M. Hussey = GONE?

[LostDoggy]

Re: M. Hussey = GONE?

Who is saying that Symonds' technique is up to test standard apart fom the selectors?


Who is saying that it's Symonds keeping Hodge out of the team? They arent in any way simliar players. Hodge would be a long way behind half a dozen other middle order batsmen in the queue.

Brad Hodge was 12th man for most of the last three years until Jacques and Rogers came in with Justin Langer's retirement, and he is still only one of two specialist middle order batsmen not in the Test team but on a Cricket Australia contract (with David Hussey the other) He was clearly next in line, and is still widely regarded as one of the top two or three batsmen at Shield level, second only to Katich last year, who has made the Test team. The batsmen being currently mentioned in the media for national honours are openers (due to Hayden's failures), when it comes to middle order players there are none better except D. Huss at the moment. The only thing that would deny him a place is either an entrenched incumbent (through form or favouritism) or a youth policy.

One has to ask, what the hell is a CA contract for if not to identify the clear order of succession?

[ledge]

Re: M. Hussey = GONE?

Your right they arent similar Hodge is a great advocate for the game in all ways Symonds is none.
Do they have to be similar?
He probably is or could be behind some but definitely not behind Symonds.
And if Symonds was in the side as a batsman well give me Hodge anyday.

[Twodogs]

Re: M. Hussey = GONE?

Your right they arent similar Hodge is a great advocate for the game in all ways Symonds is none.
Do they have to be similar?
He probably is or could be behind some but definitely not behind Symonds.
And if Symonds was in the side as a batsman well give me Hodge anyday.

To replace Symonds it'd be handy if said replacement could at least bowl a bit, not to mention the different fielding standards between Hodge and Symonds.

[LostDoggy]

Re: M. Hussey = GONE?

To replace Symonds it'd be handy if said replacement could at least bowl a bit, not to mention the different fielding standards between Hodge and Symonds.

Because Symonds has been a revelation with the ball this summer, bowling all of 0 overs in the first innings in Melbourne, and his fielding has been nothing short of spectacular with him not being able to run at all due to a bung knee?

At least a specialist batsman could have scored a few runs while doing absolutely nothing the rest of the time.

[Twodogs]

Re: M. Hussey = GONE?

Brad Hodge was 12th man for most of the last three years until Jacques and Rogers came in with Justin Langer's retirement, and he is still only one of two specialist middle order batsmen not in the Test team but on a Cricket Australia contract (with David Hussey the other) He was clearly next in line, and is still widely regarded as one of the top two or three batsmen at Shield level, second only to Katich last year, who has made the Test team. The batsmen being currently mentioned in the media for national honours are openers (due to Hayden's failures), when it comes to middle order players there are none better except D. Huss at the moment. The only thing that would deny him a place is either an entrenched incumbent (through form or favouritism) or a youth policy.

One has to ask, what the hell is a CA contract for if not to identify the clear order of succession?

So who does he replace? In reality he's competing for the #4 or #5 spot, the selectors have demonstrated their preference for a #6 who bowls a bit and can earn his spot with his fielding, so he either takes the spot of Hussey or Clarke, or Hussey takes the opener's spot and Hodge comes in. Personally I'd rather see Hughes get a chance to open and the middle order left to settle down with the players already in place.

[Twodogs]

Re: M. Hussey = GONE?

Because Symonds has been a revelation with the ball this summer, bowling all of 0 overs in the first innings in Melbourne, and his fielding has been nothing short of spectacular with him not being able to run at all due to a bung knee?

At least a specialist batsman could have scored a few runs while doing absolutely nothing the rest of the time.

You'd have to ask the selectors about that. My brain starts to hurt whenever I start to think about it.

[LostDoggy]

Re: M. Hussey = GONE?

You'd have to ask the selectors about that. My brain starts to hurt whenever I start to think about it.

Haha good one. So does mine.

It also hurts everytime I hear Hilditch try to explain it.

[Twodogs]

Re: M. Hussey = GONE?

Haha good one. So does mine.

It also hurts everytime I hear Hilditch try to explain it.

That's because he doesnt understand it. He's a lawyer they dont have to understand just convince people.

[ledge]

Re: M. Hussey = GONE?

Haha good one. So does mine.

It also hurts everytime I hear Hilditch try to explain it.

But i bet he can tell you about the weather on the beaches of Sth Australia and how well his dog is for the walk.
Sad thing is he tried to cover his bad decisions by having big Merv try and explain it on radio, making Merv look the dill, (not that Merv is the brightest spark in the fire)

[Ozza]

Re: M. Hussey = GONE?

As far as Hodge is concerned - whilst he was very stiff to get dropped at the time - his form since hasn't been good enough to force his way back in. The opportunity has been there this year and he hasn't been banging down the door with an average of about 35 - so forget Hodge - he won't play for Australia again unfortunately.

Hussey will get back into form soon enough. He is technically very sound - and after spoiling us with 3 years of looking unbeatable - his is in a (hopefully) small slump. I'd back him to come back strongly in South Africa and perform well in England. He still averages over 59 in test cricket, and his hard working attitude and enthusiasm in the field suggests to me that he will be able to turn his fortunes around.

[Topdog]

Re: M. Hussey = GONE?

On Hussey I was reading an article by Fleming (I believe) and he was saying that Hussey’s form slump is the most puzzling of them all because his stroke play is still technically very strong and he wasn't really making many mistakes.

[LostDoggy]

Re: M. Hussey = GONE?

I think Hussey needs to be retained for the next two seasons, and I am pro rebuild, just dont think you can do everyone at once and shouldnt get rid of quality players for the sake of youth. Maybe give Huss a test off... He still has plenty of runs in him. One of the best cover drives in the business.

I am really starting to like Mitch Johnson... must be something in the name... first and last!

[Sockeye Salmon]

Re: M. Hussey = GONE?

Hodge was easily good enough to have a long test career, his problem was his dreadful timing. At least twice over his career he was in terrible form just when a position became vacant, in between times he made a mountain of runs.

Hodge is at least the equal of Damian Martyn.

[LostDoggy]

Re: M. Hussey = GONE?

At least twice over his career he was in terrible form just when a position became vacant

Or hurt his back putting on his pants in the dressing room!

[Twodogs]

Re: M. Hussey = GONE?

Hodge was easily good enough to have a long test career, his problem was his dreadful timing. At least twice over his career he was in terrible form just when a position became vacant, in between times he made a mountain of runs.

Hodge is at least the equal of Damian Martyn.

Dont get me started on Damian Martyn...



We'll still be here at the start of footy season.