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

[uvelocity]

lol if smith watson maxwell and oportos are in the squad for india, i would hang myself immediately

 

[Dan]

That's a ridiculous amount of cover for the number 6 slot. Mike Hussey is apparently worth 4 people. Still not keen about picking Doherty on ODI form.

Take Jono Dean, IMO.

 

[Howe_zat]

How involved is Pat Howard in the Australian set-up? Big on rotation.

 

[Spikey]

that shane warne creep got to you too eh

 

[Spikey]

That's a ridiculous amount of cover for the number 6 slot. Mike Hussey is apparently worth 4 people. Still not keen about picking Doherty on ODI form.

Take Jono Dean, IMO.

Well it's not like they're 4 similar options.

 

[Tangles]

So Khawaja as the reserve bat might get to spend another 4 tests watching while we try every bits and pieces cricketer we can find? Fmd that stupid.

India must be dire if ppl think we can win with these shenanigans going on.

 

[the big bambino]

That's a ridiculous amount of cover for the number 6 slot. Mike Hussey is apparently worth 4 people. Still not keen about picking Doherty on ODI form.

Take Jono Dean, IMO.

But who are they? 4 candidates but none an obvious replacement for an actual no.6. Unless that role has had its job description changed to bits and pieces player.

 

[morgieb]

If Doherty gets picked, someone's getting stabbed.

 

[the big bambino]

That would be O'Keefe who must now be thinking that to get selected I must bowl worse and bat like a no.11.

 

[Tangles]

Maybe sok can just move to Tassie to get a shot at a callup.

 

[Burgey]

meanwhile charlesworth goes bang. WAG



Even Lillee would need spell these days, says Charlesworth

that line is a keeper

Lillee himself advocated a rotation policy for fast bowlers years ago.

 

[Jono]

Not sure why Aussies are fussed. England beat India with 10 men (fatty Patel just taking up space). Even if they pick Steve Smith or Doherty or something crap, they'd need to make two absolute selection blunders to lose.

 

[Burgey]

If Watson is bowling I would advocate him playing, but if he isn't, I don't think he's done enough with the bat to justify being picked.

Then again, not like a heap of the other contenders have piled on stacks of runs either.

 

[Burgey]

Not sure why Aussies are fussed. England beat India with 10 men (fatty Patel just taking up space). Even if they pick Steve Smith or Doherty or something crap, they'd need to make two absolute selection blunders to lose.

They have that in them, tbf.

 

[Top_Cat]

Lillee himself advocated a rotation policy for fast bowlers years ago.

During the Perth Test, Lillee also said on-air for ABC that quick bowlers back in his day were routinely able to bowl the overs Siddle and Hilf did and play every game and wondered whether rotation was necessary, basically saying it's a fitness issue. A font of fast bowling knowledge he is but damn if he isn't just contradictory sometimes.

Charlesworth's the ultimate pragmatist, no-one can say he's poor at time-management so I'd be interested to see if his comments have any opposition.

 

[Burgey]

During the Perth Test, Lillee also said on-air for ABC that quick bowlers back in his day were routinely able to bowl the overs Siddle and Hilf did and play every game and wondered whether rotation was necessary, basically saying it's a fitness issue. A font of fast bowling knowledge he is but damn if he isn't just contradictory sometimes.

Charlesworth's the ultimate pragmatist, no-one can say he's poor at time-management so I'd be interested to see if his comments have any opposition.

Thats very odd, because he was advocating a rotation system as fat back as the early 2000s if the reports I read the other day are true. I think DK probably needs to factor in that there wre routinely three weeks between tests when he played, and should probably also remember he sat out the 1977 tour of England after a heavy workload the preceding summer.

 

[Top_Cat]

I'm sure he did but he is old and things were better back in his day, confound it.

 

[howardj]

If Watson is bowling I would advocate him playing, but if he isn't, I don't think he's done enough with the bat to justify being picked.

Then again, not like a heap of the other contenders have piled on stacks of runs either.

I just don't get that line of thinking. It's like Watson is being punished for not being able to bowl.

If you forget he was even a bowler, and just match him up against Cowan:

- On the batting front, as opener he averages 43 versus Cowan 34

- On the fielding front, he is an important member of our depleted, behind the bat catching cordon (especially since Hussey and Ponting pulled the pin) versus Cowan who is a limited fieldsman

- On the leadership front, he is the vice-captain versus Cowan who has no leadership role at all

So, on what basis should Cowan be selected ahead of him?

For what it is worth, such is the dearth of middle order players, I would have both Watson and Cowan in the team. But to say that Watson shouldn't be there at all if he doesn't bowl, is to advocate Cowan in front of him.

 

[Dan]

I just don't get that line of thinking. It's like Watson is being punished for not being able to bowl.

If you forget he was even a bowler, and just match him up against Cowan:

- On the batting front, as opener he averages 43 versus Cowan 34

- On the fielding front, he is an important member of our depleted, behind the bat catching cordon (especially since Hussey and Ponting pulled the pin) versus Cowan who is a limited fieldsman

- On the leadership front, he is the vice-captain versus Cowan who has no leadership role at all

So, on what basis should Cowan be selected ahead of him?

For what it is worth, such is the dearth of middle order players, I would have both Watson and Cowan in the team. But to say that Watson shouldn't be there at all if he doesn't bowl, is to advocate Cowan in front of him.

- Opening with Watson gives you a pairing of blasters opening. Most successful opening partnerships have one more stoic, grinding batsman partnering the big hitter, balancing it out somewhat (Greenidge/Haynes, Hayden/Langer, Taylor/Slater, but I digress). Additionally, with Hughes at 3 you'd have an ultra-aggressive Top 3 who aren't all that crash hot against movement. Cowan provides a different form of defense to being 2/20.

- Watson isn't that great a slipper, although he is definitely an asset there. I think you're underselling Cowan's role though - the guy is class under the helmet now and holds his own elsewhere.

- Running between the wickets, well, both are terrible.

- I remember reading Cowan has been discussed as a potential leader - probably sitting behind Clarke and Watson in the chain of command (let's face it, CA doesn't want Warner captaining just yet, and neither do I) now that Ponting, Hussey and Haddin are all gone.

 

[Cabinet96]

Watson never really scored that quickly as an opener though, particularly compared to the pace Warner goes at. And he may not have made that many big scores, but neither has Cowan.