Does anyone think Australia's situation is not actually that dire?

[outbreak]

SOK should've been been back in the 2010/11 Ashes, still can't believe Doherty got picked, I'm certain he has upset the selectors somehow.

I thought I read somewhere he wasn't too well liked with the NSW team as he didn't really fit in with your average blokey blokey cricket culture. Same probably goes for the boys club that is the test side. I know his favourite music is stuff like taylor swift and he's into a bunch of nerdish stuff so maybe that kind of thing has something to do with it. Wish they picked people purely on cricket but they don't. Same thing happened with Bryce Mcgain didn't it?

 

[Top_Cat]

I can see the logic in dropping him, though. Yes he took a bag in India but there was little in his bowling that game to suggest he'd turned a corner. Mainly he did as he's done elsewhen, take advantage of great conditions for spin (which does make him valuable in and of itself, of course). On a pudding slow deck as at Trent Bridge, I'm sure the Aussies thought Agar wouldn't offer much less with the ball (true) but offer much more with the bat and in the field (true again).

England used to do the same with Tufnel; he started his Test career already a obviously good bowler but never evolved to bowl well in conditions that didn't suit him. If he had, he'd have played 100 Tests I'm sure.

 

[Riggins]

I thought I read somewhere he wasn't too well liked with the NSW team as he didn't really fit in with your average blokey blokey cricket culture. Same probably goes for the boys club that is the test side. I know his favourite music is stuff like taylor swift and he's into a bunch of nerdish stuff so maybe that kind of thing has something to do with it. Wish they picked people purely on cricket but they don't. Same thing happened with Bryce Mcgain didn't it?

nah, mcgain just bowled ****.

 

[Top_Cat]

Yeah. MacGain shouldn't have played at all until he proved his shoulder was right.

 

[outbreak]

nah, mcgain just bowled ****.

i thought he had the fc record to warrant some chances when healthy

 

[NUFAN]

I thought I read somewhere he wasn't too well liked with the NSW team as he didn't really fit in with your average blokey blokey cricket culture. Same probably goes for the boys club that is the test side. I know his favourite music is stuff like taylor swift and he's into a bunch of nerdish stuff so maybe that kind of thing has something to do with it. Wish they picked people purely on cricket but they don't. Same thing happened with Bryce Mcgain didn't it?

Boys club in the test side? We have Steve Smith, Phil Hughes and Chris Rogers in our team not Doug Walters, David Boon and Dennis Lillee.

 

[Red]

Clarkey's Boys Club

 

[outbreak]

Boys club in the test side? We have Steve Smith, Phil Hughes and Chris Rogers in our team not Doug Walters, David Boon and Dennis Lillee.

I'm sure smith, clarke and hughes share hair rollers and facial creams and the like.

 

[the big bambino]

Rogers should share his prescription with the other batsmen as a hint. While he's at it he might get his checked again.

 

[91Jmay]

Bryce McGain has to have one of the most painful test 'careers' ever really doesn't he. Jade Dernbach is laughing at his economy rate.

 

[stephen]

McGain was very poorly treated, but did himself no favours by saying to the press that he was bowling as well as ever in that innings.

Still probably should have gotten a second shot though.

 

[Uppercut]

I can see the logic in dropping him, though. Yes he took a bag in India but there was little in his bowling that game to suggest he'd turned a corner. Mainly he did as he's done elsewhen, take advantage of great conditions for spin (which does make him valuable in and of itself, of course). On a pudding slow deck as at Trent Bridge, I'm sure the Aussies thought Agar wouldn't offer much less with the ball (true) but offer much more with the bat and in the field (true again).

Well they batted him at #11 so I don't think we can credit them for that. Of course Clarke decides the batting order but has no say in selection, so it is still possible. But it'd still be pretty hideous if they picked Agar for his batting then Clarke put him at 11.

Agar seemed to give the ball a bit more of a tweak but I still think Lyon should have played. Failing that, Agar shouldn't have played the second test while so obviously not fully fit- OK they were crushed anyway but given how the pitch played it could have really cost the team. Maybe Agar hid it from the selectors, which would be understandable if not excusable, but it is sort of their job to know these things. Honestly the whole thing has been a bit of a fiasco and I think Agar's brilliant batting in the first test has saved them an awful lot of justified criticism.

 

[Top_Cat]

So it's not possible that they'd have seen him bat in the nets, seen an obviously better bat but still batted the new kid at 11?

 

[marc71178]

Didn't Clarke say he batted at 11 to try and keep as much pressure off him as possible on his debut (considering the other selected bowlers could all also handle a bat)

 

[Uppercut]

So it's not possible that they'd have seen him bat in the nets, seen an obviously better bat but still batted the new kid at 11?

They'll have noticed it no doubt but I definitely don't think they'd have factored it into his selection if they were planning to bat him at 11.

 

[Top_Cat]

Didn't Clarke say he batted at 11 to try and keep as much pressure off him as possible on his debut (considering the other selected bowlers could all also handle a bat)

Bingo.