Australian cricket selection

[howardj]

having said that, I don't want to talk in extremes and say that Hughes is a dud

it's more nuanced than that

he's only 24

haydos came back at 28

 

[benchmark00]

We've already proven that Hughes scores 50+ more regularly than Ferguson ffs!!

It's remarkable, honestly.

 

[Top_Cat]

tbh, CalFerg 'looking the part' has been a big reason why he's gotten as far as he has. Truth is, he's never actually dominated at any level because he simply hasn't had to. One look at him and people fall for it every time; he's never really been challenged or been made to work for his runs which is exactly the sort OZ don't need in the Test side.

****ty part is that he's actually a genuinely nice bloke and has great hands. But, considering his technique was basically built for AO, he should be scoring 3 tons a season and averaging 60 there, not 30's. He's no softie, it's a concentration/hunger thing.

 

[pskov]

At the end of the 2000 season, Mark Ramprakash had a career average of 51.24 in domestic FC matches but was a consistent failure at test level. Marcus Trescothick had a domestic FC average of 31.47 and had just made his test debut that summer. Who went on to have the better international career?

Domestic averages are a good guide generally, but sometimes it can be obvious that a player has technical or mental deficiencies that international bowlers are able to exploit that domestic bowlers cannot. Also sometimes you just have to trust your eye and back a player you think has the technique and talent to make it at test level, even if their stats don't completely back it up.

Will it work every time? No of course not. But in Australia's position with a paucity of batsmen, I don't think they have another choice really.

 

[SirBloody Idiot]

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.

Well, unfortunately two of them are retired.

 

[Spikey]

trent copeland hasn't retired...?

 

[Top_Cat]

Domestic averages are a good guide generally, but sometimes it can be obvious that a player has technical or mental deficiencies that international bowlers are able to exploit that domestic bowlers cannot. Also sometimes you just have to trust your eye and back a player you think has the technique and talent to make it at test level, even if their stats don't completely back it up.

The eyes have it too, though; CalFerg has big pads at the start of his innings, plays well inside the line most of the time and isn't a great player of the hook or pull. Purpose-built for big runs on AO, gigantic nicks elsewhere. Throwing a guy to the sharks because you're desperate helps no-one, especially when the biggest problems of the current line-up are more mental than technical.

 

[Jono]

trent copeland hasn't retired...?

Get off the stage

 

[Furball]

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

I've watched enough to know that Watson's hopeless.

 

[watson]

Question: What do you call a great Australian cricketer?









Answer: Retired.

 

[Spikey]

watson would be alright if he was opening!


(averages 19 in 10 innings when opening post the ashes. he averages 29 in his 14 innings not opening in that time.)

 

[vic_orthdox]

I remember around the Ashes at home when a few of us were talking about how he was in the form of his life, and only averaging 40 from it having gotten out to all those starts.

He's certainly not in that sort of form at the moment, but he's still finding ways to get out which makes it all doubly worrisome.

 

[Spark]

Yep. I remember people using "yeah but his average is fine!" defence too.

 

[iamdavid]

A) too many people are overreacting to the results in India to date. To state the obvious the conditions there drastically nullify our strength, in quick bowling, and accentuate our weaknesses, namely everything to do with spin - bowling, batting against & keeping to. Things were always likely to get ugly. By and large the team has been on an upward trajectory for the past two years, and I'd be unsurprised if we went down 4-0 in India yet managed the jag a narrow win in England given the conditions will be so much more favourable.

B) This mindset of attributing all problems we do have to selection is getting tiresome. We don't have ready-made replacements in shield cricket like we did 10 years ago, who do those questioning the ongoing selection of Cowan, Watson & Hughes suggest we play instead? Granted the squads selected have rarely been optimal, picking guys like Rogers & O'Keefe and leaving the likes of Maxwell at home would improve things incrementally, but it won't change the fact we lack batting depth - particularly in spinning conditions and we don't have a test-standard spinner.

 

[Midwinter]

One of the disappointing things about the 2nd test was the admission that Maxwell was picked for his batting ie "adding more to the team" as they say these days

This should been seen for what it really is - Hoping you wont lose.
It's a dead end street, weakening your bowling but not changing the cause of the problem, the batting.