***Official*** West Indies tour of Australia, Jan–Feb 2024

[TheJediBrah]

Something just doesn't feel right with how he handles Test cricket. He does have an excellent technique (if a bit front-foot reliant), but too often just seems to get out. He doesn't feel anywhere near as comfortable at Test level as he does at Shield level.

With that and Marsh's run of form and Head's inconsistent brilliance at Test level you have to wonder whether all sides should just go **** it and play full Bazball. Because whatever Australia's doing with their batting isn't working.

He's an incredibly nervous guy. Just mentally not up to it at the moment IMO

 

[Nintendo]

Something just doesn't feel right with how he handles Test cricket. He does have an excellent technique (if a bit front-foot reliant), but too often just seems to get out. He doesn't feel anywhere near as comfortable at Test level as he does at Shield level.

With that and Marsh's run of form and Head's inconsistent brilliance at Test level you have to wonder whether all sides should just go **** it and play full Bazball. Because whatever Australia's doing with their batting isn't working.

Yeah it does feel like it may be a bit mental, honestly. His recent run of bad form since the ashes has more been a result of finding ways to get out rather than any obvious technical fault's (the moeen dismissal in the 1st ashes test is the only technical issue I can think of). He just keeps losing concentration and chopping on, or mishitting bad balls, or whatever the hell the jadeja dismissal in the world test championship was.

 

[morgieb]

This is a really dumb comment lol

I wouldn't say luck is the right word but there has been a lot of poor performances masked by some brilliant ones. Head's innings at Adelaide, Marsh's at Melbourne, Hazlewood's triple wicket maiden at Sydney....

Not something we can get away with against the best, me thinks.

 

[PlayerComparisons]

Border Gavaskar series will be fun

 

[TheJediBrah]

I wouldn't say luck is the right word but there has been a lot of poor performances masked by some brilliant ones. Head's innings at Adelaide, Marsh's at Melbourne, Hazlewood's triple wicket maiden at Sydney....

Not something we can get away with against the best, me thinks.

That's not what luck is at all though lol. It's like saying they were really unlucky because they got in trouble in the first place

 

[TheJediBrah]

I hated Langer as coach at the time but now I think they need a bit of discipline. Being supportive is great but there needs to be a balance and I'm not convinced McDonald, Bailey and co. are able to do it. I imagine Green is going to go back today after this shot and be coddled and told to back his game etc

 

[Spark]

I hated Langer as coach at the time but now I think they need a bit of discipline. Being supportive is great but there needs to be a balance and I'm not convinced McDonald, Bailey and co. are able to do it. I imagine Green is going to go back today after this shot and be coddled and told to back his game etc

Honestly that shot was very very bad but that probably is the right thing to do (if they don't drop him, that is). He's so tentative early on and needs, dare I say it, a Bazball-style mental intervention.

 

[ashley bach]

C O D D L E D
O
D
D
L
E
D

 

[Gob]

Let's be real it's still only been literally 2 innings

Green looks real bad though. Reckon that was the wrong call

Still shuffling that far across won't work against the new ball. He has been missing straight balls since the world cup so probably some one should talk to him. He basically stopped shuffling for a period last year before picking it up again so maybe that's what he should go back to

As for Green, we haven't seen any evidence up to now that he is a top order player in test cricket so they put him in at 4 under the assumption that he is going to turn in to a completely different player which is not good thinking. Plenty of players have excelled in at first class cricket without transferring that on to test cricket so the idea of bringing Green at 4 because that's where he had all the success in FC cricket at the cost of disrupting a perfectly fine middle order is poor selection

 

[TheJediBrah]

He needs a smack up the back of the head and told he has one last chance, don't **** it up. Sink or swim

 

[Starfighter]

lol what a great idea to move a 34 year old to open and bring in a bloke who hasn't really cracked it at test level to bat at the important number 4 position.

It would certainly help if we weren't two down in the first two overs but I don't think that really justifies any of what we've seen so far

I really consider that a moot point as I don't see either of Bancroft or Renshaw doing better opening than Smith though, as they're just not very good.

And that's a big concern. I still think my Head opening and trying to bazball, and Smith 5 idea might have some merit.

Let's be real it's still only been literally 2 innings

Green looks real bad though. Reckon that was the wrong call

Four is the position Green is most suited to batting in style wise and is where he's scored his runs domestically. I think as @morgieb said he's doing something different (certainly his shot selection is to great), and you might right he's too nervous.

