It's not. They're two different points.why is "not having glaring weaknesses" indicative of a lower ceiling though?
In much the same way that Compton was for England. Might be harsh but it is the truth, both are nice blokes who just don't quite cut it at the highest level.Cowan was never going to be anything more than a plug, imo. He's done well but is never going to be more than sufficient. As soon as a talented opener proves himself ready for international cricket, he'll take Cowan's place.
Clarke wont survive the blood-bath, pretty sure he will be carrying a lot his mates along with him. Australia might retain Clarke as player maybe but he's absolutely rubbish as captain. Moreover his heydays with bat are over, no more smashing trundlers in your backyard. Time to face some quality bowlers and let that inflated average of his dip.
Yeah but I think the selectors will want to have Wade back in the side, and the fact that he's had a stint in the side already will benefit him. Again because of the poor batting talent currently in Australia, if Rogers has a good series, I think he may play for a little while longer. Considering he's only played one test match, he may be able to go until 37/38.Rogers is 35 you know.