Australian cricket selection

[benchmark00]

The former has failed repeatedly at international level, while the latter has excelled

Howard,

I will put this to you in simple terms.

In Hughes'international career, he has scored more hundreds than Ferguson in both formats (not Ferguson's fault I guess he doesn't play tests, and he bats middle order when he did play one day cricket.)

So let's talk about averages. Ferguson has not played test cricket so let's leave that. In ODI cricket Hughes averages 52, Ferguson averages 41.

But averages aren't everything.

Let's see how often each of them pass 50 in their international innings.

Ferguson once every 5 innings. Not bad.

Hughes does it once every 4 and a bit innings.


But somehow, in your head, Ferguson has excelled at international level, yet Hughes has repeatedly failed??

 

[Jono]

Double question mark is scathing.

 

[benchmark00]

But that's silly to just go on about international, right?

In first class cricket, Callum Ferguson has enjoyed that sanctuary of the Adelaide Oval his whole career. Hughes, this year.

So let's look at their overall first class record?

Callum averaging 35. Phil 45.

Callum passes 50 once every 4.06 innings. Not bad.

Phil passes 50 once every 2.9 innings. Decent.


Callum passes 100 once every 16.25 innings

Phil passes 100 once every 8.14 innings.



Come on man.

 

[uvelocity]

who does pup11 prefer?

 

[Jono]

Switching from surname to first name in the different posts a good change-up from Benchy as well.

 

[the big bambino]

Nick names would have been better.

 

[Dan]

But that's silly to just go on about international, right?

In first class cricket, Callum Ferguson has enjoyed that sanctuary of the Adelaide Oval his whole career. Hughes, this year.

So let's look at their overall first class record?

Callum averaging 35. Phil 45.

Callum passes 50 once every 4.06 innings. Not bad.

Phil passes 50 once every 2.9 innings. Decent.


Callum passes 100 once every 16.25 innings

Phil passes 100 once every 8.14 innings.



Come on man.

But Ferguson looks so classy at the crease, so he must be good, right? Right?

 

[Furball]

Asif, who averaged 28 in England (and it jumps to 32 in England against England) despite averaging 18 in South Africa and 24 overall in his career. Quite.

He had success there because he's a good bowler overall; not because the conditions suited him more than than they did elsewhere in the world.

First of all, sample size lol.

Second of all, Asif's average from the 2010 series does him a disservice. There's no reason why seam merchants won't do well in England.

 

[Furball]

Watson averages 10 more runs per innings than Cowan as an opener. I know people are pissed off with Watson, but you need to be dispassionate with these things.

As a result of his form 3 years ago, form he's looked nowhere near replicating. He averages less than 20 since the last Ashes. That's utterly gash.

 

[howardj]

As a result of his form 3 years ago, form he's looked nowhere near replicating. He averages less than 20 since the last Ashes. That's utterly gash.

And where has he batted primarily since then?

You should be Invers' understudy if you think Cowan is a better bet than Watson

Do you watch the games?

#noidea

 

[howardj]

But that's silly to just go on about international, right?

In first class cricket, Callum Ferguson has enjoyed that sanctuary of the Adelaide Oval his whole career. Hughes, this year.

So let's look at their overall first class record?

Callum averaging 35. Phil 45.

Callum passes 50 once every 4.06 innings. Not bad.

Phil passes 50 once every 2.9 innings. Decent.


Callum passes 100 once every 16.25 innings

Phil passes 100 once every 8.14 innings.



Come on man.

Hughes has been hopelessly exposed at international level

Not just been unluckily dropped, but hopelessly exposed - by England, by Chris Martin, and now by spin

Ferguson, like Clarke before him, doesn't have a great FC record before playing Tests, but looks more than the part in the ODI theatre.

In summary, he handles the step up

Hughes, by contrast, flails (and needs to be cocooned by human shields)

Look, I take what you are saying, but I at least think Ferguson is worth a look given how at home he looked on the international stage.

 

[howardj]

As a result of his form 3 years ago, form he's looked nowhere near replicating. He averages less than 20 since the last Ashes. That's utterly gash.

