-
Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.
You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.
Australian test selection 2018/19
- Thread starter Red
- Start date
the big bambino
International Captain
Don’t share the Renshaw love. He didn’t get picked bcos a high score of what is it: ten? Doesn’t get you selected unless you’re a Marsh. Beginning to think he could be a myth and people are too impressed with that fluky hundred he got to get in the team. Like Handscomb that effort looked like the start of a bull run of form that has now gone south.
Gnske
Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
He particularly needs to learn how to not screw up playing a full ball on his pads. His bat is doing strange things these days when he gets balls in that area, trying to play around that front pad.
Otherwise I'd say he's no myth, he just needs to rematerialise.
Otherwise I'd say he's no myth, he just needs to rematerialise.
James90
Cricketer Of The Year
Renshaw was the best in the Shield at the back end of the summer, and the best on the County circuit after that. Certainly has the ability to score bulk runs. But then he goes missing for months on end when he actually gets a chance to put his case for selection. Very frustrating.
Burgey
Request Your Custom Title Now!
Stiff front pad which you like to play across is a recipe for a shambles.
It’s also easily fixed, which is what makes Burgeinho, I mean Renshaw, so ****ing annoying in getting out the same way doing the same ****ing thing every week.
aussie tragic
International Captain
Called it
The Battlers Prince
International Vice-Captain
What dirt does Geoff Marsh have on Justin Langer?
Two spicy decks that MMarsh would have scored less than 10 on collectively and he gets brought in for an MCG wicket that even with extra grass will still be easy to bat on I’m assuming.
Total garbage, yes we expected it, but stop screwing with my Christmas JL ya tosser
Two spicy decks that MMarsh would have scored less than 10 on collectively and he gets brought in for an MCG wicket that even with extra grass will still be easy to bat on I’m assuming.
Total garbage, yes we expected it, but stop screwing with my Christmas JL ya tosser
The Battlers Prince
International Vice-Captain
Pucovski or a Christmas Sangha would be tasty
quincywagstaff
International Debutant
Handscomb dropping same situation as 12 months ago; issue isnt lack of runs but how technically vulnerable he looks. So flawed that it probably lifts the opposition knowing he's due to come in.
Same situation that hurt Khawaja for years in Asia; lack of runs not really the issue but how vulnerable he looked every ball in those conditions.
Same situation that hurt Khawaja for years in Asia; lack of runs not really the issue but how vulnerable he looked every ball in those conditions.
TheJediBrah
Request Your Custom Title Now!
Pretty sure it's mostly the lack of runs
morgieb
Request Your Custom Title Now!
I'll put this here rather than the tour thread at it's more relevant:
BATSMEN
This is obviously where 95% of the concerns are. As said in the tour thread too many batsmen seem happy to average high-30's at a strike rate of around 60 at Shield level, which suggests they have the required talent for Test cricket but lack the game sense/ability to build an innings to become top-class. As Spark said Greg Chappell has a lot to answer here - the types of players who would once be of the standard of a Martyn or a Hussey are now becoming more like a Clinton Perren or a Greg Mail. This rot will take a while to change. At the very least they have to admit that the Futures League is a failure and that the old Second XI should return and performances rather than talent should be rewarded. Of course the rise of T20 doesn't help here either, but a pathway for the best players no matter their age has to be utilised to keep Shield cricket of a good quality. Ideally also pitches should be close to Test conditions as possible, as well as a variety of conditions (i.e. Perth with exaggerated bounce, Brisbane as a hard bouncy wicket, Sydney spinners deck, Hobart greentop, Melbourne road, etc.) that can replicate different overseas conditions.
I wonder if adding an extra team or two might help. It probably means a reduction in quality, but it could also help the talented but underperforming players learn how to build innings better. The Ranji is no-one's idea of great cricket, but it does mean that the best will score runs and lots of it.
As for the current Top 6, here's what I would do:
Khawaja I will give a pass to - he's still probably the only batsman in the side (with Warner and Smith banned) that can score big consistent runs, and his form has to be impacted by the **** with his brother and his knee injury in the UAE.
