*Official Third Test at Edgbaston

[grecian]

According to Aggers on twitter. Freddy fit, Monty released, but already doubts the match will start on time.

Just hope the weather gets better for Friday

 

[GIMH]

Friday's forecast is good mate

 

[Top_Cat]

All we are saaaaaaying, is give Mitch a chaaaaaance

Give Johnson one more chance | Opinion | Cricinfo Magazine | Cricinfo.com

 

[four_or_six]

If that's really the team, MacDonald in for North, then .

In fact, any team without Clark =

 

[howardj]

All we are saaaaaaying, is give Mitch a chaaaaaance

Give Johnson one more chance | Opinion | Cricinfo Magazine | Cricinfo.com

Shut up Buchanan.

 

[grecian]

Friday's forecast is good mate

Yeah, about the only day that is. Not terribly confident in the forecasters that told us it would be a "Barbecue summer", though.

 

[GIMH]

Yeah, and they've predicted tonnes of rain in the previous two Tests. Saturday's forecast is the grimmest which is when I'm there, but even then it looks like there should be play, just with interruptions

 

[dontcloseyoureyes]

All we are saaaaaaying, is give Mitch a chaaaaaance

Give Johnson one more chance | Opinion | Cricinfo Magazine | Cricinfo.com

And what if his horrid bowling gives away the initiative and in the end, we lose, and the series is essentially over. Does he really deserve that chance? In essence, he's only ever had 3 truly good series of test cricket in a reasonably long test career. Backing him at Lords is one thing, risking the urn on him is a whole different kettle of fish.

 

[Scaly piscine]

According to Aggers on twitter. Freddy fit, Monty released, but already doubts the match will start on time.

Bloody should hope he's released. Mind I remember chanderpaul on here saying it was 100% certain donkey wouldn't play in the first Test.

Wouldn't be surprised if donkey finds himself out of the Northants side.

 

[Top_Cat]

And if his horrid bowling gives away the initiative and in the end, we lose, the series is over. Does he really deserve that chance? In essence, he's only ever had 3 truly good series of test cricket in a reasonably long test career. Backing him at Lords is one thing, risking the urn on him is a whole different kettle of fish.

Not denying the inherent risks (and they're significant) but I find it a refreshingly bold move by a traditionally conservative bunch of selectors. Fortune favours the brave, etc. Rare these days, especially in Tests. I respect their choice for that alone and, who knows, maybe it'll come off and he'll bag a few cheap scalps.

 

[howardj]

Merv should stay off the drink

Mitch was retained at the bottom of the fourth pint

 

[Uppercut]

Not denying the inherent risks (and they're significant) but I find it a refreshingly bold move by a traditionally conservative bunch of selectors. Fortune favours the brave, etc. Rare these days, especially in Tests. I respect their choice for that alone and, who knows, maybe it'll come off and he'll bag a few cheap scalps.

Completely disagree. Dropping the player who has been their best bowler for a long period of time, has a visibly great attitude and contributes with the bat, would be a very, very tough decision to make. With his part-time batting gone, they would have to somehow find a new balance to the team with the players they had left.

But instead they've taken the easy way out. They've played a bowler everyone knows is extremely unlikely to take wickets, who is bowling almost inconceivably badly, because they didn't have the stomach for the big call. They don't have to tell one of their favourite blokes he's out of the team, they don't have to make the big calls on how to balance the side, they don't have to worry about getting stick if his replacement bowls badly or they aren't batting low enough. The right decision was to give Midge a break, but they've bottled it.

And ftr, I'm a huge fan of Johnson's and really hope he proves me wrong at Edgbaston.

 

[Top_Cat]

Completely disagree. Dropping the player who has been their best bowler for a long period of time, has a visibly great attitude and contributes with the bat, would be a very, very tough decision to make. With his part-time batting gone, they would have to somehow find a new balance to the team with the players they had left.

But instead they've taken the easy way out. They've played a bowler everyone knows is extremely unlikely to take wickets, who is bowling almost inconceivably badly, because they didn't have the stomach for the big call. They don't have to tell one of their favourite blokes he's out of the team, they don't have to make the big calls on how to balance the side, they don't have to worry about getting stick if his replacement bowls badly or they aren't batting low enough. The right decision was to give Midge a break, but they've bottled it.

And ftr, I'm a huge fan of Johnson's and really hope he proves me wrong at Edgbaston.

Disagree it's the easy way out. Dropping Mitch, they just have to deal with him. Retaining him, they have to face the wrath of pundits and the press even before it's been given a chance to fail, let alone if he goes the journey in the game. This thread is a great example and I guess we just see the decision differently.

