• 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.

Haddin for Gilchrist in ODI

Richard

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
gettingbetter said:
The arguments for Hussey becoming an opener are valid, but practicality is far more ideal than theory. In short, Hussey, as good as his record is will become an incumbent in his position at 6 (or wherever he is). No one really likes change and minimising it by only finding an opener rather than finding both opener and middle-order batsmen is ideal.
Click to expand...
Well even if it's only a stopgap measure (I mean, Jaques' OD credentials are hardly weak UIMM) it's perfectly valid. And TBH, if it works, there'd be no good reason not to keep it. I see many worse scenarios right now than having Hussey opening - two of those being carrying on with Gilchrist and Hayden past their useful cricketing lives.
Watson: people talking about hypotheticals about him is like English fans talkinga bout Jones and Treco playing again. (Don't want to strike a nerve with you Rich, but I like the thought of probabilities rather than possibilities - does that even make sense?)
Click to expand...
Nah, Watson's nowhere near as close to a hopeless case as either Trescothick or Jones are\were. None of his injuries of late have been particularly long-term ones, nor ones as unspecific and impossible to know the outcome of as Trescothick's illness.

His last 2 innings opening the batting were, IIRR, 57* and 68, having made a 79 in his first knock there. Strong case for having another shot there IMO, and if it doesn't work you put him back down the order (where he recently struck a barnstorming 65*) and give Jaques or whoever a ODI go.
Going back to the Gilchrist/Hayden fairytale scenario, Hayden has not had the most 'affluent' career would you say. He's been made the fall man by the selectors and has had tough competiton to contend with, so him staying on is reasonable. Gilchrist on the other hand has 'been there done that' and has Haddin pushing him too.
Click to expand...
He hasn't had the career, no, but his last few matches up to the WC final read thus:
181* (166), 101 (68), 158 (143), 41, 41, 103, 41, 38.

Could one really wish for a better way to finish what has mostly been a wholly unconvincing ODI career? I don't think so. All I can see happening from now on is things getting worse again.
 
Richard

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
gettingbetter said:
Point taken on SRT, but Gilly?

Also, I need to stuff my face for the new day Rich, but to sum it up.

Going out on a high is overrated unless you work for some sports memorabilia company wanting to release 'Gilly 149' signed by Gilly himself with a limited edition of 149, a good accessory for the rich sports fan for his pool room.

You don't work for one of these firms do you?
Click to expand...
Haha, nah.

I don't get, though, why it's not a wonderful thing to go out on a high. As I said - it's certainly not essential, but if you've got a perfect chance to do so it just makes no sense, to me, not to do so.
 
NUFAN

NUFAN

Y no Afghanistan flag
James90 said:
I can't see Haddin hitting 150 in a WC final but it's not the worst idea I've heard. Might need a look at after the VB Series.

I've been expecting Gilchrist to give the shorter form away to prolong his test career so perhaps the selectors are just making this transition easier.
Click to expand...
I can't see Gilchrist hitting 150 either. :)

I would like Gilly to retire from ODI Cricket for sure, Haddin has shown he goes alright in ODI.

I would also like to see Hayden and Hogg retire and quite possibly Shane Watson.

Wait.. I mean it for Watson, he should retire from ODI Cricket and concentrate on Test Cricket as it's easily better suited to the long form of the game. It's just annoying see him get injured often in meaningless ODI or Twenty20 matches..

I know he still has a role to play in the shorter game, but perhaps retiring or not playing for a couple of years in the ODI team will help his career, long term.
 
pasag

pasag

RTDAS
Richard said:
Eh?!?!?!

What's wrong with putting balls-faced in brackets?! I only did it to emphasise the gravity of the innings.
Click to expand...
Haha apologies, thought it was first chance average rearing its head again as Hayden got dropped on 166 (although of a no-ball).
 
umop 3p!sdn

umop 3p!sdn

School Boy/Girl Captain
pasag said:
I like the way they are doing it now, playing Haddin in the team as a batsman for a while to make the transition seamless. Pretty good move imo.
Click to expand...
Agreed, I guess it's similar to AB and South Africa when boucher goes he will be able to slip in. Still they are 2 different players so it'll be interesting to see.
 
Richard

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
pasag said:
Haha apologies, thought it was first chance average rearing its head again as Hayden got dropped on 166 (although of a no-ball).
Click to expand...
Did he? Don't remember that. It's not like there's any great difference between 166 and 181* though really.

