FaaipDeOiad
Hall of Fame Member
He's only 26. If he has a couple of good seasons and a middle-order spot opens up in 2 or 3 years he won't be past it.vic_orthdox said:
-
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.
***Official*** Australia in England (The Ashes)
- Thread starter James
- Start date
vic_orthdox
Global Moderator
Apologies. I remembered him being 28 from somewhere...
luckyeddie
Cricket Web Staff Member
I think the two populations who jibe at each other are...LongHopCassidy said:
a) Me
b) Everybody else
and that's how it should be
Mister Wright
Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
He's born in 1978, so he will be 27 this year.FaaipDeOiad said:
King_Ponting
International Regular
I dont think thronely will do well next year either mate.
King_Ponting
International Regular
Just seeing the way he bats, he moves his feet late and im sure thats something that the bowlers will pick up next season, also he cant play the yorker well early in his innings. So those two factors make me feel that way.
I've seen Thornely play and to be honest he has not really impressed me. He gets out for low scores too often and needs to work on his footwork.
As a fielder he is very good, he does some great stuff, takes great catches but his bowling isnt up to scratch. There is no doubt he has potential but for his sake i hope it starts to show soon or it'll very hard for him to make the Australian team.
I think a guy like Shane Watson who in my mind is very overrated has more potential then him.
As a fielder he is very good, he does some great stuff, takes great catches but his bowling isnt up to scratch. There is no doubt he has potential but for his sake i hope it starts to show soon or it'll very hard for him to make the Australian team.
I think a guy like Shane Watson who in my mind is very overrated has more potential then him.
vic_orthdox
Global Moderator
It really is hard to argue against it, if your talking about his performances in international terms. He's had massive wraps on him, and although he hasn't had consistent opportunities, when he's had them he has failed to impress.aussie said:no no Watson is by no means overrated
People talk about how he needs to be higher up the order, or given a more important role in the side. Simply, at this stage he's not good enough, you can't do that for him over other more deserving players that are in the ODI (and Test) XI at the moment.
FaaipDeOiad
Hall of Fame Member
I don't think the issue is Watson being overrated, as him never being much good in that role in the first place. He's a batsman who is a useful back-up seam bowler, not a big hitting bowling all-rounder. Basically, he's Jacques Kallis and they're treating him like Lance Kluesener.
Either way, his ideal role in the Australian team would be batting at 6 in tests. Currently, there's no role for him there, and he's probably not quite ready for it yet, so they're trying to blood him in the ODI side. I don't think it's been a complete failure mind you, his bowling hasn't been much good but he's not done much wrong with the bat really. Still, he's never had much sucess in domestic OD games, because his bowling isn't suited to it and he's too boundary reliant as a batsman. I still think he can become a good ODI player (and he's certainly trying to develop some variation and so on) as a batsmen who can sent down useful overs, but he's really not there yet.
The problem with judging Watson on his ODI bowling record, which is all people really have currently since he's had minimum batting opportunities and done okay, is that he was never someone you could reasonably expect to have immediate success as a bowler in ODIs.
Either way, his ideal role in the Australian team would be batting at 6 in tests. Currently, there's no role for him there, and he's probably not quite ready for it yet, so they're trying to blood him in the ODI side. I don't think it's been a complete failure mind you, his bowling hasn't been much good but he's not done much wrong with the bat really. Still, he's never had much sucess in domestic OD games, because his bowling isn't suited to it and he's too boundary reliant as a batsman. I still think he can become a good ODI player (and he's certainly trying to develop some variation and so on) as a batsmen who can sent down useful overs, but he's really not there yet.
The problem with judging Watson on his ODI bowling record, which is all people really have currently since he's had minimum batting opportunities and done okay, is that he was never someone you could reasonably expect to have immediate success as a bowler in ODIs.
FaaipDeOiad
Hall of Fame Member
Well, the first option I can see for Australia now is to go in with four specialist bowlers (Hogg and Lee are certainly good enough with the bat to stop Australia having a "tail") and use Symonds and Clarke for 10 overs, which has the obvious advantage in batting depth, but a weakness in terms of relying on Symonds who can sometimes be a bit expensive. Obviously, this is what Australia are currently doing.marc71178 said:
The other option is to pick an all-rounder to play at 7 and give Australia 5 specialist bowlers. I'd say this is preferable in the long term, with Symonds only being used to fill in holes in the overs rather than being forced to bowl 10. There are a few people around who can play this role, the best options are probably James Hopes and (and some people may disagree with me on the second one) Cameron White. White isn't a great bowler but if he can manage to keep it tight he's an extremely handy hitter and quite capable of batting at 7 imo. He's also a "potential" sort of bowler who could turn out to be a decent sort of wicket taking force in a few years if his bowling continues to develop.
Hopes is born for the role in ODIs as far as I can see. His bowling is too unpenetrative for test cricket but he's very handy at keeping the runs down, races through his overs pretty quickly off a short run, and he's developing rapidly as a big hitting lower order batsmen. The one real problem I can see for him (not a problem with White) is that he might not be the best person to rely on if Australia get 5 down for not too much. But, given that his FC batting is improving recently along with his OD batting, I think he can play that role and I'd say the selectors have a close eye on him for it. He's played one ODI so far and did very well in it, and wasn't far off a man of the match award really.
The other option is, obviously, Shane Watson.
Of course, with the imminent addition of the substitute rule, all of this could change and we have to wait and see how tactics develop around the extra player.
shaka
International Regular
Shane Warne may move to South Africa to get more peace and quiet, personally i doubt this would be such the case.
http://foxsports.news.com.au/story/0,8659,15777197-5000061,00.html
http://foxsports.news.com.au/story/0,8659,15777197-5000061,00.html
Mister Wright
Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
James Hopes would be perfect for the substitution role. Many people think an extra bowler or batsman will be selected as the substitute. However I think the allrounder player will be made the 12th player, due to the team not knowing what they are going to do 1st. That way a team can play a full 11, then use the allrounder as a substitue depending on whether they need another bowler or batsman.FaaipDeOiad said: