*Official* Third Test (Headingley, Leeds) 6–10 July

[Socerer 01]

Bro doesn't understand logic.

facts don’t care about your feelings bro

 

[Nintendo]

Only two you say? Who to believe, you or my own lying eyes....? Which tests did he win with the bat? His only century so far has been in a draw. Think he's only scored two 50's outside of Aus.

His average has been up and down (trending down at the moment at 34) for a couple of years in the 30-36 region. Below 35 is not something to write home about. A SR in the 40's. Fair enough if you're playing with a set batsman I s'pose or going for a draw. I doubt that's why though and more because he can't turn over the strike early. If he sorted out being able to get up the other end occasionally I think he has some potential for an opener. Maybe another Watto...35 with bat, 33 with ball isn't terrible for an opener who bowls (though I doubt Green will keep an average below 40 with the ball).



I don't care how old he is (24) as much as how he performs. After 23 matches he hasn't done all that much. Phil Hughes and Adam Voges (greatest ftb of all time?) dominated shield too. If I'm not mistaken so did Marsh?



Then put him in the attack.

Or don't cherry pick, then he is getting his "poles" at 36+. What sort of average does he have outside of Aus? (to help you out it seems to be 77 at a strike rate of 123).



I didn't bring up Renshaw. My point is that he has had a fair run and been mediocre. He shouldn't be pencilled in perpetually on "promise". At some point you gotta call it and say it hasn't translated to test success, unless you're happy with a low to mid 30's batsman at no 6. Will soon be time to look for next in line (who hasn't already failed). Shield success isn't everything or necessarily predictive.



Had lots of promise though. Kept him going for years.

"Only two you say? Who to believe, you or my own lying eyes....? Which tests did he win with the bat? His only century so far has been in a draw. Think he's only scored two 50's outside of Aus."

He averaged 50+ across the india, pak and sri lanka tour. He's made two 50's and 1 100 outside AUS. He made 85 in the 3rd test vs PAK to give us a match winning first innings total after a mini collapse due to some reverse swing shenanigans with shaheen, and made 77 in sri lanka in a game where one other batter passed 50 across the 4 innings on an absolute sandpit to win us the game.

"
Then put him in the attack.

Or don't cherry pick, then he is getting his "poles" at 36+. What sort of average does he have outside of Aus? (to help you out it seems to be 77 at a strike rate of 123). "

I'm not cherry picking. I'm saying recently he had a two year stretch where he was good enough to play as a frontline seamer. He's had two bad test's this tour and now people want him ****ed off.

"Had lots of promise though. Kept him going for years."

I assume this is something about green being backed on "promise", correct me if I'm wrong. A) Green actually earned his spot in the side, marsh got his off U19 Form, our obsession with getting another Keith miller, one 4 test run of fantastic batting just before sandpaper gate and langer's WA bias. B) Green isn't being kept around on promise. He just spent a 2 year period making runs @36/37 and taking wickets 29-30. If you think that's "not earning his keep", then I really don't know what else to say.

"No idea what Harris is doing in the squad, but Renshaw should never have been dropped when he was. He hasn't had many opportunities since (including being rushed Johannesburg after the sandpaper incident). Far better recent shield form than Green though, yet from limited matches."

You bought up renshaw here as having better "recent" shield form then green, while conveniently ignoring the fact that green's barely played shield because he's been playing international cricket, and when he did play he outperformed any similiar patch of form renshaw has shown.

 

[Spofforth]

facts don’t care about your feelings bro

True that. Facts don't care about anyone's feelings. But selective use of them can be misleading.

Adam Voges really is the best since Bradman. Prove me wrong.

 

[Gob]

If you want to prove that someone is mediocre, the best way to go about it is keep repeating it

 

[Gob]

The numbers are right here, he hasn't been mediocre at test level.

Jesus christ man I was hoping to see some numbers

 

[Spofforth]

The numbers are right here, he hasn't been mediocre at test level.

I thought we were having a cricket discussion so unfortunately followed the link which is a bit sick. Really if I get up your nose that much put me on ignore.

Reported.

.

 

[Gob]

As someone who has followed Green's International career basically ball by ball, I have to say he has always improved. I don't know what his bowling record after his debut India series where he was used poorly but they must be good and he has already contributed with some match defining innings in Pakistan, Sl and India where the conditions cannot be more alien to a batsman grew up in Western Australia

He has a great defence and range of attacking shots but needs to work more on rotation of strike but he'll get there. You have to be patient with a bloke who has such a high ceiling.

