***Official*** Australia in India 2012/13

[Spark]

Have concerns about GingerFurball's temperament itbt, not sure he's suited for a long innings in Indian conditions. Offers a lot of chances.

 

[Philhughesisbes]

I"m excited about two of our top 3 but that doesn"t change the fact that our top 3 is way inexperienced and inconsistent, as a result number 4 becomes a pivotal position.Clarke is the best batsman in the team he has to bat there simple as that.Khawaja should bat 5 and Watson our all rounder at 6.

 

[Prince EWS]

Have concerns about GingerFurball's temperament itbt, not sure he's suited for a long innings in Indian conditions. Offers a lot of chances.

I'm personally offended by the standard of his cricket.

 

[Philhughesisbes]

Is it a guarantee he'll play though? I mean, this is a guy who looked as unthreathening as it gets on a 5th day pitch which was giving turn. Yeah, he's played near enough twenty Tests but I'm sure touring traditional offies haven't been much chop recently.

Well yes Lyon will be in the team for the first test against India.He is a good offie, one or two bad series doesn"t change that.

 

[Furball]

Have concerns about GingerFurball's temperament itbt, not sure he's suited for a long innings in Indian conditions. Offers a lot of chances.

I can't believe there's doubts about my temperament when I've been a relentless accumulator of infraction points for the last 18 months.

 

[Burgey]

Actually tbf Nostrils goes pretty well IMO. It won't be easy for our blokes there, just saying their attack isn't what it was. I presume from the talk that Bailey might play. There isn't much cricket who're they head off. Maybe That young bloke from Tassie whose name escapes me ATM could be a chance if he keeps scoring heavily.

 

[morgieb]

Actually tbf Nostrils goes pretty well IMO. It won't be easy for our blokes there, just saying their attack isn't what it was. I presume from the talk that Bailey might play. There isn't much cricket who're they head off. Maybe That young bloke from Tassie whose name escapes me ATM could be a chance if he keeps scoring heavily.

Doolan?

 

[Burgey]

Yeah that's the fella

 

[Prince EWS]

Actually tbf Nostrils goes pretty well IMO. It won't be easy for our blokes there, just saying their attack isn't what it was. I presume from the talk that Bailey might play. There isn't much cricket who're they head off. Maybe That young bloke from Tassie whose name escapes me ATM could be a chance if he keeps scoring heavily.

Yadav's been injured for a while now and they dropped Zaheer for their most recent Test (Chawla, Dinda, Ishant and Awana were all picked in the squad ahead of him..) so if we're really lucky, neither of them will play. Bhuvneshwar Kumar debuted for them in ODIs recently, he looks pretty decent - bowls big banana inswingers and has a good leg cutter to compliment them - but he hasn't played a Test yet.

There's definitely every chance their bowling attack could be even worse than you're expecting with no Zaheer/Yadav, tbh.

 

[Philhughesisbes]

I heard that Smith is inline to be considered as the back up bat for India.If that's the case selectors really have lost it.

 

[Tangles]

Smith isn't a bad option given the list of part timers like Moz and Maxell doesn't impress but I'd rather they took a specialist batter. Preferably give someone experience for the Ashes rather than an old timer.

 

[Burgey]

Anyone who stays leg side of the ball should never play first class cricket, let alone ever play for Australia. Who the **** is coaching these blokes I do not know. Hughes did it, Smith does it, Dussey does it. It's ****. I turn the tv off when blokes bar like that. I don't want my young bloke seeing it. It's disgusting. Like a turd sandwich.

 

[Philhughesisbes]

I"m glad the talk of David Hussey and test cricket has now died down. Khawaja will replace Hussey.Who do you guys think should be the reserve bat?

 

[Burgey]

Bailey, Doolan or Haddin.

 

[oldmancraigy]

I like O'Keefe, but people have been falling into the trap with his average for ages. I'm sure every other First Class spinner in the country would've absolutely loved to have their career figures boosted by this match on what was probably the most spin-friendly pitch served up for a First Class fixture in my lifetime. It was an absolute bunsen by all reports and Senanayake and O'Keefe combining for 15 wickets in the first innings backs that up. No doubt that you have to bowl well to take 7/35 but the other bowlers didn't get that opportunity on that wicket, and he still didn't do anything in the second innings.

He averages ~ 31 in the Sheffield Shield, which is still a very good average for a spinner in Australian conditions, but he's still very much an Australian conditions spinner in that he's just a tight stock bowler more than anything else. If the pitch is favouring spin and you need him to be a strike bowler he's not going to be able to do it for you unless it's favouring spin to the absurd degree the pitch for the match I linked above was and, again, by all reports it's something we'd never see an international level.

Last season O'Keefe took 9 wickets in 7 games at an average of 52; he was comfortably outbowled by the likes of Beer (26 wickets @ 26), Doherty (19w @ 26), Boyce (20w @ 34). Even part-timers Katich (10w @ 20) and Maxwell (16w @ 29) managed to not only average better than him but take more wickets in substantially fewer overs. His form has been better again this season, and an argument could be made to suggest that he's actually the best man for the Test XI at home if Watson's bowling because he plays the support role better, but in India you definitely need a spinner more capable of taking genuine wickets (and Watson isn't bowling anyway).

