Australia name Chappell-Hadlee Trophy squad

[tooextracool]

Thank you, finally some sanity.

oh yes of course, the brilliant idea of someone with avg 34 and ER of 4.8 being better than someone with avg 31 and E.R 4.36, is perfectly sane.

 

[mavric41]

Depends - if the crowd like ugly swiping across the line and swinging to the boundaries, then yes - if, on the other hand, the attractiveness of the strokeplay comes higher on their priority list than the scoring-rate, then no.

It is a ODI - not a test match.

 

[Slow Love™]

actually i havent ignored anything such, you've ignored the original post completely. the quote to which i initially responded was "Symonds alone is better spinner than Hogg"
please show me where there is evidence to that?
"and regardless my reply was this,hogg seems to be the best spinning option australia have got so i would consider playing him on any slow wicket."

Fair enough, Mister Wright DID say that - still, the sentence before that was "Surely 10 overs of spin can be covered by Symonds, Lehmann & Clarke."

Lehmann and Symonds sharing the spin duties was again brought up in the post you immediately responded to last, so it seemed like you ignored it when you ranted on about Symonds.

what symonds has to offer is an average at 34 @4.8 sometin. extremely poor IMO, i couldnt even back him to bowl 10 overs consistently. of course if the pitch is not a slow one i would not play hogg as i mentioned earlier and would stick with a pace bowler.

While I agree that on spin alone, Hogg is a marginally better option, I think the point being made here is that Symonds batting already justifies his selection, and his sharing of the spin duties is a bonus, adding value to his batting skills. Which, ultimately, you probably agree with anyway, seeing as you can only see a place for Hogg on a slow turner (of which, we're not likely to see many of in Australian one-day tournaments). I would say that a guy that needs such specialist conditions to be selected (by your own evaluation) probably doesn't belong in Australia's "strongest side". Certainly in the context of the VB series, anyway.

 

[bryce]

who says that i look at them solely? i look at the ER as the primary consideration for any bowler. of course the fact that both symonds and clarke have worser averages than hogg in ODIs prove a lot doesnt it?

actually clarke(aswell as lehmann) have better bowling averages than hogg.

what symonds has to offer is an average at 34 @4.8 sometin. extremely poor IMO, i couldnt even back him to bowl 10 overs consistently.

what symonds has to offer is a brutal batsman aswell as a part-time spinner to share 10 overs with lehmann and clarke(who both have bowling averages under 30), symonds role with the ball is not to bowl 10 overs consistently but mainly to get through 10 quick overs shared with the two left-arm spinners.

 

[Crazy Sam]

Symonds is a better batsman, fielder and bowler than Hogg will ever be.

 

[age_master]

actually clarke(aswell as lehmann) have better bowling averages than hogg.

smart work there

 

[mavric41]

Symonds is a better batsman, fielder and bowler than Hogg will ever be.

And better looking

 

[Mister Wright]

oh yes of course, the brilliant idea of someone with avg 34 and ER of 4.8 being better than someone with avg 31 and E.R 4.36, is perfectly sane.

Well considering Symonds batting is much better than Hogg's, I think Symonds offers more, couple that with Lehmann sharing the overs with Symonds. It is still my opinion that Symonds alone is a better spinner, stats don't always tell the full story.

 

[Richard]

Symonds is a better batsman, fielder and bowler than Hogg will ever be.

I don't think many would dispute the first bit (though Hogg is more than good enough IMO to hold a place in a domestic side with the bat), you'd have to be out of your mind to dispute the second (though Hogg isn't a bad fielder) and I don't agree on the last (though Symonds the seamer is not too far behind Hogg).

 

[Richard]

It is a ODI - not a test match.

So?
Do ODIs have to be a slogfest?

 

[tooextracool]

actually clarke(aswell as lehmann) have better bowling averages than hogg..

err clarke has an average of 33 which is 2 runs more than what hogg averages. with regards to lehmann, i think its fairly obvious to anyone whos watched him bowl that his figures are flattered particularly by his performances against minnows-b'desh,holland,zimbabwe and kenya.

what symonds has to offer is a brutal batsman aswell as a part-time spinner to share 10 overs with lehmann and clarke(who both have bowling averages under 30), symonds role with the ball is not to bowl 10 overs consistently but mainly to get through 10 quick overs shared with the two left-arm spinners.

i dont know where you get your averags from, but clarke does not average under 30. lehmann as ive said earlier would average a lot more than 30 if it werent for those performances against non-test class opponents. and as i said earlier, if the pitch is not a slow one, then yes i wouldnt go for hogg, but as we saw in the game against england neither of the 3(well at least symonds and lehmann) are capable of attacking with the ball.

 

[tooextracool]

Well considering Symonds batting is much better than Hogg's, I think Symonds offers more, couple that with Lehmann sharing the overs with Symonds. It is still my opinion that Symonds alone is a better spinner, stats don't always tell the full story.

yes i know who offers more and what not. i dont rate hogg that highly, but its just insulting to put someone like symonds who is particularly useless ahead of him as a bowler.

 

[tooextracool]

Fair enough, Mister Wright DID say that - still, the sentence before that was "Surely 10 overs of spin can be covered by Symonds, Lehmann & Clarke."

Lehmann and Symonds sharing the spin duties was again brought up in the post you immediately responded to last, so it seemed like you ignored it when you ranted on about Symonds..

yes i ignored it because it wasnt the point i was arguing against ITFP. i was arguing against the point that symonds is a better bowler than hogg which is certainly not true.
and i do know that they can cover 10 overs, but can they pick up wickets on slow turners? if so then why were they distinctly rubbish against england?

