George Bailey

[the big bambino]

Probably in order I'd replace Bailey with Wade (has test centuries at least) Doolan (picked as cover at Sydney) Hughes, Voges and White (yes I know..I know - but he's made some runs) Reserve opener to come from Cowan and Usman.

 

[uvelocity]

This is seriously weird. Of course they picked him on the bludgeoning of the Indian attack. He failed in his usual way in the lead up to the first test in his only Shield outings so it wasn't on that. Was it based on the season of Shield last year when he averaged 18 then?

Me and everyone else who watches shield could tell you long before the first test that Bailey would continue to be dismissed like that. He's made a career out of it, why would he now change?

look youre seriously wierd but i dont complain. they picked bailey on a) lack of other options b) international experience c) domestic experience d) bludgeoning that attack - in that order imo

could you and everyone else who watches shield tell us that rogers would perform to a reasonable standard in test cricket?

 

[benchmark00]

Yeah Chris Rogers really having a golden time of it...

You are crazy if you think the selectors picked him on anything other than his recent ODI efforts. It was a **** selection then and it's a **** selection now.

 

[uvelocity]

nom nom nom

 

[Tangles]

Rogers has like 20k runs at 49 so yes that suggests he was going to do better than George.

 

[Dan]

Who would you have picked at the time Benchy. Gone with Doolan straight up?

At the time I was thinking Doolan as the #1 selection, with Bailey behind him. There wasn't that much else unless they threw a debut to the likes of Lynn or Burns, and if the selectors have Doolan pigeonholed as a top 4 option, then there weren't many other experienced batsmen vying for #6. North, Wade and White are the only 3 I can think of who would considered as number 6 options. Maybe Smarsh as well.

 

[benchmark00]

I of course would have selected Doolan. He has a test standard game.

But over Bailey I think I would have had about half a dozen ahead of him at least.

NB: I think Bailey is a stand up guy. Great bloke, so this isn't personal or anything. Also admired his short form work, has seriously transformed himself into a world class player there.

 

[howardj]

I know it's an opportune time to make this comment but how does this bloke get a guernsey?

He's 30+ years old and averages ~ 38 in first class cricket. I don't buy that he is picked because of his form in India because he's surely lost that card by now. And what's the rationale for thinking that swinging hard at balls on flat wickets would put him in good stead to buckle down again Broad and Anderson?

He's surely only in the team because he's a good bloke and they like having him around the dressing rooms.

Discuss.

That's always been my benchmark...a guy who's over 30, and averages in the 30s

Alarm bells

 

[uvelocity]

bearing in mind

Ok if you want to include Starc, Siddle and Pattinson there are 9 batsmen in the Australian team better than Rogers. Are you happy?

and

Rogers would get found out in no time in test cricket with his ghey pray mantis looking technique. Why are his runs I'm Shield cricket more valuable than Hughes'?

and others.

a michelin star level of taste

 

[benchmark00]

Rogers gone on to prove me wrong with a muscular test average of 37.

 

[uvelocity]

a blokes contribution to his team reduced to quoting averages now? the kind of analysis a mother could be proud of in a son

 

[howardj]

a blokes contribution to his team reduced to quoting averages now? the kind of analysis a mother could be proud of in a son

will always be exceptions of course

but once you hit 30, there's a fair body of work that's gone into producing your average

plus, while there will of course be exceptions, generally you have less scope for improvement than a green horn in their 20s

 

[benchmark00]

a blokes contribution to his team reduced to quoting averages now? the kind of analysis a mother could be proud of in a son

I'm sure he mixes a nice cordial as well. I'm not why you have brought Rogers into this though? What's it got to do with you being called on your silly assertion that Bailey's been picked on anything other than his recent ODI form?

 

[the big bambino]

While the young guns have failed to get the runs its codgers like Rogers whose got the tons.

 

[uvelocity]

i meant to post your taste in the rogers thread but sparked it tbh

nobody could say bailey's lo form didnt contribute to his selection, but had d00lander kicked the season off alright, or the other recent bats to have been given a run not burned their chances completely, his lo form would have stayed just that.

 

[the big bambino]

Yeah not a Bailey fan but wasn't the worst decn to pick him considering. Now we know its a blue lets just not do it again. Rogers though deserved a chance especially when he wasn't up against much.

 

[benchmark00]

i meant to post your taste in the rogers thread but sparked it tbh

nobody could say bailey's lo form didnt contribute to his selection, but had d00lander kicked the season off alright, or the other recent bats to have been given a run not burned their chances completely, his lo form would have stayed just that.

Might want to check Doolans early season work again bud.

 

[uvelocity]

10 knocks for 2 50's and a lone ton. banging the proverbial house down

 

[benchmark00]

Lol at you thinking he batted ten times before the first test.

 

[uvelocity]

quite right, 1 ton and 1 50 before the first test. ch33rs