• 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*** South Africa in Australia

Pratters

Cricket, Lovely Cricket
burkey_1988 said:
Clarke or Katich
Okay if Clarke can be considered a 5th bowling option he can come in in place of Symonds.

In Perth if Australia want the 5th bowling option to be a medium bowler instead of a spinner it will be a dillemna. If that would be the case, is there an option except Symonds or a 5th regular bowler?
 
Last edited:

Burpey

Cricketer Of The Year
Pratyush said:
Okay if Clarke can be considered a 5th bowling option he can come in in place of Symonds.

In Perth if Australia want the 5th bowling action to be a medium bowler instead of a spinner it will be a dillemna. If that would be the case, is there an option except Symonds or a 5th regular bowler?
They don't need a fifth bowling option. With McGrath, Lee, Warne, and Bracken/Clark/Lewis/Gillespie, no one else will bowl in my opinion. If they are desperate to break a partnership, they might use Hussey or Clarke.
 

Pratters

Cricket, Lovely Cricket
burkey_1988 said:
They don't need a fifth bowling option. With McGrath, Lee, Warne, and Bracken/Clark/Lewis/Gillespie, no one else will bowl in my opinion. If they are desperate to break a partnership, they might use Hussey or Clarke.
The Aussie selectors think they do need a 5th bowling option. Else why would they play Symonds after Watson got injured. Whether they would consider Clarke to be 5th bowling option or not time will tell..

It is definitely a problem to play Symonds considering his batting isnt doing good.
 

Burpey

Cricketer Of The Year
Pratyush said:
The Aussie selectors think they do need a 5th bowling option. Else why would they play Symonds after Watson got injured. Whether they would consider Clarke to be 5th bowling option or not time will tell..

It is definitely a problem to play Symonds considering his batting isnt doing good.
I just felt the all-rounder was there because there were only two pacemen, and if either Lee or McGrath broke down then there would only be one in the side. With MacGill not playing in Perth, meaning there will be three pacemen and no need for an all-rounder as cover.
 

Pratters

Cricket, Lovely Cricket
burkey_1988 said:
meaning there will be three pacemen and no need for an all-rounder as cover.
Clarke can be considered the 5th bowling option as a part timer if he is chosen but how much would he really be used in Perth I dont know.
 

Burpey

Cricketer Of The Year
I can't believe this push for a Flintoff-style all-rounder. Australia achieved a record number of Test wins with no all-rounder. It's another case of how the Aussie selectors have no idea but managing to get away with it because of the calibre of pleyrs Australia has. It'll be interesting when Australia is no longer number one and selection will have a huge impact on the side's success (or failure).
 

Pratters

Cricket, Lovely Cricket
Is the potency of a 4 pronged Australian attack right now as good as in their prime? Without a strong Gillespie the Aussie selectors have doubt whether Australia can take 20 wickets consistently against quality opposition. This means they want to feel safer with a 5th bowling option. But they do not want to go all the way by chosing a 5th bowler as it would weaken the batting.

A simple case of problem of not having a quality all rounder.

Of course if Gillespie comes back strong in the future all this will change short term.
 

aussie

Hall of Fame Member
burkey_1988 said:
Who would you rather give time to adapt to Test cricket: Clarke or Symonds? Symonds offers nothing to the team. His bowling lacks penetration and his batting has looked ordinary in all four Tests he has played. What's the point of an all-rounder when he is not up to scratch with bat or ball?
well i cant disagree here, i guess its up to the selectors to decide on that one to be honest..
 

aussie

Hall of Fame Member
Pratyush said:
Is the potency of a 4 pronged Australian attack right now as good as in their prime? Without a strong Gillespie the Aussie selectors have doubt whether Australia can take 20 wickets consistently against quality opposition. This means they want to feel safer with a 5th bowling option. But they do not want to go all the way by chosing a 5th bowler as it would weaken the batting.

A simple case of problem of not having a quality all rounder.

Of course if Gillespie comes back strong in the future all this will change short term.
yea well said, but if Dizzy builds on his good domestic form & comes back to the test side and gives australia its potent 4 man attack again, it will be interesting to see if the selectors would still persue the idea of having Watson has the all-rounder, especially if the blokes in the middle order i.e Hodge, Hussey, Clarke, Martyn cement their place.
 

Burpey

Cricketer Of The Year
With McGrath, Warne, Lee, MacGill, how can Australia not have the potency to take 20 wickets?
 

Protea

School Boy/Girl Captain
His finger isn't that badly injured. Only a small tear apparently and he should be fit for the first Test.
 

Snippie

School Boy/Girl Cricketer
Yep, Protea is right, apparently he'll still get treatment but he will most probably even be able to play in the warm-up match :D

I just don't think he'll be trying to take any spectacular catches in the first few matches :p
 

Jono

Virat Kohli (c)
Glad Smith is playing. I love watching him bat and I want to see Smith vs. Ponting in the coming series. Battle of the cry babies :D
 

age_master

Hall of Fame Member
burkey_1988 said:
I can't believe this push for a Flintoff-style all-rounder. Australia achieved a record number of Test wins with no all-rounder. It's another case of how the Aussie selectors have no idea but managing to get away with it because of the calibre of pleyrs Australia has. It'll be interesting when Australia is no longer number one and selection will have a huge impact on the side's success (or failure).
while i agree i think that Symonds is a good selection, he will come good with the bat soon enough. he is a definate match winner and definatley good enough to bat at number 6 for Australia imo for the long term.
 

ClownSymonds

U19 Vice-Captain
I agree that the selectors are generally clueless, but Symonds does deserve at least a couple more Tests before being thrown to the gutter. If he doesn't come good, I wouldn't mind giving a specialist his place. All-rounders really aren't needed when the specialists can do their jobs well.
 

Autobahn

State 12th Man
To be honest trying to look for a "true" all rounder is pointless really when you consider both warne and lee's batting has improved ten-fold over the summer.

At number 8 and 9 you will normally get the scrappy tail-enders in most teams and warne and lee fit the bill perfectly.

I really don't get why they are so bothered about it.
 

aussie

Hall of Fame Member
this test series promises to be a real exciting one with all of the pre-series talk already getting hot. I've got this iffy feeling something nasty is going to happen on the field of play during this series, i really do...

But with reference to the 1st test at the W.A.C.A it will be interesting to see if SA leave out Boje, pick Langeveldt so as to go for a 4 prong pace attack. Yea the W.A.C.A test cant come sooner :cool:
 

Top