2013 Tour of India

[Rocco Jones]

Re: 2013 Tour of India

Just had a look at FC bowling averages of our leading spinners and I am surprised to see O'Keefe comfortably has the best average of the lot.

O'Keefe 27
Lyon 32
Beer 40
Hauritz 42
Doherty 44

Never been a big fan of O'Keefe's but 27 with the ball and 35 with the bat are pretty impressive FC stats.

[GVGjr]

Re: 2013 Tour of India

Beer has an AC joint injury and is probably out. Lyon would be the lock and I'd have though Doherty (for his limited overs form) and O'Keefe (for his first class form and career stats) are vying for the second spinners spot. I'd be taking O'Keefe, don't need to flight it in India which is his fault. Skiddy left armer should be fine

So Lyon and two left armers in Doherty and O'Keefe?

For team balance, would we be better served by taking someone like Smith rather than one of either Doherty or O'Keefe?

To me unless we are taking a quick bowling all-rounder like Watson or Henriques then our chances of playing two spin bowlers is minimal.

I think we need a decent 5th bowling option given the conditions we will face.

[lemmon]

Re: 2013 Tour of India

So Lyon and two left armers in Doherty and O'Keefe?

For team balance, would we be better served by taking someone like Smith rather than one of either Doherty or O'Keefe?

To me unless we are taking a quick bowling all-rounder like Watson or Henriques then our chances of playing two spin bowlers is minimal.

I think we need a decent 5th bowling option given the conditions we will face.

Oh I didn't mean we take both Doherty and O'Keefe, just that they are fighting for the second spot amongst themselves and I would be giving it to O'Keefe. I'm with you that we can't afford both and can't see us playing two specialist spinners in the XI

[Ozza]

Re: 2013 Tour of India

Squad announced:

Australian test Squad: Michael Clarke (capt), Ed Cowan, David Warner, Phil Hughes, Shane Watson, Matthew Wade, Glenn Maxwell, Mitchell Johnson, Peter Siddle, Mitchell Starc, Nathan Lyon, Moises Henriques, James Pattinson, Xavier Doherty, Jackson Bird, Usman Khawaja, Steve Smith.

Break up being:

Bats:

Cowan
Warner
Hughes
Watson*
Clarke
Khawaja

Keeper:
Wade

Fast Bowling:
Siddle
Pattinson
Bird
Starc
Johnson

Spinners:
Lyon
Doherty

All Rounders:
Maxwell
Smith
Henriques

*I've assumed Watson is just a batsman, non-bowling. Based on recent reports - I don't think we can count on him bowling necessarily.

So, if we go in to Test number 1 - and it is fairly flat Indian deck, but not completely unfriendly to fast-bowling - whats the best 11?

[bulldogtragic]

Re: 2013 Tour of India

Certainly does not look as threatening as teams before it.

[lemmon]

Re: 2013 Tour of India

I would put Smith in the batsman department, looks like they've evaluated the backups and decided he is the best against spin which I don't particularly oppose. They look set to play an allrounder, either Maxwell or Henriques which is slightly ridiculous in my eyes, bits and pieces players shouldn't play test match cricket.

My XI would be:
Warner
Cowan
Hughes
Khawaja
Clarke
Watson (more suited to 6 than Khawaja)
Wade
Patto
Siddle
Lyon
Bird

Its not a team suited to India but its a team that plays to our strengths, I wouldnt be adverse to switching out Bird for either Starc or Johnson who I can see being successful on the sub-continent but I wouldn't play two spinners when Doherty is the second choice (shouldve been O'Keefe anyway)

[Throughandthrough]

Re: 2013 Tour of India

some bizarre selections

from alterternative cricket

Shield cricket this year

Steve Smith Centuries: Nil
Wickets: One

Doherty:

Two wickets, averaging 80

Stephen O'Keefe (17wkts @ 24, avg 25 with bat)

[bulldogtragic]

Re: 2013 Tour of India

some bizarre selections

from alterternative cricket

Shield cricket this year

Steve Smith Centuries: Nil
Wickets: One

Doherty:

Two wickets, averaging 80

Stephen O'Keefe (17wkts @ 24, avg 25 with bat)

SOK should have been picked. X is not test material IMO.

[GVGjr]

Re: 2013 Tour of India

I see some of the logic behind these selections the four opening batsman seems excessive given the conditions.

