4th Test Australia v England - MCG

[Bornadog]

Re: 4th Test Australia v England - MCG

We will be lucky to make 200, this is woeful

[KT31]

Re: 4th Test Australia v England - MCG

We will be lucky to make 200, this is woeful

Makes Clarke's decision to bowl quite bewildering.

[Eastdog]

Re: 4th Test Australia v England - MCG

Planning to watch a bit more tomorrow as I didn't watch much today but that was a dissapointing batting performance from us. We need to now make sure we bowl really well and get them out for a low 2nd innings total and then hopefully go for the win. Another good crowd in.

[Bornadog]

Re: 4th Test Australia v England - MCG

Agreed. We need to look at Maddinson at the number 6 spot.

Watson and Bailey are sensational ODI players.

End of post.

I would have Watson at 6, drop Bailey and look for a new number three.

[azabob]

Re: 4th Test Australia v England - MCG

I would have Watson at 6, drop Bailey and look for a new number three.

Didn't sooky la la Watson demand to bat at 3?

[GVGjr]

Re: 4th Test Australia v England - MCG

I would have Watson at 6, drop Bailey and look for a new number three.

I know you are a fan of Watson but his batting averages just does not support his selection in the top 6. I don't think moving him from 3 to 6 will improve his performances either.
Given his age and the fact that his bowling knocks him around I think we need to look elsewhere.

His bowling shouldn't support his selection as a batsman.

[1eyedog]

Re: 4th Test Australia v England - MCG

I know you are a fan of Watson but his batting averages just does not support his selection in the top 6. I don't think moving him from 3 to 6 will improve his performances either.
Given his age and the fact that his bowling knocks him around I think we need to look elsewhere.

His bowling shouldn't support his selection as a batsman.

But it doesn't does it? It supports his selection as an all-rounder and I thought he had bowled well without being spectacular this series. Bowled very nicely in Melbourne before breaking down and his body is obviously where the real issue is.

[GVGjr]

Re: 4th Test Australia v England - MCG

But it doesn't does it? It supports his selection as an all-rounder and I thought he had bowled well without being spectacular this series. Bowled very nicely in Melbourne before breaking down and his body is obviously where the real issue is.

To me a genuine all-rounder gets by on the performance with both the bat and ball. Watson has bowled very well in this series without taking a lot of wickets but his batting has been poor with plenty of starts where he can't go on with it.
As I have previously mentioned, it's not like he has been the victim of great bowling, bad umpiring decisions or being run out by his team mates but rather he has been getting himself out with poor shot selections.

His batting average is of a number 7 and while Haddin's batting has been a huge bonus this series we shouldn't have to move him up the order to cover Watson.
Who would you rather coming in at number 6 for us if it was a choice between Stokes and Watson? We can accept the inconsistency of 22yo in his 3rd test but I don't think we should from a 32yo with the experience of a 50 test career behind him.

[jeemak]

Re: 4th Test Australia v England - MCG

I seem to have the same feelings about Watson's bowling that I do about Shaun Higgins ability to hold down a half forward spot rotating through the midfield.

When fit he's extremely useful, though it's just too unreliable a prospect to rely upon.

Batting wise (bowling aside for the moment), who else cuts the mustard? If he was batting at six and scoring at his current rate it probably wouldn't worry us as much as it does when he's batting at three.

Who can seriously contend for the number three spot? If Bailey was axed, and Watson moved to six I'd be OK with it, only knowing somebody capable was in the wings ready to take on a top order spot.

[GVGjr]

Re: 4th Test Australia v England - MCG

Burns and Maddinson spring to mind and of course Doolan is around the mark.
Hughes could also come in as the number 3.

I get why Watson is a popular player but on his batting average he shouldn't be holding his spot

[jeemak]

Re: 4th Test Australia v England - MCG

Hughes is the obvious choice of those you mentioned.

Kind of seems like going over old ground though, doesn't it.

If he's the best option of them, he's the best option irrespective of his very well known and exposed flaws.

[GVGjr]

Re: 4th Test Australia v England - MCG

Hughes is the obvious choice of those you mentioned.

Kind of seems like going over old ground though, doesn't it.

If he's the best option of them, he's the best option irrespective of his very well known and exposed flaws.

Three players I mentioned haven't played for Australia and Hughes is still young enough to come good.

Burns has had a great start to the season and has batted at the top of the order for Queensland. I think he could hold down a top order spot.
Maddinson has a great technique and would be an ideal number 5 or 6. Doolan has been around the mark for a while now. He could be a solid number 3 or 4.