The others....not so much. Long-term I can see a path for Head or Harris, but they aren't anywhere near as promising as Hughes, Khawaja and Smith were around the 2010/11 Ashes, and ideally need a season at Shield level where they can take what they've learned at Test level about building an innings and ironing out their technical flaws. The problem is that Smith and Hughes were 22 at the end of the 2010/11 Ashes. Head is 25 and Harris is 26. A significant difference and I think the best we can hope for is for them to get to a Nicholls/Karunatne level.
Finch cannot open. That was clear at Shield level, and it's clear as day here. As a 5/6 he could be valuable, but the problem is the decks this series aren't as flat as they have been for the last 15 years, and even then he may struggle a bit. Very poor man's Warner at this level, and he should be dropped.
Mitch Marsh has to go. He simply isn't a Top 6 batsmen at this level and at 27 it's getting harder to see him becoming one. And while he's a good bowler, he's not going to be in our best 4 bowlers. The only time I can see value for him is on uber-roads, and even then I'd pick Patto to bat 7/8 with Cummins first.
Handscomb's game is just a mess. Like Hughes but he's nowhere near as good. If he can sort his problems out I think he'll be a good player, but he needs at least a season at Shield/county level first and time with coaches without his mind being muddled.
Shaun Marsh is a conundrum. Unlike several others he at least knows how to build an innings, and has played plenty of great knocks for Australia before. The problem is what's between it - a failure rate of 40-45% is unacceptable. Realistically any Top 6 batsman having a failure rate of over 1/3 of their innings isn't worth it unless you have 3-4 ATG's in the side already. And he's not even kicking on with his starts now. Unless he scores runs in the second innings it's time to move on.
But who to replace them? I admit, the alternatives aren't great. I've even seen plenty of people call for Pukovski or Sangha, which is ridiculous to me given the lack of cricket behind them. But here are a few names:
Out of the banned trio, Warner and Smith have to return. I understand the dressing room/off-field concerns with Warner, and if we had two decent openers in the side I'd have no problems with KP-ing him and letting him become a T20 renegade. The problem is we don't, and too many of our Top 6 aren't of the standard. So I think we have to pick him, with the caveat that he is on a quite short leash. Smith is obvious - he was on his way to becoming the best batsman since Bradman before the ban, and his problem was more of pathetically weak leadership rather than being of a very short fuse and a character that looks bad for the team.
Bancroft is an interesting one. I found the excuse he gave for ball-tampering a very bad look towards his personality - what 25 year old decides to pull that kind of stunt because he wanted to fit in? It's the **** that happens when we're 15. He also is nowhere near as good, while he has the ability to build an innings and the temperament for Test cricket, he seems a little bit short of requirements too. He's certainly not better than Renshaw IMO, let alone Warner. Comes down to how he does at Shield level to see whether he can book a ticket to England next summer.
For those not banned:
* Burns - I admit I don't really rate him - basically all of his runs came on roads and his domestic record isn't fantastic, but he at least knows how to build an innings. As a middle order player he's definitely ahead of Marsh, and him being a right-hander gives him a point of difference to Head and Marsh. Should be picked.
* Maxwell - in theory he probably isn't significantly better than Head or Marsh, and his ability to build an innings is debatable, but there's little doubt he's been harshly treated. And his other skills (amazing fielding, tight bowling) makes him a very attractive package. Sadly it's looks like he's been blacklisted at Test level.
* Renshaw - form is a worry, especially given it looks like he loses form whenever a Test spot is on offer which suggest mental issues. But simply put - out of all Australian batsman born after 1989 (not counting Puko/Sangha due to lack of exposure) he is the one that I think is the most likely to succeed at Test level. He knows how to bat time. He knows how to go big. He has gears so isn't purely a blocker. He doesn't have too many glaring technique flaws. He has the requisite talent for the level. If given a crack I genuinely reckon he can get to Hayden's/Smith's level. Has to be picked for the Ashes as he's one of the few cricketers I have faith in scoring runs in England, so should be shunted in regardless of form.