 

[TheJediBrah]

Still shuffling that far across won't work against the new ball. He has been missing straight balls since the world cup so probably some one should talk to him. He basically stopped shuffling for a period last year before picking it up again so maybe that's what he should go back to

As for Green, we haven't seen any evidence up to now that he is a top order player in test cricket so they put him in at 4 under the assumption that he is going to turn in to a completely different player which is not good thinking. Plenty of players have excelled in at first class cricket without transferring that on to test cricket so the idea of bringing Green at 4 because that's where he had all the success in FC cricket at the cost of disrupting a perfectly fine middle order is poor selection

Don't agree re. Smith and the new ball but agree 100% about Green. Even on this forum there were people saying that he was struggling at 6 because it's "not his position" and he would do better at 4 which I thought was crazy at the time and even moreso now. If you can bat in Test, you can bat at 6. It's not a drastically different game than at 4

 

[Nintendo]

Still shuffling that far across won't work against the new ball. He has been missing straight balls since the world cup so probably some one should talk to him. He basically stopped shuffling for a period last year before picking it up again so maybe that's what he should go back to

As for Green, we haven't seen any evidence up to now that he is a top order player in test cricket so they put him in at 4 under the assumption that he is going to turn in to a completely different player which is not good thinking. Plenty of players have excelled in at first class cricket without transferring that on to test cricket so the idea of bringing Green at 4 because that's where he had all the success in FC cricket at the cost of disrupting a perfectly fine middle order is poor selection

Huh? Green's natural game is far more suited to batting 4 than 6/7. We've barely seen any evidence he's suited to batting 6 either, honestly. Most of his best knocks has come with him walking in earlier than you'de expect a typical #6 to, and his best results are at #4 in FC. We made an assumption that he could turn into a completely different player when we tried turning him into a #6.

 

[Starfighter]

I hated Langer as coach at the time but now I think they need a bit of discipline. Being supportive is great but there needs to be a balance and I'm not convinced McDonald, Bailey and co. are able to do it. I imagine Green is going to go back today after this shot and be coddled and told to back his game etc

I was in favour of Kirsten as an option because I've heard good things about him and think he might be better on the mental toughness and discipline without being a lunatic like Langer (and out batting was very brittle under Langer as well).

Also it should not be forgotten with respect to this year in particular that the pitches have had a lot more in them for the bowlers.

 

[Nintendo]

Don't agree re. Smith and the new ball but agree 100% about Green. Even on this forum there were people saying that he was struggling at 6 because it's "not his position" and he would do better at 4 which I thought was crazy at the time and even moreso now. If you can bat in Test, you can bat at 6. It's not a drastically different game than at 4

I can't remember the numbers exactly, but a wicket falls roughly every ~10 overs in test cricket. There's a huge difference between batting 4 and 6, 20 overs worth of difference on average.

 

[Gob]

I really consider that a moot point as I don't see either of Bancroft or Renshaw doing better opening than Smith though, as they're just not very good.

And that's a big concern. I still think my Head opening and trying to bazball, and Smith 5 idea might have some merit.


Four is the position Green is most suited to batting in style wise and is where he's scored his runs domestically. I think as @morgieb said he's doing something different (certainly his shot selection is to great), and you might right he's too nervous.

Yeah but Green is unlikely to match Smith at 4 who was still averaging close to 50 at that position in the last 2 years. I think he will eventually figure something out and yes will probably do better than Bancroft etc but his net input would be less for the team

 

[danzydab]

dont think the aus test team has looked as vulnerable as it looks now

 

[Starfighter]

Don't agree re. Smith and the new ball but agree 100% about Green. Even on this forum there were people saying that he was struggling at 6 because it's "not his position" and he would do better at 4 which I thought was crazy at the time and even moreso now. If you can bat in Test, you can bat at 6. It's not a drastically different game than at 4

You're wrong on this one because there is a very clear expectation currently in Australia that a No. 6 has to bosh, and that clearly affected his game because it's not the way he scores his runs in red ball and he looked flustered trying to do - even when he did make some scores it looked rather unnatural. Scoring like Imran Khan (who struck at 48 from No. 7 or 6) simply isn't in the Australian cricket mentality, and striking at 48-50 and striking at 60 or more is a different game. If there wasn't that expectation, then you'd be right.

 

[TheJediBrah]

I can't remember the numbers exactly, but a wicket falls roughly every ~10 overs in test cricket. There's a huge difference between batting 4 and 6, 20 overs worth of difference on average.

Batting is batting. If you can't bat 6 you're not going to be able to bat anywhere else.

Ponting batted 6 for years before moving up. Martyn dominated at 6 before going up to 4 as well.

"He's struggling at 6, let's move him up to 4" is just dumb and was never going to work

 

[Starfighter]

Batting is batting. If you can't bat 6 you're not going to be able to bat anywhere else.

Ponting batted 6 for years before moving up. Martyn dominated at 6 before going up to 4 as well.

"He's struggling at 6, let's move him up to 4" is just dumb and was never going to work

Neither of them had pressure put on them to act like a Bothemesque bashing allrounder.