• 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* Third Test at Old Trafford

superkingdave

superkingdave

Hall of Fame Member
So Cricinfo seem to think Australia are considering 2 spinners for OT...reckon England would be fairly comfortable with that.
 
P

Philhughesisbes

School Boy/Girl Captain
Tangles said:
How does anyone challenge Watson for his spot though when he is sometimes a batsman and sometimes an allrounder? Right now hes a sometimes allrounder who opens the batting for Australia. Would an opener plundering runs in the SS dislodge him? I bet it would just change who he bats with. An allrounder going great guns won't convince them to drop an opener either. IMO if he opens then he needs to be judged as a specialist bat against the other specialists. If hes an allrounder then he needs to be consistently bowling overs and batting at 6, where he could be dislodged by McDonald/Henriques/etc.
Click to expand...
Spot on.Judging him as a specialist(which we should since he is opening) means he fails badly.That's why I"ve never advocated. An all rounder opening in a test match because if they consistently score 30"s and take 1.5 wicket per match most persons get convince they are value to the team( no they"re not).Watson needs to step up with the bat if he"s opening.He can afford to average 50 with the ball as long as he Is averaging mid 40"s opening.That would be better value ffor the team.Warner Rogers would be my choice at the top and hearing that Smith scored a century means you can"t drop him which means Watson should be drop.Should be between he and Smith for the number 6 spot ( we can"t afford both in the team not unless both are banging the door down).
 
Adders

Adders

Cricketer Of The Year
GingerFurball said:
They were mad enough to go with 4 quicks plus Watson on that pitch.
Click to expand...
But I don't think there is any question that they'll play 1 spinner at OT.....the debate is more whether they'll play 2. England only played Swann on that wicket which everyone knew was going to break up from day 1.

I hope we don't go with both Monty and Swann...worked well for us in India but outside of that it has never been a great success.
 
Cabinet96

Cabinet96

Hall of Fame Member
Had never been a great success in India before that either. I'm not saying we should pick Monty, but he and Swann have played one game together outside of Asia. It's hardly evidence to say it should never happen. They've bowled well together in pretty much every test they've played since Monty's recall in the UAE.
 
Riggins

Riggins

International Captain
Yeah they seem to bowl well in tandem, maybe because monty seems to be able to bowl quite quick without putting too much on the ball. In India he still got work off the pitch so could keep it tight. Might not be as effective like that on harder/more predictable tracks in england and aus though.
 
the big bambino

the big bambino

Cricketer Of The Year
Spikey said:
yeah he sure was groomed

FC games Shane Watson opened in before he got shoved into the team to cover for MJ


The Home of CricketArchive
The Home of CricketArchive
The Home of CricketArchive


and dont go into him opening in ODIs even james hopes opened in them
Click to expand...
I remember that and thought it was the end of him. From memory he did work with G Chappell who reckoned he was an opener. He found himself there with that intent which eventually came off, his preceeding run of outs notwithstanding.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Top