* Patterson - does average more than the rest at Shield level, but given his conversion rate and a few technical flaws, I don't have a lot of confidence of being great at Tests. He's slightly better than the Head's of the world, but a lot of the same issues still apply IMO.
* Wade - he's another left-hander and has struggled at Tests before. Against that, he is better at building an innings than many of our middle-order, and is in hot form. Should be considered.
* Stoinis - no thanks. In OK form this season but his overall record still isn't great, and offers little as a specialist. Marsh has generally outperformed him at Shield level too.
* Hughes - not enough performances outside of this season.
* Pukovski/Sangha - give them at least another season at Shield level, come on.
There's a couple of cricketers that I liked what they were building for a couple of seasons (Doran, Turner) but they simply haven't done enough recently.
One left-field call I'm tempted to shrill for is Jordan Silk. Two OK-ish seasons in a row, on a greentop. Can bat time. Solid game. I think in England he might be an interesting call if he finishes this season on song. In fact I'd be interested to see what everyone's Duke ball average is (I know Renshaw's for example would have to be really good) as it might give a good idea of who can handle swing the best in the side.
So for the next Test/Sri Lanka series all of Burns, Maxwell, Renshaw and Wade should be considered and at least a couple should be picked.
As for Paine, I think I'm happy enough with him...for now. At the very least, there are far bigger questions in the side and I have no idea who else can captain.
BOWLING
I don't think the bowling has too much to be concerned about. Both Cummins and Lyon have been superb. Starc and Hazlewood though...a little bit worrying. Hazlewood seems to go missing away from home in friendly conditions (England, South Africa), and there's simply not enough friendly conditions in Australia for him to exploit. He may be a victim of high expectations, though - I remember in 2016/17 I thought he was going to be the premier bowler worldwide given how well he bowled that summer. Frankly he's been disappointing since then. Similar case with Starc - his bowling in Sri Lanka was amazing (ditto the New Zealand 2015/16 series) that I thought he was going to be the best bowler in the world in all formats. He's regressed since then and while is still very awkward to face is kinda like a Johnson 2009/10 in that he bowls poorly but still takes wickets. I'd still keep them both though as those who might be better simply can't stay fit long enough (Pattinson, Behrendorff, Stanlake) and the Tremain and Bird's of the world simply don't seem as special. Richardson OTOH might be....should be in the squad now (or Tremain) instead of Siddle. Had we been bowling to our batting lineup we'd be doing much better.
BATSMEN
This is obviously where 95% of the concerns are. As said in the tour thread too many batsmen seem happy to average high-30's at a strike rate of around 60 at Shield level, which suggests they have the required talent for Test cricket but lack the game sense/ability to build an innings to become top-class. As Spark said Greg Chappell has a lot to answer here - the types of players who would once be of the standard of a Martyn or a Hussey are now becoming more like a Clinton Perren or a Greg Mail. This rot will take a while to change. At the very least they have to admit that the Futures League is a failure and that the old Second XI should return and performances rather than talent should be rewarded. Of course the rise of T20 doesn't help here either, but a pathway for the best players no matter their age has to be utilised to keep Shield cricket of a good quality. Ideally also pitches should be close to Test conditions as possible, as well as a variety of conditions (i.e. Perth with exaggerated bounce, Brisbane as a hard bouncy wicket, Sydney spinners deck, Hobart greentop, Melbourne road, etc.) that can replicate different overseas conditions.
I wonder if adding an extra team or two might help. It probably means a reduction in quality, but it could also help the talented but underperforming players learn how to build innings better. The Ranji is no-one's idea of great cricket, but it does mean that the best will score runs and lots of it.
As for the current Top 6, here's what I would do:
Khawaja I will give a pass to - he's still probably the only batsman in the side (with Warner and Smith banned) that can score big consistent runs, and his form has to be impacted by the **** with his brother and his knee injury in the UAE.
The others....not so much. Long-term I can see a path for Head or Harris, but they aren't anywhere near as promising as Hughes, Khawaja and Smith were around the 2010/11 Ashes, and ideally need a season at Shield level where they can take what they've learned at Test level about building an innings and ironing out their technical flaws. The problem is that Smith and Hughes were 22 at the end of the 2010/11 Ashes. Head is 25 and Harris is 26. A significant difference and I think the best we can hope for is for them to get to a Nicholls/Karunatne level.
