content with making a start. Watson has had so many chances to show he can compile a big score, and he's consistently failed to do it. I don't see what harm might be done in batting him down the order a bit and freeing him up to bat more aggressively. Flintoff became a national hero because he had three good scores in a career. Granted our expectations will always be higher than England's, but it's worth a shot. If it doesn't work then they can always try other things.

I do think he has to be in the side, but I don't think he's a test match top three batsman's arse hole.

 

[robelinda]

agree. I don't think Watson thinks its ok to be getting 40's and 60's, he fully knows he has to convert, but the management are not making him accountable for the repeated failures to go on with it. He hasn't embarrassed himself up the order, nor has he excelled. I am doubting his ability to really bat for a long time, when has he done that last, in tests or FC cricket? I guess his ton in India in 2010 was a marathon effort, but geez that was 2 years ago.

 

[watson]

It should be noted that the great South African allrounder/opener Trevor Goddard scored just one century in 78 Test innings at an average of 'only' 34.46 runs.

Yet his inability to score centuries didn't diminish his effectiveness, or stop him forging an excellent opening partnership with Eddie Barlow. Neither did his bowling Strike Rate of 95 balls per wicket stop him playing for 15 years at the very top.

If Shane Watson can score consistent runs, and take consistent wickets then he should remain in the Australian team. He may end up being Australia's equivalent of Trevor Goddard - which isn't a bad thing.

 

[Jono]

Can't help but feel Watson being unfairly pillored here but he should stay high in the order. Helpfully, someone on the internet has provided a reconstruction of the likely scenario of Watson starting his innings against spin, especially against India.

Lol, every year you post this and every year it's just as funny

 

[BoyBrumby]

Should be retained but obviously banned from reviewing stuff and calling for runs.

Always been of the opinion he cracks the weights a bit too hard for someone who bowls as much as he does. Not an ounce of fat on him, but he's still quite the unit for a medium quick with a body made of paper.

 

[social]

And PEWS, players don't make hundreds to get to 100, they do it to win games and keep on batting. Watson has rarely, if ever, taken the game from the opposition. The number of times he's gotten out at bad times after 50...

This

The problem with Watto is that his "big" scores rarely make a match-changing difference because they arent big enough

Furthermore, by getting out at the times that he does, he is generally handing the advantage to the oppo

In short, he hasnt been good enough

 

[pup11]

Yeah but was he getting out to spinners consistently when he batted there?

Anyway look, the point is this. Watson seems to think that getting somewhere between 40-60 is good enough when you're batting in the top three at test cricket. it isn't. And the selectors are indulging this abominable attitude by continuing to pick him there. If there are blokes at the top of the order who are averaging well domestically and the selectors think they're up to it, then provided they aren't Victorian, they deserve a shot and let him drop down the order.

Look who we're playing in the immediate future. We've got SA and SL here ffs. If he's getting knocked over by bloody Tahir consistently then he isn't a test player at all. Then we go to England, and it's a seamer's delight unless your name is Warne or Murali. Sure Swann is ok, but he's not in those blokes' class.

I want my openers and number three to have an appetite for big scores, not being content with making a start. Watson has had so many chances to show he can compile a big score, and he's consistently failed to do it. I don't see what harm might be done in batting him down the order a bit and freeing him up to bat more aggressively. Flintoff became a national hero because he had three good scores in a career. Granted our expectations will always be higher than England's, but it's worth a shot. If it doesn't work then they can always try other things.

I do think he has to be in the side, but I don't think he's a test match top three batsman's arse hole.

I don't have an exact stat but I think he gets out to spin pretty regularly as well and even when he doesn't; getting tied down by spin from one end usually plays a big part in him getting out in careless fashion.

Also lets not make it sound as if he is a great player of fast bowling either, sure on flat tracks he can literally dominate fast bowlers but when the ball does something he is usually the first wicket to fall.

Australia need an all-rounder there is no doubt about that, but its time to also start looking at other options especially considering Watto's injury plagued career. Someone like Christian might not be rated too highly by many but its hard to argue with his domestic stats over the last two-three seasons and even if he brings 50% of that form to international cricket then its hard to see him contribute any less to the team then what Watto does as an all-rounder.

 

[flibbertyjibber]

Watson is a frustrating player but he is still probably the best you have in Australia now Katich has been bombed so basically until players do better (Hughes and Cowan haven't) then you are stuck with him.

Says it all really that you are scratching around searching for a pair of openers to average 40 when for 20 years it was a given and a couple were closer to 50 in that time.

