Who is the best upcoming player?

[tooextracool]

At no. 3 or as a wk/batsman?

If i was picking them solely for their batting. Gilchrist may set the world on fire and destroy as many bowlers mentally, but i think id still take Dravid as a batsman.

I dont mind Collingwood - scores runs when they count on many an occasion

Bell is the guy for whom the jury is still out. He's scored the vast majority of his runs against very weak attacks.

Yet Bell has scored runs against the same attacks that Collingwood has. Personally i think Bell is a better player of spin than Collingwood, and hes also more consistent. Collingwood seems to have one or two good games all series and really doesnt do much else. Throw in the fact that Bell has a better technique(and is in the form of his life ATM) thats probably more equipped to Australia than Collingwoods.

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

Someone like Jacques whos done what exactly?
May i ask which player in Australia has averaged 40 odd for 4 years in test match cricket and is currently not even in the running for the Australian test squad?
Let me also remind you that if Vaughan were fit, England would have 2 of Cook/Collingwood/Bell on the bench and you'd have to wonder which team in the world would not want the 2 players averaging over 50 in intl cricket plus Owais Shah in their squads. Throw in Butcher and you have quite a list there.
Then there are players like Ed Joyce who dont even come under consideration.

If you're going to include people like Butcher for England, why not include the likes of Lehmann for Australia? They are of equivalent relevance to the sides, in the sense that neither of them will ever be picked again, but they both still play first class cricket, and Lehmann is certainly a far better player.

Jaques would be opening in both forms of the game for just about any other team in the world, given a first class average in the mid 50s, and higher in the last couple of years, and the fact that he scored 90 odd on ODI debut. Watson averages 50 in FC cricket and can bowl, Hodge averages 60 odd in tests and isn't being picked, and so on. To put it simply, there are no batsmen who aren't playing for England in test cricket who would be in line for selection if they were available for Australia. The only possible one is Michael Vaughan, and I doubt he'd make the Australian team at the moment.

 

[social]

Symonds and Katich were major disappointments and rightly dropped.

Clarke, Cosgrove, Jacques and Watson are all international quality players at different stages of their development.

Add to those a couple of other emerging talents and the batting depth is fine.

Pace bowling is the real worry unless someone such as Johnson converts unlimited potential into performances.

 

[social]

If i was picking them solely for their batting. Gilchrist may set the world on fire and destroy as many bowlers mentally, but i think id still take Dravid as a batsman.



Yet Bell has scored runs against the same attacks that Collingwood has. Personally i think Bell is a better player of spin than Collingwood, and hes also more consistent. Collingwood seems to have one or two good games all series and really doesnt do much else. Throw in the fact that Bell has a better technique(and is in the form of his life ATM) thats probably more equipped to Australia than Collingwoods.

Bell has basically scored mountains of runs vs B grade Pakistan this year (in tests) and Bangladesh. He cashes in, when in form, which generally is the sign of a good player. IMO, there is no way that he can be left out of the first Ashes test. However, his failures against the best continue to be a worry and I'm not as certain about his technique as you seem to be.

Collingwood has a better history of scoring "hard runs". Whilst having an ordinary fc record, he seems to be a good team player and more valuable than Bell when things arent going according to plan.

 

[tooextracool]

If you're going to include people like Butcher for England, why not include the likes of Lehmann for Australia? They are of equivalent relevance to the sides, in the sense that neither of them will ever be picked again, but they both still play first class cricket, and Lehmann is certainly a far better player

Two reasons, firstly Butcher is 34, and possibly has at least 2-3 years left in him while Lehmann is almost 37 and even if he were selected it would only be for one series. Secondly, Butcher was never dropped from the side, he was injured and missed out, which is not the same thing that can be said about Lehmann whos intl career is clearly over.

Jaques would be opening in both forms of the game for just about any other team in the world, given a first class average in the mid 50s, and higher in the last couple of years, and the fact that he scored 90 odd on ODI debut. Watson averages 50 in FC cricket and can bowl, Hodge averages 60 odd in tests and isn't being picked, and so on. To put it simply, there are no batsmen who aren't playing for England in test cricket who would be in line for selection if they were available for Australia. The only possible one is Michael Vaughan, and I doubt he'd make the Australian team at the moment.

