Australia name Chappell-Hadlee Trophy squad

[bryce]

somehow i don't see them playing a specialist batsmman at number eight.......

 

[Mr Casson]

And that would make sense to me - no point using him if the conditions don't help.

Yeah you're right, but Ponting uses Lehmann all the time. Given recent performances, especially in ODIs, Clarke is every bit as good as Lehmann.

 

[marc71178]

Take a look at their respective career records in all List A games though, and consider how effective Lehmann has been for Yorkshire.

That's why he's used ahead of Clarke (who to be honest has a much more ordinary record)

 

[Richard]

Yeah you're right, but Ponting uses Lehmann all the time. Given recent performances, especially in ODIs, Clarke is every bit as good as Lehmann.

There's a surprise.
Clarke is infitesimally superior to Lehmann in every recent regard in your eyes.
Might I remind you of the first-innings at Adelaide: Lehmann 81, Clarke 7. Lehmann 2-55, Clarke DNB.

 

[tooextracool]

I dispute Hogg playing in the strongest side. Surely 10 overs of spin can be covered by Symonds, Lehmann & Clarke. Symonds alone is better spinner than Hogg.

err no, an economy rate of 4.87 as opposed to an ER of 4.36 is not comparable. hogg seems to be the best spinning option australia have got so i would consider playing him on any slow wicket.

 

[tooextracool]

WC2003 was not a farcical tournament, how many times will you keep saying things like that?

err kenya reached the semis, 2 games were completely decided by the toss, zimbabwe reached the super six stage, what more do you want?

 

[tooextracool]

Yeah you're right, but Ponting uses Lehmann all the time. Given recent performances, especially in ODIs, Clarke is every bit as good as Lehmann.

as his brilliant average of 27 in ODIs this year(outside of zim) suggests.....

 

[age_master]

lack of abit of form? going after it late in the innings?

 

[age_master]

err kenya reached the semis, 2 games were completely decided by the toss, zimbabwe reached the super six stage, what more do you want?

the best 2 teams made the final and the best team won....

 

[age_master]

Take a look at their respective career records in all List A games though, and consider how effective Lehmann has been for Yorkshire.

That's why he's used ahead of Clarke (who to be honest has a much more ordinary record)

that and clarke wouldn't want to ruin his career test bowling figures

 

[age_master]

Take a look at their respective career records in all List A games though, and consider how effective Lehmann has been for Yorkshire.

Lehmann is a more defensive bowler, bowls at a slower pace, useful for restriction particularly. Clarke is more attacking and can be more than a handful in suitable conditions.

 

[Mr Casson]

There's a surprise.
Clarke is infitesimally superior to Lehmann in every recent regard in your eyes.
Might I remind you of the first-innings at Adelaide: Lehmann 81, Clarke 7. Lehmann 2-55, Clarke DNB.

Might I remind you of India? Compare the two there. What a poor argument, using Adelaide as the sole basis for comparison.

 

[Pinkline Jones]

I simply can't comprehend this thread - to my knowledge Ray Hadley has never played for Australia - he's gonna pull someone's f*in ears when he hears about this!

 

[Mister Wright]

err no, an economy rate of 4.87 as opposed to an ER of 4.36 is not comparable. hogg seems to be the best spinning option australia have got so i would consider playing him on any slow wicket.

Well roll me in flour and call me a rissole! - a whole 0.5 more runs an over, whoopedy doo dah!. An economy rate of 4.36 is nothing to rave about, I would rather have another bowler or batsman play, as I have said before both Symonds & Lehmann can fill in the 10 overs. I wouldn't consider playing him on any wicket.

 

[Slow Love™]

Seems to me that Katich's selection is something of a "we haven't forgotten about you mate", from the selectors, as much as anything else.

 

[Mister Wright]

Seems to me that Katich's selection is something of a "we haven't forgotten about you mate", from the selectors, as much as anything else.

That's the only reason they have selected 14 I think. N.S.W. won't be happy.

 

[shaka]

Harvey is not a surprise omission from the team, because he is still injured. He will be a loss to the team.

 

[Mister Wright]

Harvey is not a surprise omission from the team, because he is still injured. He will be a loss to the team.

Firstly, Harvey is back playing now. Secondly, he will not be a loss to the team.

 

[Camel56]

I simply can't comprehend this thread - to my knowledge Ray Hadley has never played for Australia - he's gonna pull someone's f*in ears when he hears about this!

Yes pinky he certainly will be. At the very least he will want to find the spastic who came up with the idea.

 

[marc71178]

Lehmann is a more defensive bowler, bowls at a slower pace, useful for restriction particularly. Clarke is more attacking and can be more than a handful in suitable conditions.

In an ODI you don't need your marmite to attack.