You can not get around the fact that he averages 10 more runs per innings (a whopping gap) than Ed

You just can't, mate

Ed wouldn't even be mentioned in opposition planning meetings

 

[Spark]

Clarke was 23 and was coming off decent FC form.

Ferguson is in his late twenties and has averaged high-30s for ages.

Sorry, but it's really hard to take either him or you seriously when you advocate his inclusion when there is literally no evidence that he would be any good in Tests other than "well he looks good and he has a good ODI average"

 

[Justo]

Hughes has been hopelessly exposed at international level

Not just been unluckily dropped, but hopelessly exposed - by England, by Chris Martin, and now by spin

Ferguson, like Clarke before him, doesn't have a great FC record before playing Tests, but looks more than the part in the ODI theatre.

In summary, he handles the step up

Hughes, by contrast, flails (and needs to be cocooned by human shields)

Look, I take what you are saying, but I at least think Ferguson is worth a look given how at home he looked on the international stage.

Hughes has done very well in ODI cricket as well. His stats at the moment are ahead of Ferguson. Just because someone succeeds at ODI cricket doesn't mean they'll do well in Test cricket or should be selected for Test cricket.

Hughes should be persisted with longer. He's the leading shield run scorer and he's missed a few matches. He's matching an all time great batsmen (Ponting) in centuries and half centuries with only Chris Rogers ahead of him in the centuries tally this season. Not only that but his 50s this season could easily have been converted to centuries. The two 50s at the Gabba he got out for 90 and 80 odd (from memory). On both occasions he was out early the next day trying to reestablish his innings. The 90 odd he made against WA he was run out while the other batsmen was on strike.

If he is going to be replaced it definitely shouldn't be by an average batsmen who offers little else to the team. Any one of Voges, Doolan or Burns would be a far better bet than Ferguson. At least they offer something extra outside of batting. In Voges case it'd be experience (both in England and Australia) and part time SLA while Doolan and Burns both offer the potential of young batsmen with long careers ahead of them. Even though their records aren't particularly great they are both young and in good positions to improve them. Ferguson on the other hand as has been mentioned plays in the most favourible conditions for batting and hasn't got alot to show for it. As it is Ferguson's lucky to be playing for South Australia at First Class level.

 

[benchmark00]

Hughes has been hopelessly exposed at international level

Not just been unluckily dropped, but hopelessly exposed - by England, by Chris Martin, and now by spin

Ferguson, like Clarke before him, doesn't have a great FC record before playing Tests, but looks more than the part in the ODI theatre.

In summary, he handles the step up

Hughes, by contrast, flails (and needs to be cocooned by human shields)

Look, I take what you are saying, but I at least think Ferguson is worth a look given how at home he looked on the international stage.

Why have you ignored my post just up from that Howard?

 

[howardj]

I am backing a man with clean Test hands, and who looks the part in the international theatre, over a man who has been exposed by pace in England, by Chris Martin in Australia and by spin in india

Clean hands and success to date, over serial failure and the known

 

[Spikey]

success to date?

 

[Spark]

I still struggle to take this line of argument seriously when his only claim to fame is some good ODI knocks, which Hughes has already surpassed, and that Cowan's high-30s average in FC is enough to mark him down as a journeyman, despite the fact that Cowan did what Ferguson has never done and that is to put together a string of big FC scores in quick succession.

There is nothing to recommend Ferguson over the other major contenders except "he looks good". Nothing. Zero. Zilch. I'd rather Voges or North itbt.

 

[howardj]

ODIs mate

Seriously, let's take a look at somebody who has clean hands, and who has to date looked the part

I think it's great that Hughes has scored so many centuries at such a young age, but it's what's in between that which is so damning

 

[Spark]

In the end the defining question is "who are the best six batsmen in this country?"

We know who at least three of them are, and we think we know who the fourth is though he really has to start pulling his weight. There might be debate over the fifth/sixth but Ferguson is not one of them. He's not even close to one of them.