I just think Watson is better suited as an opener. Whether he scores more runs now shouldn't be dependent on whether he is opening or at 3 - he more often than not sees of the new ball anyway, but his problem has obv been making big scores. So hopefully he has turned a corner in that regard. I think Warner at 3 is a better fit at this stage. I like having a right/left combo opening, plus I feel we could get more out of him coming in against a slightly older ball, where he would be less likely to nick off playing his shots. I don't see why someone like Hughes couldn't be a 4 - it's really the ideal spot for him. Protected as much as he can against the new ball, whilst not having to face spin that early either (not that it's going to be much of an issue in Aus though).Not sure why Watson would be anything other than 3 given what's just happened, Warner will probably be more comfortable opening in Australia too. For me, Clarke and Smith stay up and 4 and 5, while umber six goes to whoever is piling it on in the SS, that could be Hughes, but whoever it is bats 6, we can't throw another young batsman straight into the top order again IMO.
Nic Maddinson hasn't done his chances any harm with his recent performances in South Africa. He would appear to be next cab off the rank of the young batsmen, and I'd like to see Maddinson come into the line-up as high in the batting order as possible. But for now Warner, Rogers and Watson are locks, and Clarke now seems happy at 4 after preferring lower slots for a while.If Maddinson continues to pile up runs early in the season, then he should be in the team as he is our best young batsman and hasn't been scarred by losses against England
Mate, 2 thingsOn the Bouncy wickets with the ball coming on to the bat.
1. Warner
2. Rogers
3. Watson
4. Clarke
5. Maddinson
6. Smith
7. Haddin
8. Harris (if Healthy)
9. Pattinson (if Healthy
10. Siddle
11. Lyon
12. Starc (fist man in for either Harris or Pattinson)
13. Cummins
14. Cosgrove
15. Hughes
16. Ahmed
17. Maxwell
I see things very much as you do here. Our only difference is Starc or Pattinson, and on reflection I'd take a fit and firing Pattinson over Starc, and Cummins is broken again.On the Bouncy wickets with the ball coming on to the bat.
1. Warner
2. Rogers
3. Watson
4. Clarke
5. Maddinson
6. Smith
7. Haddin
8. Harris (if Healthy)
9. Pattinson (if Healthy
10. Siddle
11. Lyon
12. Starc (fist man in for either Harris or Pattinson)
13. Cummins
14. Cosgrove
15. Hughes
16. Ahmed
17. Maxwell
Plus he's, y'know, not eligible.I think Michael Hogan being 32 is the least of his problems if you are talking about him as a batsman, worlds best no.11 batsman only I'm afraid
Someone has to bat there. Might as well be the world's bestI think Michael Hogan being 32 is the least of his problems if you are talking about him as a batsman, worlds best no.11 batsman only I'm afraid
Reckon he might re-think that if CA offered him a Test cap and a central contract.Plus he's, y'know, not eligible.
Unless he's actually been capped by another Test side then he is.Plus he's, y'know, not eligible.
Well said with regard to Lyon, he should play not necessarily he will play.Selectors picked Agar ahead of him and Ahmed is better than Agar so there is still an outside chance Ahmed might be picked ahead of Lyon.Harris Pattinson and Siddle should make up our seam attack anyone who say they are too similiar doesn"t have clue.Lyon should be the spinner.Hughes is my 6th bat with Maddinson and Khawaja in the wings.Would say that 6 of the top 7 are locked in now for Brisbane. Rogers, Warner, Watson, Clarke, Smith and Haddin. Harris will obviously play if fit as will Siddle and Lyon should too. So basically just a number 6 and the 3rd paceman to pick. Pattinson if fit would be my choice but not got a clue who i'd choose as 6th batsman.
Michael Hogan's batting figures last season make for interesting reading and are the reason he found his way into the list in my earlier post:I think Michael Hogan being 32 is the least of his problems if you are talking about him as a batsman, worlds best no.11 batsman only I'm afraid
I don't know mate, we haven't been in the best of form so I wouldn't say we're a shoe in.I'd say the opposite.