On your point about Shield average with the ball this season.. I like Maxwell more than most of this forum in general, but you do realise how much easier it is to maintain a good average when you're used in the role Maxwell has been for Victoria this season, right? I mean, he's taken seven wickets FFS. It's a whole different thing actually being used as a frontline bowler, and I think CA are probably a bit annoyed Maxwell hasn't been given more challenging spells, but it is what it is.

I'm not even going to dignify the Dave Hussey bowling thing with a response.

FTR, I've got no beef with O'Keefe being the backup spinner in India. It's probably how I'd lean at the moment. Ahead of Lyon in subcontinent conditions though? Nah.

I hear what you're saying - basically one ought to ignore O'Keefe's career best game because it was on a turning pitch, but yet count his career worst year against him (punctuated by injury) WHILE AT THE SAME TIME counting the career best years of other spinners in their favour?

Right. Makes sense?

O'Keefe IS the leading wicket taker amongst spin bowlers THIS season.
EVEN if you disregard his best match figures on that spinning wicket (like somehow a spinner claiming wickets on a turning pitch is bad...) then he is streets ahead of the competition. His career first class average would be 30.9 without that match.

Take away Nathan Lyon's best match figures (a dustbowl where he snagged 7/83) and he averages 41 at first class level (this includes his currently inflated numbers from the test arena where he had a hot start, but is trending back towards what he is, a 40 average bowler).

If you want to argue about who is more likely to TAKE a wicket, then let's go with the strike rates. It's 66 to 75 in favour of O'Keefe.

I won't dignify the mention of Doherty by providing you with his figures, they aren't worth a mention in the 4-5 day matches (notwithstanding that he's an outstanding 50 over bowler).

Michael Beer is at 40 with a SR of 80. Taking out his best match figures he slumps to an average of 43.

On Boyce, I'd love for him to succeed, but let's not pretend he's proved anything more than a glimmer thus far.


The point you make about O'Keefe not being a strike bowler is well made. Unfortunately it is completely absurd to suggest that any of the spin options in Australia are 'strike bowlers'. Some of them produce the odd dangerous delivery, but mostly they get thrashed around the ground for little to no joy.
Hence the spin bowling role in the Australian team over the last few years has been one of 'containment'. How many wickets has Lyon scored from batsmen hitting out? Answer: lots. How effective is Lyon when we need some penetration? Answer, not at all. He is very easy to 'see off' since he is not threatening at all.
O'Keefe fills the role in much better fashion, he bowls a tighter line and is much more likely to 'nag out' a wicket LBW. Had he been bowling on the final day in Perth, I'm sure he would've had more success because he at least threatens in ONE way [but that's pure speculation].

When it all comes down to it, we have a bunch of spinners who are NOT up to international standards, and so what we ought to do is select the 'least offensive' option. Clearly that's O'Keefe. However if you think all options are equally offensive, then at least we ought to select the one who has more strings to his bow. Again, clearly that is O'Keefe. Having his lower order batting gives us that chance to play "3 allrounders" in the 6-8 spots (Wade being one of them).
Worst case is that O'Keefe would spell the quicks, keep it tight from one end, and provide some pressure in that regard. Best case is that his persistent line would produce results.


I'm really not sure where you get the point about Lyon being threatening in subcontinent conditions? Or against subcontinent batsmen? It must be because he got 6 wickets in one game against Sri Lanka?
Using your logic, that can be discounted because spinners claimed 17 wickets on that spin friendly pitch. So apart from that result his subcontinent form is an average of 94.
Personally I'm happy to let that result stand, but I don't consider a 37 average, with a 71 SR as overly impressive. Perhaps that's just me...
Worth noting that in his career against the subcontinet nations, he averages over 40 (that's over 40 against Sri Lanka and against India).

Hence I'd push for Maxwell as the second spinner. Sure, he might not be the greatest, but he's tighter than Lyon, Doherty etc. He's an outstanding fielder and will offer a whole lot in that regard, and he gives us 'depth' in the batting. It's really really hard to win in India, so let's bat deep and if we have to walk away with draws, let's do so?
Well worth noting that he bowls 13 overs per innings at state level, so it's not like he's a 5-6 over guy. As a comparison, in innings that Watson bowls for Oz, he bowls 10 overs. So while Maxwell isn't a high usage guy, he bowls a 'handy' amount as a backup spinner.

DHussey: I'll withdraw any comments I made on his spin, was overstating things to illustrate my disdain for Lyon.

Bottom line: If they manufacture spin-havens, then we don't have a spinner who can capitalize anyway, so let's bat deep and keep it tight when we bowl. O'Keefe being "at" the batsmen will produce at least as many wickets as Lyon would've anyway...

 

[Philhughesisbes]

I haven"t seen much of Doolan apart from 20 20, so I can"t comment there but Bailey should be seriously considered.The reserve bat shouldn't be an all rounder imo.There is no all rounder part from Watson who is good enough to bat at number 6 in test cricket.