Im sorry what? Clearly the logic behind picking someone who averages 50 odd in FC cricket over someone like Bell or Cook who is doing that in test match cricket defies all logic. Hodge isnt being picked, because quite frankly he didnt look good enough despite his double ton he was largely a complete failure at the test match level.

 

[tooextracool]

Bell has basically scored mountains of runs vs B grade Pakistan this year (in tests) and Bangladesh. He cashes in, when in form, which generally is the sign of a good player. IMO, there is no way that he can be left out of the first Ashes test. However, his failures against the best continue to be a worry and I'm not as certain about his technique as you seem to be.

Collingwood has a better history of scoring "hard runs". Whilst having an ordinary fc record, he seems to be a good team player and more valuable than Bell when things arent going according to plan.

Theres arguments both ways IMO. It is true that Bells technique has probably not been exposed too much recently, especially his tendency to poke at deliveries outside the off stump but then again the same can be said about Collingwood who hasnt exactly been the hallmark of consistentcy either and as largely performed on the slower, flatter tracks during his career. For me when the ball is moving around or turning a lot though, Bell has the better technique which is why i am leaning towards him ATM.

 

[social]

Two reasons, firstly Butcher is 34, and possibly has at least 2-3 years left in him while Lehmann is almost 37 and even if he were selected it would only be for one series. Secondly, Butcher was never dropped from the side, he was injured and missed out, which is not the same thing that can be said about Lehmann whos intl career is clearly over.




Im sorry what? Clearly the logic behind picking someone who averages 50 odd in FC cricket over someone like Bell or Cook who is doing that in test match cricket defies all logic. Hodge isnt being picked, because quite frankly he didnt look good enough despite his double ton he was largely a complete failure at the test match level.

Lehmann was one of the world's best players during the nineties and substantially better than Butcher. The fact that he averaged 45+ in tests when picked after his peak was testimony to that - one of the most unfortunate waste of talents in recent memory.

I think the point is that whilst Cook and Bell have done very well, Jacques would definitely have been picked before them had he been English. Would he achieve the same results - time will tell as Jacques is likely to play in the Ashes series this year.

 

[tooextracool]

Lehmann was one of the world's best players during the nineties and substantially better than Butcher. The fact that he averaged 45+ in tests when picked after his peak was testimony to that - one of the most unfortunate waste of talents in recent memory.

Lehmann is one of the Australian players i rated very very highly, even during his most recent stint in test match cricket and I was very disappointed when he was dropped because he clearly deserved a lot better having been kept away from his peak by the Waugh brothers. The point however is not whether he was or is a better player than Butcher, but the fact is that his international career is over, no matter which country he lived in or played domestic cricket in given his age.

I think the point is that whilst Cook and Bell have done very well, Jacques would definitely have been picked before them had he been English. Would he achieve the same results - time will tell as Jacques is likely to play in the Ashes series this year.

That may very well be the case, but one cannot say that he would have been as successful had he been picked to play for England. My point however is that players that have scored runs in international cricket will always make for better bench strength than players who havent. The reason why i initially stated that England had the best reserve batsmen in the world, was because they have players on the bench that have scored runs against TEST bowlers, and that cannot be said about any other team in the world.

 

[social]

Lehmann is one of the Australian players i rated very very highly, even during his most recent stint in test match cricket and I was very disappointed when he was dropped because he clearly deserved a lot better having been kept away from his peak by the Waugh brothers. The point however is not whether he was or is a better player than Butcher, but the fact is that his international career is over, no matter which country he lived in or played domestic cricket in given his age.



That may very well be the case, but one cannot say that he would have been as successful had he been picked to play for England. My point however is that players that have scored runs in international cricket will always make for better bench strength than players who havent. The reason why i initially stated that England had the best reserve batsmen in the world, was because they have players on the bench that have scored runs against TEST bowlers, and that cannot be said about any other team in the world.