Finch cannot open. That was clear at Shield level, and it's clear as day here. As a 5/6 he could be valuable, but the problem is the decks this series aren't as flat as they have been for the last 15 years, and even then he may struggle a bit. Very poor man's Warner at this level, and he should be dropped.
Mitch Marsh has to go. He simply isn't a Top 6 batsmen at this level and at 27 it's getting harder to see him becoming one. And while he's a good bowler, he's not going to be in our best 4 bowlers. The only time I can see value for him is on uber-roads, and even then I'd pick Patto to bat 7/8 with Cummins first.
Handscomb's game is just a mess. Like Hughes but he's nowhere near as good. If he can sort his problems out I think he'll be a good player, but he needs at least a season at Shield/county level first and time with coaches without his mind being muddled.
Shaun Marsh is a conundrum. Unlike several others he at least knows how to build an innings, and has played plenty of great knocks for Australia before. The problem is what's between it - a failure rate of 40-45% is unacceptable. Realistically any Top 6 batsman having a failure rate of over 1/3 of their innings isn't worth it unless you have 3-4 ATG's in the side already. And he's not even kicking on with his starts now. Unless he scores runs in the second innings it's time to move on.
But who to replace them? I admit, the alternatives aren't great. I've even seen plenty of people call for Pukovski or Sangha, which is ridiculous to me given the lack of cricket behind them. But here are a few names:
Out of the banned trio, Warner and Smith have to return. I understand the dressing room/off-field concerns with Warner, and if we had two decent openers in the side I'd have no problems with KP-ing him and letting him become a T20 renegade. The problem is we don't, and too many of our Top 6 aren't of the standard. So I think we have to pick him, with the caveat that he is on a quite short leash. Smith is obvious - he was on his way to becoming the best batsman since Bradman before the ban, and his problem was more of pathetically weak leadership rather than being of a very short fuse and a character that looks bad for the team.
Bancroft is an interesting one. I found the excuse he gave for ball-tampering a very bad look towards his personality - what 25 year old decides to pull that kind of stunt because he wanted to fit in? It's the **** that happens when we're 15. He also is nowhere near as good, while he has the ability to build an innings and the temperament for Test cricket, he seems a little bit short of requirements too. He's certainly not better than Renshaw IMO, let alone Warner. Comes down to how he does at Shield level to see whether he can book a ticket to England next summer.
For those not banned:
* Burns - I admit I don't really rate him - basically all of his runs came on roads and his domestic record isn't fantastic, but he at least knows how to build an innings. As a middle order player he's definitely ahead of Marsh, and him being a right-hander gives him a point of difference to Head and Marsh. Should be picked.
* Maxwell - in theory he probably isn't significantly better than Head or Marsh, and his ability to build an innings is debatable, but there's little doubt he's been harshly treated. And his other skills (amazing fielding, tight bowling) makes him a very attractive package. Sadly it's looks like he's been blacklisted at Test level.
* Renshaw - form is a worry, especially given it looks like he loses form whenever a Test spot is on offer which suggest mental issues. But simply put - out of all Australian batsman born after 1989 (not counting Puko/Sangha due to lack of exposure) he is the one that I think is the most likely to succeed at Test level. He knows how to bat time. He knows how to go big. He has gears so isn't purely a blocker. He doesn't have too many glaring technique flaws. He has the requisite talent for the level. If given a crack I genuinely reckon he can get to Hayden's/Smith's level. Has to be picked for the Ashes as he's one of the few cricketers I have faith in scoring runs in England, so should be shunted in regardless of form.
* Patterson - does average more than the rest at Shield level, but given his conversion rate and a few technical flaws, I don't have a lot of confidence of being great at Tests. He's slightly better than the Head's of the world, but a lot of the same issues still apply IMO.
* Wade - he's another left-hander and has struggled at Tests before. Against that, he is better at building an innings than many of our middle-order, and is in hot form. Should be considered.
