*Official* Australia A in England 2019

[Test_Fan_Only]

Labuschagne has done pretty much everything asked of him for Glamorgan. I still fundamentally believe Head and Patterson are better batsman but having him in the squad wouldn't be a bad call at all.

Just desperately hope Will Pucovski doesn't play, the kid will wear the baggy green one day but everyone should just be more patient. All this media hype around him Puc not doing any good at all, the next big thing tag historically more a curse than a blessing

Pucovski is a massive talent, but he is miles from test cricket at the moment. While his best innings have been brilliant he also has a lot of failures in between. He needs to get more consistency in his batting.

Having said that it might be a good idea for Australian team to keep him around the Ashes squad for the first test or two to give him some experience of the environment seeing he is in England anyway.

 

[NUFAN]

As long as he doesnt have to sit beside and listen to Langer the whole time, im okay with him staying along for the experience.

 

[Prince EWS]

I'm no Labuschagne fan, but on what basis can you drop him? He's the incumbent and he's made a ton of runs this English summer.

Someone has to get dropped for Smith. I don't think we'd be talking about dropping him for someone else "just because", but someone's gotta and the other incumbents are better players.

 

[Test_Fan_Only]

Very good to see the Australia A team will now be at full strength for play Engaand A. Should see Wade and Handscomb in the side.

 

[NUFAN]

You watch Handscomb and wonder if he really is even Aus A standard in English conditions. Definitely stressing these conditions as on a spinning wicket he is clearly good enough.

Fox Sports named a First Test team with Marnus at 3 and Wade at 6. Centuries from Burns and Patterson last Test was not enough.

 

[andruid]

Could never be as underwhelming as your posts and your face tbh

That might not be a bad thing.


Anyway is Tim bringing the pain?

 

[TheJediBrah]

You watch Handscomb and wonder if he really is even Aus A standard in English conditions. Definitely stressing these conditions as on a spinning wicket he is clearly good enough.

Even I'm starting to question it now. At this stage I'm thinking that, at best, Handscomb should be a horses-for-courses Asia/slow turning wicket specialist. But that will never happen because horses-for-courses for batsmen never actually happens.

I still think he's great value in the ODI middle order, as long as he isn't coming in inside the first 10 overs.

 

[GoodAreasShane]

Even I'm starting to question it now. At this stage I'm thinking that, at best, Handscomb should be a horses-for-courses Asia/slow turning wicket specialist. But that will never happen because horses-for-courses for batsmen never actually happens.

I still think he's great value in the ODI middle order, as long as he isn't coming in inside the first 10 overs.

Knew you would come to your senses eventually.

Seriously though, I like the horses for courses call, as critical as I have been of Handscomb he is still one of the better players of spin bowling in the country.

 

[stephen]

Nah Handscomb can never be seen in an Australia jersey again.

 

[stephen]

I'd rather Maxwell in tests and the next world cup than Handscomb to play.

Other than his critical failure last night, his technique is so ugly that I'm actively rooting for him to get out when he bats.

 

[trundler]

If having an ugly technique was held against Australian players your 2 greatest bats (coincidentally the 2 most socially inept) would never have played. Handscomb has major flaws though. Can't have a test batsman who can't handle swing and the shorter stuff.

 

[Prince EWS]

You watch Handscomb and wonder if he really is even Aus A standard in English conditions. Definitely stressing these conditions as on a spinning wicket he is clearly good enough.

He wouldn't make my second XI in English conditions but I'd absolutely pick him for Australia A anyway. This is a great way to give your best batsmen an opportunity to improve their games in different conditions - especially conditions they're not suited to - and perhaps adjust their allround games to cater for them. I'm all for horses for courses in the actual Test squad but for the A team I'd almost want to deliberately do the opposite sometimes. Whether Australia A do well in the game or not is totally irrelevant IMO.

 

[stephen]

If having an ugly technique was held against Australian players your 2 greatest bats (coincidentally the 2 most autistic) would never have played. Handscomb has major flaws though. Can't have a test batsman who can't handle swing and the shorter stuff.

Handscomb does not have a gritty technique. He has a revolting technique.

 

[aussie tragic]

So which 2 Aussie batsmen do you leave out of the Lions game?

Harris, Burns, Head, Patterson and Pucovski played the last game and Handscomb, Wade and M Marsh should now also be available

 

[morgieb]

If having an ugly technique was held against Australian players your 2 greatest bats (coincidentally the 2 most socially inept) would never have played. Handscomb has major flaws though. Can't have a test batsman who can't handle swing and the shorter stuff.

There's a difference between an ugly techinque and a flat out bad one though. Smith for example has a very good techinque even if it's unorthodox. Handscomb's is terrible and frankly he looks a sitting duck against anything pitched up.

 

[Andy1993]

There's a difference between an ugly techinque and a flat out bad one though. Smith for example has a very good techinque even if it's unorthodox. Handscomb's is terrible and frankly he looks a sitting duck against anything pitched up.

hmm similarities with Gary Ballance then?

 

[cnerd123]

The difference between a good technique and bad technique is all in how you use it imo.

If a batsman is good between the ears he'll find ways to score runs no matter what. E.g. Smith, Chanderpaul, Border. Even the late Phil Hughes (heck that was exactly why we were so excited about him.)

Handscomb is worth persisting with if the coaching staff feels he has what it takes to overcome his technical deficiencies.

 

[Prince EWS]

So which 2 Aussie batsmen do you leave out of the Lions game?

Harris, Burns, Head, Patterson and Pucovski played the last game and Handscomb, Wade and M Marsh should now also be available

Haha despite saying I'd definitely pick Handscomb in my last post I would probably actually leave him out in this weird situation where half the Test lineup is available. Not because his technique is illsuited to playing in England - that's a great reason to select him - but because there are more interesting/important players to select for this game.

1 Harris
2 Burns
3 Pucovski
4 Patterson
5 Head
6 Marsh
7 Paine

 

[Test_Fan_Only]

Haha despite saying I'd definitely pick Handscomb in my last post I would probably actually leave him out in this weird situation where half the Test lineup is available. Not because his technique is illsuited to playing in England - that's a great reason to select him - but because there are more interesting/important players to select for this game.

1 Harris
2 Burns
3 Pucovski
4 Patterson
5 Head
6 Marsh
7 Paine

Marsh ahead of Wade is a huge mistake. Marsh should not be the side, poor batsman, not good enough to bat in the top 6.

 

[Test_Fan_Only]

So which 2 Aussie batsmen do you leave out of the Lions game?

Harris, Burns, Head, Patterson and Pucovski played the last game and Handscomb, Wade and M Marsh should now also be available

Marsh is not a batsman, he is a poor all rounder who does not belong on the A tour.

The other one is probably Pucovski because there is no way I would select him for the Ashes tour. A bit of a strange call as he is the type of player that playing on a A tour would be great experience. Handscomb is the other option for me.

So Harris, Burns, Patterson, Head, Wade, Handscomb, Paine.