But FYI first-chance averages are not d***!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! :@
 
Richard

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
Haha, just to think that di Venuto was the first given a shot at the opening berth... shame he was always a better FC than OD player TBH.
 
Perm

Perm

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Really CBF replying to Richard's detailed analysis, but I will later. All I will say at the moment is, why drop a guy if he is winning you games? Hayden is clearing doing that for Australia.
 
Mister Wright

Mister Wright

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Richard said:
I've just re-examined this thing properly... I really don't see any sense in it for anyone TBH. What better way would there have been for Gilchrist to end his career than with 149 in a World Cup final? You can't delay the time for change forever, the best bet IMO is to get Haddin in there and if (in the unlikely event that TBH) he fails you've got maximum time between now and the next Cup to look at someone else. But for Hussey's injury he'd not be playing currently.

Hayden too - don't see any point in him playing ODIs now. He's had a phenominal few games starting with that 181* one, proved to everyone that he actually can play ODIs at the age of 35. Why did he need to go on any more?

Hogg I still want to see playing as I still don't believe him to be a top-class ODI spinner and a few more games might, maybe, show that (yes, I've been thinking that since 2002\03). I don't imagine he'll be around in WC2011, but there certainly don't appear to be any spinners abounding.

Ponting, Hussey, Symonds, Lee and Bracken, while into their 30s now, are probably young enough to be still, just about (in all cases bar Bracken - he's an "easily") good enough in 2011.

It's really, really annoying Watson's missed this current series as the jury's still out on him; no real good can come of Hopes playing now really, if Watson had been fit it'd have been a case-closed scenario on Hopes' ODI credentials.

Annoying that Tait's injured too, even though the jury's still out on both him and his replacement Johnson. Could have done to see both of them in this current series.
Click to expand...
I can see Hayden playing at the next WC. Probably unlikely, but knowing Hayden he'll want to play for as long as possible.

I used to think Hogg was nothing, but he has proved everyone wrong in ODIs. Tests are another matter, but he has been up to the task in ODI and has been very good for Australia.
 
Matt79

Matt79

Hall of Fame Member
Yeah, the flip side is this current team are likely to continue to rewrite the rules in terms of age and I'd not be surprised to see Hayden, Ponting and maybe even Gilly play til they're 39/40. Ponting aside, they all had quite late starts to their career, and they're still fitter and stronger than almost all their competition as it is.
 
Prince EWS

Prince EWS

Global Moderator
Richard said:
Haha, nah.

I don't get, though, why it's not a wonderful thing to go out on a high. As I said - it's certainly not essential, but if you've got a perfect chance to do so it just makes no sense, to me, not to do so.
Click to expand...
He obviously wants to keep playing. Continuing to play ODIs for his country obviously means more to him than his last game being a good one.
 
pup11

pup11

International Coach
Yeah Gilly is in that stage of his career where he can think like that, anyways even at this stage of his career he is miles ahead of any Gilchrist- wannabe in world cricket.
As i said he is legend and should be treated like one, he played the game in his own very unique style, and he has every right to decide when is right time for him to go, he will always put Australian cricket ahead of himself and when he feels the team is suffering because of him he will decide that its time for him to go.
 
Richard

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
Perm said:
Really CBF replying to Richard's detailed analysis, but I will later. All I will say at the moment is, why drop a guy if he is winning you games? Hayden is clearing doing that for Australia.
Click to expand...
I wasn't suggesting anyone be dropped - pensioned-off maybe - but rather that someone should retire. Three people in fact, only one of whom did.
 
Perm

Perm

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Richard said:
I wasn't suggesting anyone be dropped - pensioned-off maybe - but rather that someone should retire. Three people in fact, only one of whom did.
Click to expand...
But why? If a player is still performing at top level cricket, enjoying himself, and doing a good job for his country then it doesn't make sense to retire.
 
Richard

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
Prince EWS said:
He obviously wants to keep playing. Continuing to play ODIs for his country obviously means more to him than his last game being a good one.
Click to expand...
I'm sure it does, but as I say, I think he's probably going to do more harm than good by continuing to play now. Unless Gilchrist feels very confident of playing in WC2011, IMO it'd be best for Australia to get Haddin in now, and then IF he doesn't go as well as expected then they can look at someone else in as much time as possible.

Bearing in mind this and the chance to finish with a WC final 149, I think that would've been the perfect time to call it a day from ODIs. I can understand Ganguly, Dravid and Tendulkar not retiring after the Cup because of the way it went.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Top