* Stoinis - no thanks. In OK form this season but his overall record still isn't great, and offers little as a specialist. Marsh has generally outperformed him at Shield level too.
* Hughes - not enough performances outside of this season.
* Pukovski/Sangha - give them at least another season at Shield level, come on.
There's a couple of cricketers that I liked what they were building for a couple of seasons (Doran, Turner) but they simply haven't done enough recently.
One left-field call I'm tempted to shrill for is Jordan Silk. Two OK-ish seasons in a row, on a greentop. Can bat time. Solid game. I think in England he might be an interesting call if he finishes this season on song. In fact I'd be interested to see what everyone's Duke ball average is (I know Renshaw's for example would have to be really good) as it might give a good idea of who can handle swing the best in the side.
So for the next Test/Sri Lanka series all of Burns, Maxwell, Renshaw and Wade should be considered and at least a couple should be picked.
As for Paine, I think I'm happy enough with him...for now. At the very least, there are far bigger questions in the side and I have no idea who else can captain.
BOWLING
I don't think the bowling has too much to be concerned about. Both Cummins and Lyon have been superb. Starc and Hazlewood though...a little bit worrying. Hazlewood seems to go missing away from home in friendly conditions (England, South Africa), and there's simply not enough friendly conditions in Australia for him to exploit. He may be a victim of high expectations, though - I remember in 2016/17 I thought he was going to be the premier bowler worldwide given how well he bowled that summer. Frankly he's been disappointing since then. Similar case with Starc - his bowling in Sri Lanka was amazing (ditto the New Zealand 2015/16 series) that I thought he was going to be the best bowler in the world in all formats. He's regressed since then and while is still very awkward to face is kinda like a Johnson 2009/10 in that he bowls poorly but still takes wickets. I'd still keep them both though as those who might be better simply can't stay fit long enough (Pattinson, Behrendorff, Stanlake) and the Tremain and Bird's of the world simply don't seem as special. Richardson OTOH might be....should be in the squad now (or Tremain) instead of Siddle. Had we been bowling to our batting lineup we'd be doing much better.
Last edited:
SeamUp
International Coach
My best Aussie batting line-up. Not just looking at form or stats.
Warner
Bancroft
Renshaw
Smith
Khawaja
Head
I would take Pucovski to England. Ideally he finishes off the 4 day season with runs.
Head had a decent spell at Worcestershire. Renshaw at Somerset and Bancroft seems to be in demand in England with Gloucs, Somerset and now Durham. I just have confidence in the top 5 particularly scoring 100s. Head is the one I have doubts with but give him a bit of time to unleash especially with an accumulator keeper Paine at 7.
Warner
Bancroft
Renshaw
Smith
Khawaja
Head
I would take Pucovski to England. Ideally he finishes off the 4 day season with runs.
Head had a decent spell at Worcestershire. Renshaw at Somerset and Bancroft seems to be in demand in England with Gloucs, Somerset and now Durham. I just have confidence in the top 5 particularly scoring 100s. Head is the one I have doubts with but give him a bit of time to unleash especially with an accumulator keeper Paine at 7.
stephen
Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Was utterly unimpressive wasn't he, a couple of downhill skiing half centuries aside.
SeamUp
International Coach
Wasn't thrown in against 2nd tier nations and actually think he was showing progression on our tough pitches against our attack. Seems to have apetite for big runs and in Asia and England where he has had exposure.
Its a pity what happened because it was coming to the stage where we see if he makes it or not.
Its a pity what happened because it was coming to the stage where we see if he makes it or not.
morgieb
Request Your Custom Title Now!
Yeah he was probably our best specialist batsmen over there, ignoring all the **** going on.
Still fair to say that he wasn't going great guns before he tampered, mind you.
turnstyle
First Class Debutant
Am I the only one that sees the lack of quality bats coinciding with the rule changes to the domestic second XI structure back in 2009. I see they now allow 6 over 23's instead of 3, but still rotate 13-14 players per match. Feels more like they're trying to find talent rather than building a solid side to win a comp.
Last edited:
GotSpin
Hall of Fame Member
The whole youth focus has hurt Australian cricket from grade cricket upwards