I get why we have Smith, Henriques and Maxwell in the mix because we do need a 5th bowling option. The only issue with Henriques and Maxwell is that it probably means Wade moves to the number 6 batting spot if either of them is picked. If they pick Smith then Wade can probably bat at 7 which is better for him.

It's a shame we don't have an Alan Sieler, Graeme Beard or Colin Miller type player. (for the younger folk they all bowled medium pace and spin and would change depending on the innings)

I think Watson (The VC) should bat open with Warner so I see Cowan as excessive.
I don't think Doherty offers us much.

[Remi Moses]

Re: 2013 Tour of India

How on earth did Smith and Doherty get a guernsey?
Henriques as well. Doherty's a 50 over bowler, Smith must be in for his fielding and Henriques for comedic value. O'keefe had to be in with Doolan

[LostDoggy]

Re: 2013 Tour of India

O'keefe had to be in with Doolan

Unfortunately Doolan doesnt get much of a look in because he doesnt come from NSW. Has proven form against international teams but needs to wear a blue cap i think.

[Ozza]

Re: 2013 Tour of India

John Inveriarity was on SEN yesterday afternoon. He spoke well about the logic behind some of the selections. I don't necessarily agree with it all - but there is some logic there.

The one I am most against is Doherty - I don't see him as a test player AT ALL.

I've never been a Steve Smith fan - but Inveriarity identified him as a exceptional player of spin bowling. He said that Smith has been picked as a back up batsman - and not as a bowler/all-rounder at all.

It appears that the idea is - if they go into a game with 2 quicks and 2 spinners - then Henriques is likely to play as the 5th bowler. Whereas, if 3 quicks play - and 1 spinner - then Maxwell would play as the 5th bowler/second spin bowler. He seemed very very keen on Maxwell as a prospect.

I'd be tempted to drop Ed Cowan and open with Watson - with the side looking like this;

Warner
Watson
Hughes
Clarke
Khawaja
Wade
Maxwell
Johnson
Siddle
Pattinson
Lyon

12th: Bird (could easily see Bird in the team - but Johnson's form with bat and ball and the conditions, possibly gives him a slight edge).

[Go_Dogs]

Re: 2013 Tour of India

The squad isn't very strong, but the cupboard is so bare that it's difficult to provide alternate options with significant merit, O'Keefe seemingly the one exception.

Not expecting to do well in the series at all, but if one of the all-round types can blossom that would help us moving towards the Ashes.

Warner now is some doubt with his fracture, might ease the problem of too many openers, but would really hurt if he doesn't get up.

[Axe Man]

Re: 2013 Tour of India

I'd be tempted to drop Ed Cowan and open with Watson

Can I ask why you prefer Watson over Cowan?

Neither has great batting figures but Cowan's recent form is better than that of Watson's. Cowan averaged 36 over the summer in 10 innings. Watson has averaged 30 over his last 10 innings stretching back to the West Indies tour. Watson also hasn't made a test century in over 2 years.

Ideally I would probably prefer Watson too but I just don't think he has made his case at the moment. It would simply be replacing one mediocrely performing batsman with a slightly worse performing batsman. Let him play some first class cricket and gain some form. Of course if he is able to bowl again it is an entirely different equation.

[Rocco Jones]

Re: 2013 Tour of India

Cannot believe I am saying this but my XI would include 4 pacemen. It's due to a combo of a few things:
- Our pace bowlers are good bats, a few good number 8 types
- Not much depth in batting. Don't see next specialist bat averaging much more than 35
- Good depth in pace bowlers
- Watson not bowling

My XI would be
Warner
Watson
Hughes
Bailey
Clarke
Wade
O'Keefe
Pattinson
Starc
Siddle
Bird

I like the option of having O'Keefe in. IMO he is the equal to Lyon and Doherty and offers much more with the bat. I don't see Maxwell and Smith as anything more than part timers with the ball, might as well go with another specialist bat.

I know you shouldn't read too much into ODI cricket when it comes to tests but I really think Bailey is the type of guy who would jump to next level. A good head/leader. Can see him coming in and averaging 40+.

Usman comes in for Bailey who I think is a bit of an opposite. Looks a gem at Shield level but really struggles with the step up (more so in pressure than ability).

Just don't rate our spinners nearly enough to play one who can't bat and another 'spinning all-rounder' who doesn't warrant a spot on his batting alone. Like in trade period, ordinary + ordinary doesn't = good.