[1eyedog]

Re: 4th Test Australia v England - MCG

I would have Watson at 6, drop Bailey and look for a new number three.

To me a genuine all-rounder gets by on the performance with both the bat and ball. Watson has bowled very well in this series without taking a lot of wickets but his batting has been poor with plenty of starts where he can't go on with it.
As I have previously mentioned, it's not like he has been the victim of great bowling, bad umpiring decisions or being run out by his team mates but rather he has been getting himself out with poor shot selections.

His batting average is of a number 7 and while Haddin's batting has been a huge bonus this series we shouldn't have to move him up the order to cover Watson.
Who would you rather coming in at number 6 for us if it was a choice between Stokes and Watson? We can accept the inconsistency of 22yo in his 3rd test but I don't think we should from a 32yo with the experience of a 50 test career behind him.

I see where you are coming from and of course every Australian cricket fan wishes he had an extra 5 runs to his average but the truth is he is a very good lower order batsman and a more than useful bowler which makes him a genuine all-rounder. If we are truly set on playing an all-rounder then he should be played. I'm in the group that likes the idea of an all-rounder even if he has failed to live up to his potential throughout the duration of his career. He should be picked as an all-rounder and bat at 6 as BAD suggests and Bailey should make way for him. Bailey is provided approximately the same output with the bat without the ability to bowl. Again, Watson's body is the big unknown but going on history you would have to say that it is unlikely he will be able to bowl beyond 2014-2015. If he can't bowl he doesn't play. It's a good question re. Stokes vs Watson and to be honest right now its a coin toss - although in a year I may well lean toward Stokes who is exciting, aggressive and has ability. Also, the thing is that experience counts for something and Watson's experience is preferred over the idea of getting more match time into Stokes. Australian cricket needs stability as we reassert ourselves as a dominant force and Watson at least provides experience, stability and a sounding board for Pup - so I choose Watson. FWIW I would bring in Hughes or Khwaja at 3 and just play them and move Watson down the order.

With this recent turn around in form across the team we may not see any wholesale change for a while though.

[Bornadog]

Re: 4th Test Australia v England - MCG

I see where you are coming from and of course every Australian cricket fan wishes he had an extra 5 runs to his average but the truth is he is a very good lower order batsman and a more than useful bowler which makes him a genuine all-rounder. If we are truly set on playing an all-rounder then he should be played. I'm in the group that likes the idea of an all-rounder even if he has failed to live up to his potential throughout the duration of his career. He should be picked as an all-rounder and bat at 6 as BAD suggests and Bailey should make way for him. Bailey is provided approximately the same output with the bat without the ability to bowl. Again, Watson's body is the big unknown but going on history you would have to say that it is unlikely he will be able to bowl beyond 2014-2015. If he can't bowl he doesn't play. It's a good question re. Stokes vs Watson and to be honest right now its a coin toss - although in a year I may well lean toward Stokes who is exciting, aggressive and has ability. Also, the thing is that experience counts for something and Watson's experience is preferred over the idea of getting more match time into Stokes. Australian cricket needs stability as we reassert ourselves as a dominant force and Watson at least provides experience, stability and a sounding board for Pup - so I choose Watson. FWIW I would bring in Hughes or Khwaja at 3 and just play them and move Watson down the order.

With this recent turn around in form across the team we may not see any wholesale change for a while though.

Couldn't agree more. The number three spot is arguably one of the hardest spots to play and also one of the most important. Watson is clearly not an opener or number three. He needs to come in when the shine is off the ball and just play aggressively like we know he can. As for his bowling, he has been very good this series without taking too many wickets or leaking too many runs. He always seems to snag a wicket when you need one.

[GVGjr]

Re: 4th Test Australia v England - MCG

Couldn't agree more. The number three spot is arguably one of the hardest spots to play and also one of the most important. Watson is clearly not an opener or number three. He needs to come in when the shine is off the ball and just play aggressively like we know he can. As for his bowling, he has been very good this series without taking too many wickets or leaking too many runs. He always seems to snag a wicket when you need one.

His batting average is 32 this year and even if he is pushed down to number 6 spot it's not good enough for a 32yo who actually doesn't do a lot of bowling due to persistent injuries.

His bowling is good but in a team that really only has two top line performers in the top 6 batting spots can we really afford to carry a veteran with a modest and yet declining batting average?

His shot selection and his ability to bat out sessions or difficult periods really highlight to me that doesn't have the right spirit for a number 6.