Eng's current batting lineup

Tresco
Strauss
Cook
KP
Bell
Collingwood

Backup

Shah - regarded as v ordinary until one-off test in sub-continent (jury still out I'd say)
Vaughan - may never play again but, in any event, not in the top echelon nowadays
Flintoff - average test bat
Joyce - unproven

Put in that perspective, it's not that strong

 

[tooextracool]

Eng's current batting lineup

Tresco
Strauss
Cook
KP
Bell
Collingwood

Backup

Shah - regarded as v ordinary until one-off test in sub-continent (jury still out I'd say)
Vaughan - may never play again but, in any event, not in the top echelon nowadays
Flintoff - average test bat
Joyce - unproven

Put in that perspective, it's not that strong

Im sorry but since when is Flintoff a back up player to the England side? Seems more like you included him there to suit your argument a little bit.
Fact is that one of Collingwood/Bell/Cook will miss out during the Ashes and another one of them would not even be in the side if it werent for injuries.
With regards to Shah, he never played test match cricket before his one off test, so to say that he was very ordinary before that is a tad harsh.
Joyce is about as unproven as the likes of Jacques from Australia given that they both have superior FC records.
For me those players look a lot stronger than the Clarke/Katich/ Watson/Symonds/Hodge scenario for Australia considering that more than half of them have been dropped from the side for poor performances.

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

Yet at the end of the day, all that matters are the runs and if Collingwood is scoring more runs, then logically he is the player to pick. The world is not aware of a lot of things or perhaps a better word to use is that they are 'mistaken', it took them almost a decade to realise that Dravid was infact one of the best players of his generation while players like Gilchrist got plenty of credit for pasting bowlers around the park. Yet i know id rather pick dravid than gilchrist.

Shockingly, still irrelevant.

 

[tooextracool]

Shockingly, still irrelevant.

it seems to me like its only irrelevant because it goes against your argument. Runs scored are always the most important thing a batsman can do and it seems to me like Collingwood and co have been doing it more often than Pietersen.

 

[adharcric]

I'm sorry but Australia's batting reserves are at least as good as England's. If you're going to look at England with only five specialist batsmen playing, then you've got to do the same with Australia. By that standard, the top five for England are Tresco, Strauss, Cook, Pietersen and Bell. For Australia, they're Langer, Hayden, Ponting, Martyn and Hussey.
Let's keep Flintoff and Watson out of it and Gilly and Read as well.

Australia ~ Clarke, Jacques, Hodge, Katich
England ~ Collingwood, Vaughan (even when fit, I wouldn't see him making the team ahead of Cook), Shah, Joyce

Tough to conclude that England are that much better in that department.

 

[Dasa]

^The difference is that the English players (with the exception of Joyce) have already had some success at Test match level, whereas all the Australian players you've named have been dropped for lack of performance at the highest level, or in the case of Jaques, haven't done much in the chances given.

 

[adharcric]

^The difference is that the English players (with the exception of Joyce) have already had some success at Test match level, whereas all the Australian players you've named have been dropped for lack of performance at the highest level, or in the case of Jaques, haven't done much in the chances given.

Do you think it might have anything to do with the level of competition in the Australian team? Kaif has been persisted with in India forever, but he wouldn't last this long in Australia. It might work like that in England too.

 

[StumpMic]

Has anyone considered Upul Tharanga? He has been scoring centuries left and right lately. My vote goes to him.

 

[vic_orthdox]

^The difference is that the English players (with the exception of Joyce) have already had some success at Test match level, whereas all the Australian players you've named have been dropped for lack of performance at the highest level, or in the case of Jaques, haven't done much in the chances given.

Hodge's poor performance of averaging 58...

 

[Steulen]

Hodge's poor performance of averaging 58...

Based on one huge double ton and a string of failures.

 

[Perm]

Has anyone considered Upul Tharanga? He has been scoring centuries left and right lately. My vote goes to him.

Indeed he has 4 ODI centuries and 1 test hundred and is basically a certain at the top of the order in this stage of his career, especially ODI games. Definately one of the best up and coming players of the current crop, is going to be a very good opener in time.

 

[gunner]

best up and coming star

ASIF!!!