 

[social]

I don't have an exact stat but I think he gets out to spin pretty regularly as well and even when he doesn't; getting tied down by spin from one end usually plays a big part in him getting out in careless fashion.

Also lets not make it sound as if he is a great player of fast bowling either, sure on flat tracks he can literally dominate fast bowlers but when the ball does something he is usually the first wicket to fall.

Australia need an all-rounder there is no doubt about that, but its time to also start looking at other options especially considering Watto's injury plagued career. Someone like Christian might not be rated too highly by many but its hard to argue with his domestic stats over the last two-three seasons and even if he brings 50% of that form to international cricket then its hard to see him contribute any less to the team then what Watto does as an all-rounder.

The main problem with Watto and spin is that he doesnt rotate the strike enough

Obviously there is a skill onvolved in this but I also suspect that it has something to do with the mental fog that seems to descend upon him on virtually every occasion that he reaches a certain point in his innings

It's as if he says to himself "****, if I dont get out I'll score a 100" and he then proceeds to completely shut up shop and fails to treat each ball on its merits

 

[flibbertyjibber]

The main problem with Watto and spin is that he doesnt rotate the strike enough

Obviously there is a skill onvolved in this but I also suspect that it has something to do with the mental fog that seems to descend upon him on virtually every occasion that he reaches a certain point in his innings

It's as if he says to himself "****, if I dont get out I'll score a 100" and he then proceeds to completely shut up shop and fails to treat each ball on its merits

Watto and spin is like Bedwetter in a one day game for us. No strike rotation so you either have dot balls, boundaries or out to a ridiculous shot. They don't look like they want to learn a get out nurdle for a single which would help them both immensely.

 

[vic_orthdox]

Watson is definitely, at this point, one of our six best batsmen. He, IMO, is not one of our best four bowlers, especially considering that there's very little likelihood that he could maintain a bowler's workload. Therefore, we need to do all we can to maximise his batting for us.

I guess the problem is that he's a little too good at bowling, and at times does bowl better than other players picked to be the bowlers. But he really should be used sparingly, and let it be known to him to worry about batting.

 

[Flem274*]

Watson scored a steady hundred in India. He's not comfortable against spin, but unlike the Ashwell Prince's of this world he can grit his teeth and get through it.

His only issue is concentration.

 

[Valer]

Watson is definitely, at this point, one of our six best batsmen. He, IMO, is not one of our best four bowlers, especially considering that there's very little likelihood that he could maintain a bowler's workload. Therefore, we need to do all we can to maximise his batting for us.

I guess the problem is that he's a little too good at bowling, and at times does bowl better than other players picked to be the bowlers. But he really should be used sparingly, and let it be known to him to worry about batting.

Who isn't injury prone that you are putting ahead of him?

 

[vic_orthdox]

There are injury prone amongst these too, but when we lose other bowlers to injury, we aren't losing one of our best six batsmen. Test cricket, I'd probably have these guys ahead of him as a bowler.

Siddle
Hilfenhaus
Pattinson
Harris
Cummins

EDIT: and I'd always play a spinner, so leaves three spots for Watson to compete for as a pure bowler.

 

[Valer]

I'd play him before Siddle, giving you Hilf 2.0, and 3 bowlers with more than a few injury problems.

The problem is the overall package is too good to drop for the few games you actually have a team from the other four bowlers and would involve screwing with the batting order too much to keep him in the team at other times.

 

[Spark]

You'd play him as a specialist bowler before Siddle?

Just... what?

 

[Jager]

Siddle is the bowler I'd pick first for Australia tbh

 

[uvelocity]

nobody knows our best team. we have batsmen who regularly fail at the top, we have batsmen who fail to resurrect top order collapses in the middle, we have reliable bowlers who underperform or exciting prospects who can't stay on the park. we aren't even sure which one of 3 or 4 keepers should be our first choice.....

But if some of these young kids want to stand up and forge a new era, what an opportunity. The bottom line is these guys need to be hungry, and they need to be ****ing hungry.

 

[Flem274*]

nobody knows our best team. we have batsmen who regularly fail at the top, we have batsmen who fail to resurrect top order collapses in the middle, we have reliable bowlers who underperform or exciting prospects who can't stay on the park. we aren't even sure which one of 3 or 4 keepers should be our first choice.....

Is that you New Zealand?

More seriously, its an issue you need to get rid of asap. Teams who decide they are in "rebuilding phase" subsequently plummet down the rankings from where they were and poor performances are cut slack because the team is "rebuilding".

Example A: NZ since 2007

Example B: The West Indies since Ambrose and Walsh called it a day.