While I agree that on spin alone, Hogg is a marginally better option, I think the point being made here is that Symonds batting already justifies his selection, and his sharing of the spin duties is a bonus, adding value to his batting skills. Which, ultimately, you probably agree with anyway, seeing as you can only see a place for Hogg on a slow turner (of which, we're not likely to see many of in Australian one-day tournaments). I would say that a guy that needs such specialist conditions to be selected (by your own evaluation) probably doesn't belong in Australia's "strongest side". Certainly in the context of the VB series, anyway.

you seem to make it out as though i have threatened to exclude one of symonds,clarke or lehmann from the side for hogg. there is also a 4th bowler who bowls 10 overs. ATM the spot is being contested between watson and b.lee neither off whom have been particularly brilliant, certainly on slow turners hogg would be a better option than tht both of them.
as far as players being picked in specialist conditions is concerned, im sure the recent game against england showed precisely that didn it? that australia dont need a specialist spinner to bowl on slow conditions. and of course the fact that both kumble and harbhajan dont play in the same side in ODIs or tests unless they are on turners proves that they are both useless i would presume?

 

[Slow Love™]

yes i ignored it because it wasnt the point i was arguing against ITFP. i was arguing against the point that symonds is a better bowler than hogg which is certainly not true.

Fine, but you began your argument with me by saying "actually I haven't ignored anything such." when I said you had. Now you're confirming you did. Ok then, maybe we can ditch the pointless to-and-fro on this.

as far as players being picked in specialist conditions is concerned, im sure the recent game against england showed precisely that didn it? that australia dont need a specialist spinner to bowl on slow conditions. and of course the fact that both kumble and harbhajan dont play in the same side in ODIs or tests unless they are on turners proves that they are both useless i would presume?

Sheesh, you build some straw men. I can't see how what I said implied that. What I said was that seeing as Hogg required such specialist conditions to be considered for selection at all, it makes little sense to include him iin Australia's best side, particularly where the VB series is concerned. I find it extremely unlikely you're going to FIND a pitch so suitable to his needs in this competition.

As to this whole "Lehmann and Symonds were useless against England so it's obvious they can't bowl on slow turners" thing - man, you're making far too much out of just one game. They bowled poorly, and the team was comprehensively outplayed. Stop clinging to this one match to prove your assessment of their slow-turner capabilities. Particularly when it's so irrelevant to this series.

 

[Slow Love™]

Oh, I should have said Chappell-Hadlee Trophy series, rather than the VB series. But obviously I mean both, anyhow.

 

[tooextracool]

Fine, but you began your argument with me by saying "actually I haven't ignored anything such." when I said you had. Now you're confirming you did. Ok then, maybe we can ditch the pointless to-and-fro on this..

ok, so i did ignore it, does it make a difference? i didnt make any reference to it in any one of my posts but i did read it. so you can call it whatever you want but it doesnt affect my point.

Sheesh, you build some straw men. I can't see how what I said implied that. What I said was that seeing as Hogg required such specialist conditions to be considered for selection at all, it makes little sense to include him iin Australia's best side, particularly where the VB series is concerned. I find it extremely unlikely you're going to FIND a pitch so suitable to his needs in this competition...

by saying things like players who only play in specialist conditions dont deserve to be in the aussies strongest side, i think you've pretty much implied that. why shouldnt he be picked in their side just because he can only play in specialist conditions? would you rather that they dont pick any spinner in specialist conditions and then get hammered, especially when players like b.lee keep getting selected for unknown reasons.

As to this whole "Lehmann and Symonds were useless against England so it's obvious they can't bowl on slow turners" thing - man, you're making far too much out of just one game. They bowled poorly, and the team was comprehensively outplayed. Stop clinging to this one match to prove your assessment of their slow-turner capabilities. Particularly when it's so irrelevant to this series.

its certainly not irrelevant to this series, how do you know that there wont be a slow wicket in any of these games? do you have inside info on them?
as far symonds and lehmann are concerned, if you think that their performances so far in their career have suggested that they are capable of being attacking bowlers on turners, then you certainly havent been following them closely enough. of course if ponting would be smart enough to bowl clarke more often in ODIs we might just get to see if he can.

 

[bryce]

err clarke has an average of 33 which is 2 runs more than what hogg averages. with regards to lehmann, i think its fairly obvious to anyone whos watched him bowl that his figures are flattered particularly by his performances against minnows-b'desh,holland,zimbabwe and kenya.



i dont know where you get your averags from, but clarke does not average under 30. lehmann as ive said earlier would average a lot more than 30 if it werent for those performances against non-test class opponents. and as i said earlier, if the pitch is not a slow one, then yes i wouldnt go for hogg, but as we saw in the game against england neither of the 3(well at least symonds and lehmann) are capable of attacking with the ball.

i don't know where you get your averages from but i hope you stop using it!

Michael Clarke - Cricinfo Player Profile

 

[tooextracool]

i don't know where you get your averages from but i hope you stop using it!

Michael Clarke - Cricinfo Player Profile

i get my averages from howstat, regardless it is irrelevant as to which average is right, because as i said earlier ER is what matters most in ODIs and hogg's ER is significantly better than clarkes.

 

[Mr Casson]

i get my averages from howstat, regardless it is irrelevant as to which average is right, because as i said earlier ER is what matters most in ODIs and hogg's ER is significantly better than clarkes.

Cricinfo's would be right.

 

[Mr Casson]

So?
Do ODIs have to be a slogfest?

It helps you win.