 

[Burgey]

I hear what you're saying - basically one ought to ignore O'Keefe's career best game because it was on a turning pitch, but yet count his career worst year against him (punctuated by injury) WHILE AT THE SAME TIME counting the career best years of other spinners in their favour?

Right. Makes sense?

O'Keefe IS the leading wicket taker amongst spin bowlers THIS season.
EVEN if you disregard his best match figures on that spinning wicket (like somehow a spinner claiming wickets on a turning pitch is bad...) then he is streets ahead of the competition. His career first class average would be 30.9 without that match.

Take away Nathan Lyon's best match figures (a dustbowl where he snagged 7/83) and he averages 41 at first class level (this includes his currently inflated numbers from the test arena where he had a hot start, but is trending back towards what he is, a 40 average bowler).

If you want to argue about who is more likely to TAKE a wicket, then let's go with the strike rates. It's 66 to 75 in favour of O'Keefe.

I won't dignify the mention of Doherty by providing you with his figures, they aren't worth a mention in the 4-5 day matches (notwithstanding that he's an outstanding 50 over bowler).

Michael Beer is at 40 with a SR of 80. Taking out his best match figures he slumps to an average of 43.

On Boyce, I'd love for him to succeed, but let's not pretend he's proved anything more than a glimmer thus far.


The point you make about O'Keefe not being a strike bowler is well made. Unfortunately it is completely absurd to suggest that any of the spin options in Australia are 'strike bowlers'. Some of them produce the odd dangerous delivery, but mostly they get thrashed around the ground for little to no joy.
Hence the spin bowling role in the Australian team over the last few years has been one of 'containment'. How many wickets has Lyon scored from batsmen hitting out? Answer: lots. How effective is Lyon when we need some penetration? Answer, not at all. He is very easy to 'see off' since he is not threatening at all.
O'Keefe fills the role in much better fashion, he bowls a tighter line and is much more likely to 'nag out' a wicket LBW. Had he been bowling on the final day in Perth, I'm sure he would've had more success because he at least threatens in ONE way [but that's pure speculation].

When it all comes down to it, we have a bunch of spinners who are NOT up to international standards, and so what we ought to do is select the 'least offensive' option. Clearly that's O'Keefe. However if you think all options are equally offensive, then at least we ought to select the one who has more strings to his bow. Again, clearly that is O'Keefe. Having his lower order batting gives us that chance to play "3 allrounders" in the 6-8 spots (Wade being one of them).
Worst case is that O'Keefe would spell the quicks, keep it tight from one end, and provide some pressure in that regard. Best case is that his persistent line would produce results.


I'm really not sure where you get the point about Lyon being threatening in subcontinent conditions? Or against subcontinent batsmen? It must be because he got 6 wickets in one game against Sri Lanka?
Using your logic, that can be discounted because spinners claimed 17 wickets on that spin friendly pitch. So apart from that result his subcontinent form is an average of 94.
Personally I'm happy to let that result stand, but I don't consider a 37 average, with a 71 SR as overly impressive. Perhaps that's just me...
Worth noting that in his career against the subcontinet nations, he averages over 40 (that's over 40 against Sri Lanka and against India).

Hence I'd push for Maxwell as the second spinner. Sure, he might not be the greatest, but he's tighter than Lyon, Doherty etc. He's an outstanding fielder and will offer a whole lot in that regard, and he gives us 'depth' in the batting. It's really really hard to win in India, so let's bat deep and if we have to walk away with draws, let's do so?
Well worth noting that he bowls 13 overs per innings at state level, so it's not like he's a 5-6 over guy. As a comparison, in innings that Watson bowls for Oz, he bowls 10 overs. So while Maxwell isn't a high usage guy, he bowls a 'handy' amount as a backup spinner.

DHussey: I'll withdraw any comments I made on his spin, was overstating things to illustrate my disdain for Lyon.

Bottom line: If they manufacture spin-havens, then we don't have a spinner who can capitalize anyway, so let's bat deep and keep it tight when we bowl. O'Keefe being "at" the batsmen will produce at least as many wickets as Lyon would've anyway...

Yeah but Lyon has been fine at test level already. If he averaged 30 odd as a finger spinner in tests I don't care if he never takes another FC wicket.

Would help if Wade lifts his game mind you. For all the spinners and quicks alike.

 

[the big bambino]

Agree about Wade. I'd make an adjustment to my team. Maxwell for Doherty. Can't justify the latter on reflection and didn't expect him and don't expect his replacement to figure in the tests anyway. May as well take Maxwell on an investment in the future excuse.

 

[Crazy Sam]

It would be interesting if Haddin were selected as a specialist batsman and then made the XI. Wouldn't you be inclined then to give him the gloves if he's considered a better keeper than Wade?

 

[Philhughesisbes]

Why would selectors pick o"keefe over Lyon?Lyon is the best option.It doesn"t matter that O"keefe is a better bat than Lyon.We need to pick our best spin bowler.Lyon is better than what most people would want to believe and selectors need to persist with him.