• 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*** New Zealand in Australia 2011

hazsa19

International Regular
It's complicated with Harris...Pat Howard, the team performance guy, seems to want to ensure Harris is 100% capable of playing 5 day matches before getting back in the team. So apparently he is almost certainly out of contention even for the boxing day test.
Seems logical...
 

chalky

International Debutant
Love that Inzi story always makes me chuckle to myself. Wonder if anyone ever sledged him with Fat jokes as he seemed a bit sensitive.
 

Zinzan

Request Your Custom Title Now!
South Africa are going to kill us.

I genuinely don't know what to do with this lot. Make the ****s stand outside the gates and apologize to NZ fans sounds like a vindictively nice idea.
It's not all gloom & doom Flem, we do have some potentially good Test batsmen in this lot.

Positives - Ryder is still Test class, Williamson definitely will be & Brownlie looks like a proper Test batsman. In Vettori we still have the best 7-8 in the world.

Negatives - Taylor needs to come down the order, he's still too loose to bat in the top 4, Guptill hasn't got a good enough technique/temperament to open & McCullum isn't consistent enough to get away with playing like Sehwag as an opener,he's way too hit & miss especially considering the frailty of the rest of our batting lineup.
 

adub

International Captain
Thanks.

Next question, what sort of attack do the Australians feel will be selected for Boxing Day? Has MJ been dropped or rested?

Love watching cricket all night in the winter :)
MJ is injured and will not be back for 5 months. I don't think he'll play tests again (fingers crossed).

If everyone is fit we'll probably play Cummins, Pattinson, Siddle, Lyon with Watson back in the top six. I'd be pretty happy with that.
 

Furball

Evil Scotsman
How long is Harris expected to be out for? When fit would have him over Siddle every day.
Who knows? I wouldn't back Harris to play more than two Tests in a row in any case. He's only played 50% of the Tests Australia have played since his debut thanks to injury.
 

NUFAN

Y no Afghanistan flag
Quite weak is understatement actually.
I think it's an accurate statement. What would you have said instead?

It's complicated with Harris...Pat Howard, the team performance guy, seems to want to ensure Harris is 100% capable of playing 5 day matches before getting back in the team. So apparently he is almost certainly out of contention even for the boxing day test.
My only concern with Harris and Cutting is that they are looking to take part in the Big Bash. I really don't want to see an injury prone quick getting injured in that sort of Cricket.
 

Ruckus

International Captain
Seems logical...
I'm not so sure about it tbh. Harris is really getting on in age and has a degenerative knee condition, so I think we should probably just play him as much as we can while he his on his last legs. We have to move on from Harris though, and fortunately the emergence of these young bowlers will provide some good alternatives.
 

Bahnz

Hall of Fame Member
Did I? (genuine question)
Actually no I retract that, this guy is clearly **** and this spell is an aberration. I don't even know how he manages to grip a ball because he's so ********.
I agree that this isn't the most testing line up he could bowl to. But he has bowled very well and I don't think they were lucky dismissals or poor shots. He's set it up, created pressure and had seam movement. I think most batsmen around the world would've had a lot of trouble in that over. And his other overs haven't been horrible either.

He looks to have the tools to become a Steyn-like figure, but we obviously have to wait and see. I want to be optimistic about him because cricket is better with testing fast bowlers. And it seems we can completely write off a player as rubbish based on one innings but can't give him props and make positive predictions when he produces the opposite in the next innings?
He has bowled well, which I said right from the start. But they were poor shots. Guptill got a gud'un fair enough, but batsmen with better skills against the short ball than he (ie. everyone) might've faired better. As for the three nicks, in none of those cases was the ball in the corridor. They were all well wide of the off stump. And yes they were swinging, and yes it was good pace but good test batsmen shouldn't be lured into shots like that so early in their innings.

And I suppose I really hate the general tendency to write new players off after one bad performance (see the calls from earlier in this thread to drop Bracewell on the basis of his efforts on the second day). Which is why I find it equally aggravating when you have people going the opposite way.

Anyway, he certainly could by a top quick. Lets just leave it at that.
 

Top