Truth is, no-one knows how he's going to do. He's just that sort of bowler; either he'll buckle under the pressure and get spanked or he'll be backed into a corner so hard he'll fire up. Either way, it'll be entertaining to watch.

 

[dontcloseyoureyes]

Either way, it'll be entertaining to watch.

That's debatable.

 

[Matt79]

If that is the XI, at least with McDonald we'll have more options to cover it if Johnson is again disappointing. Strangely enough, both North AND Clark are stiff.

 

[inbox24]

I thought you said we can't read too much into the tour match performance, but you claim that Watson outperformed him and should have got a go? Haha, interesting logic.

Anyway, McDonald plays because a) we need a bowling all-rounder more than a half-baked Watson, who would no doubt break down and b) Clark isn't playing, who was Watson's best chance of playing, balance wise.

Haddin good enough to bat 6, and McDonald at 7 and Johnson at 8 is a stronger 6 - 7 - 8 than Prior/Flintoff/Broad IMO.

Well again there's a difference between form and class. The following cricketers are not international quality: McDonald, Johnson, North. In a perfect world these guys would have all played 0 test matches, however considering the massive blunders that the Hilditch has made we can only make the best of a really bad situation by not picking these players. McDonald is not good enough to make any international team bar West Indies or Bangladesh, and never will be. Luckily for him he is playing cricket in the post 2005 Ashes era when all rounders are considered as crucial to the team as a wicketkeeper. With regards to Johnson, the first time I saw him bowl for Queensland I was horrified, but alas I reassured myself that he would never play for Australia. Fast forward to 2006 and he was picked for ODIs which itself was a huge disservice to cricket, and then to 2007 when he played his first test match which was just an insult to test cricketers in general. I admit he has improved a little, but going from club standard bowling to barely FC level bowling doesn't cut it. The main points of the problem lie with the fact that 1. he'll never be able to consistently swing the ball and control the swing, and 2. because of this, he'll have to rely on line and length which obviously he can't because he can't put two consecutive deliveries in the same area. The only thing going for him is pace and being a left hander. If he was a right hander he'd be a replica of Mahmood with the bowling average of Sami. Now the chickens are coming home to roost and my predictions are coming true.

In conclusion these aforementioned guys should count themselves lucky they played in an era when Hilditch was selector a guy who doesn't know his right from his left. The only fair result in this Ashes would be for Australia's quality players to put up a good fight but lose the crucial moments of the game (and hence the game) when we are relying on guys like Johnson and McDonald.

 

[Prince EWS]

The following cricketers are not international quality: McDonald, Johnson, North.

I've gotta admit though inbox, the one (and only, tbh) thing I like about your posts is that, unlike a lot of other members, you don't change your opinion based on a few games here or there all the time. You either rate someone or you don't. I respect that.

 

[Son Of Coco]

I think it's madness, and the Aussies being contrary for the sake of it.

I fear Buchanan has taken the reigns back.

I agree. I hope he plays well, but you wonder what Clark has to do if he can't get himself picked ahead of the **** Johnson has served up in the first two matches.

I should add, I rate Johnson when he's in form. But you have to recognise a player performing badly and who has issues. If he can deal with them mid-test (yet again) and turn it around he'll have done well.

 

[Uppercut]

Disagree it's the easy way out. Dropping Mitch, they just have to deal with him. Retaining him, they have to face the wrath of pundits and the press even before it's been given a chance to fail, let alone if he goes the journey in the game. This thread is a great example and I guess we just see the decision differently.

Truth is, no-one knows how he's going to do. He's just that sort of bowler; either he'll buckle under the pressure and get spanked or he'll be backed into a corner so hard he'll fire up. Either way, it'll be entertaining to watch.

The impression I get is that he's hopelessly out of sorts, suffering from technical issues and yet to bowl a half-decent spell since he came to England at the end of May. Reports from inside the camp yesterday said he was only operating in the nets at 2/3 capacity, so it's not like he's bowling the house down in the camp.

The idea that he'll get fired up by criticism and start bowling well is far-fetched tstl. He's already been operating at 90+mph, and it's not like he didn't care before. Determination won't give him back his accuracy. I expect him to bowl better than he did at Lord's (it would be hard not to) but still below-par.

The Aussie selectors know he almost definitely won't perform, but,
1. They aren't willing to take the big decisions on team balance dropping Midge would involve.
2. They refuse to believe that their star all-rounder isn't bowling well and are kidding themselves.
3. They can't bear to let such a solid pro and good bloke suffer the humiliation of being "dropped".

To me, that's taking the easy way out.

 

[Uppercut]

I've gotta admit though inbox, the one (and only, tbh) thing I like about your posts is that, unlike a lot of other members, you don't change your opinion based on a few games here or there all the time. You either rate someone or you don't. I respect that.

It comes with the territory when you're religious .