 

[Daemon]

oh nintendo

see you after the Ashes

 

[Gob]

Also I'll keep Warner. He played a key part in Australia going 2 up in the series and in the last game, he genuinely got two very good balls

 

[Gob]

oh nintendo

see you after the Ashes

I actually think that's the ideal response to quite a few of the posters here

Never had the courage to implement it

 

[Spofforth]

If you want to prove that someone is mediocre, the best way to go about it is keep repeating it

Not sure it's possible to prove anything, ultimately. Only give reasons for your opinion. If I've been repetitive, oh well, I haven't forced anyone to argue with me.

I thought it was just friendly discussion.

Apparently not, or maybe a little too friendly?

 

[Gob]

Not sure it's possible to prove anything, ultimately. Only give reasons for your opinion. If I've been repetitive, oh well, I haven't forced anyone to argue with me.

I thought it was just friendly discussion.

Apparently not, or maybe a little too friendly?

Well this is cricketweb.com fella an online forum designed to discuss crickets

What else would you expect

 

[Nintendo]

Jesus christ man I was hoping to see some numbers

I'm sorry you got caught in the crossfire.

 

[Gob]

I'm sorry you got caught in the crossfire.

I'm glad you are still here posting

 

[Spofforth]

Well this is cricketweb.com fella an online forum designed to discuss crickets

What else would you expect

The cricket discussion I don't mind at all.

One match defining 50 in SL (Pakistan one wasn't) and a century in a high scoring draw doesn't seem anything to rave about after 23 test matches. When a 50 is your highlight, it says a lot. Winning both by an innings/10 wickets doesn't sound like a tough contest either. The tougher conditions at the moment has him doing it tough. I'm seeing the normal ups and downs rather than improvement. He's averaging 19 at home and 78 away with the ball, since his first series.

Broad has Warner's number unfortunately. I'd move Marnus up, he's basically opening most of the time anyway.

Better just leave it at that.

 

[Socerer 01]

True that. Facts don't care about anyone's feelings. But selective use of them can be misleading.

Adam Voges really is the best since Bradman. Prove me wrong.

???? there is nothing selective about what i said though? if you think Green is bad or mediocre then Stokes has done worse in the same time period, would you also drop him or not pick him? if you're so fixated on Green being mid then who do u think should come in for him once Marsh inevitably gets injured or loses form???

 

[SteveNZ]

Is Cummins' captaincy that bad? This is the first series I've seen him and I'd say he's been OK. He gets a lot of blame when a tactic doesn't work, but when it does work everyone just talks about England's batsmen being stupid.

I thought Ponting and Paine were terrible captains.

It's worth mentioning that I doubt these tactics are solely attributable to Pat Cummins. There would be a lot of strategy meetings involving Andrew McDonald and senior players as to how they go about things. And I think there are more than enough voices in that side, and Pat Cummins seems democratic enough to listen to them.

 

[GoodAreasShane]

The whole argument that Green is a complete waste of a spot and being picked exclusivey on potential is just crazy imo.

Has he absolutely dominated? No. But he has without a doubt played a couple of really valuable innings here and there, certainly far in excess of what Marsh had done at a similar stage of his Test career. His bowling too is far better when he actually bowls the right length, this directive to use him to bowl almost exclusively short is absolutely a waste of his ability.

That being said it might not be the worst thing for him to sit out the remainder of this series, stick with Marsh while he's running hot but with the knowledge that he probably won't hold that position post Ashes

 

[Spofforth]

???? there is nothing selective about what i said though? if you think Green is bad or mediocre then Stokes has done worse in the same time period, would you also drop him or not pick him? if you're so fixated on Green being mid then who do u think should come in for him once Marsh inevitably gets injured or loses form???

Yea, sure.

The fact Stokes has proven to be a freakish match winner (especially with the bat, but can be exceptional with the ball) with 13 centuries and 29 fifties through 95 matches over a decade...and who can seem unstoppable when on a roll and snatch victory or turn a series on it's head from anywhere, nothing to do with it. 36.5 with bat...32 with the ball through 95 matches over a decade just something the poor poms will have to put up with, what are they thinking...?

A dip in form from a proven match winner might be a little different to a bloke who's main claim to fame so far seems to be a couple of "match defining" fifties (a claim which seems dubious in itself). Or not... as you wish.

Not sure I would keep Marsh. Still carry the scars from all the hopium. I doubt it matters anyway, both Warner and Green are protected species.

Would put the word around though that there could soon be vacancy for an opener and a no. 6 in the batting line up (will definately be for Warner soon) and let Green know it's time he started to do something. I doubt he'll make a no 6 batting allrounder anyway. Might be better up the order one day (Watto?).

 

[Spofforth]

The whole argument that Green is a complete waste of a spot and being picked exclusivey on potential is just crazy imo.

I'm not saying that. I'm saying that so far, based on results, he is way overrated and perceived "potential" is obviously influencing selectors and allowing what is really a mediocre return so far, to fly under the radar.