I’ll keep Damien Martyn in the team, did not fair too well in Bangladesh but he played a marvellous match winning knock at Jo’Burg. Also the fact that Australia should be aware that Hoggard does like a left hander and Martyn does at least add to the quota of right handers. However if Jaques form continues he be a tough man to leave out, other than that, I’m pretty much in agreement with you.Quote:
Originally Posted by aussie
fully agree with your point greg, hopefully the England selectors think along the same lines when the time comes.
Martyn will start in Brisbane, barring injury. One can never be absolutely certain about our selectors behaviour, given their strange choices in recent times, but people are getting way ahead of themselves because there has been no international cricket for Australia in months. Jaques scoring big in England and for Australia "A" is very good and all, but Martyn is, barring a brief absence of two series, a solid member of the test side. He made his return in good fashion against South Africa and averaged 50+ with a match-winning century, and there's simply no reason to drop him.
There are, imo, only three places which are remotely debatable for the first test, and the 4th batting spot is pretty secure for at least a test or two.
Langer
Hayden
Ponting
Martyn/Hodge/Jaques
Hussey
Watson/Clarke
Gilchrist
Warne
Lee
Gillespie/Clark/MacGill
McGrath
I think the likely lineup for Brisbane is Martyn at 4, and Clarke at 6 with Gillespie at 10. Later in the series, and potentially even for the first test, Watson will come in at 6 and MacGill for Gillespie. The selectors usually pick the full quota of seamers for Brisbane, and I think it's fairly unlikely that they will play Watson with the seam attack, but it could go either way. It may well depend on ODI form in the Champions Trophy as to who starts at 6 when the seamers play. When MacGill is in the side, Watson will be also.
Jaques and Hodge will miss out, I think. Martyn may be dropped if he has a poor ODI run and a bad test or two in the Ashes, but I think regardless of what happens between now and then he will be given one more chance at 4. Gillespie is probably ahead of Clark right now, because of his experience in various conditions, and the fact that he was the pick of the seamers in Bangladesh. MacGill should play at least 2-3 tests in the Ashes.
Gillespie in England now = laughable. Clark HAS to be ahead of him. Even MacGill.
Am inclined to agree with you there, would prefer to see Clark over Gillespie at the moment.Quote:
Originally Posted by Nnanden
In terms of what Sean was saying about Clarke or Watson, I'd prefer to see Watson. In terms of first class averages, Watson has just passed 50, while Clarke is only 40.01. And, given that he can offer a decent fifth bowling option, I reckon he should get a run over him. Granted, Clarke is a much better player of spin, but given they're playing in Australia, with only Monty to contend with (will be decent, but it's not Kumble and Harbhajan in India), I don't see much reason why Clarke should be in over Watson.
Talking of Stuart Clark, I saw him play a few games for Middlesex when he was over here and he looked very average to say the least. So how come he performed so well in South Africa? Favourable conditions? Or has he improved a hell of a lot during the short space of time?
From what I saw I imagine KP and co would be well up for facing him. Just looking for a little more insight into the bloke.
Well from what i saw of Dizzy today i'm not so sure, his figures look a bit rough but he beat the bat a lot early on & could have easily got about 3 wickets. But yea i would still have Clark ahead of him slightly now, but if he can end the season with some wickets & start the Pura cup with South Australia well it could be a different story.Quote:
Originally Posted by andyc
Hear hear! A test featuring both Warne & Panesar will be a real treat.
Quote:
Originally Posted by UncleTheOne
I saw him playing for Middlesex as well, and as you say he looked nothing special. Perhaps though he wasn't giving 100%? You'd expect any player to give a bit extra when they play for their country.
Stuart Clark never looks anything special. He's a very deceptive bowler really. He bowled wonderfully in South Africa though.Quote:
Originally Posted by UncleTheOne
30 wickets @ 31 is "laughable"? Anyway, Australia have never really picked players based on county form. I don't think it's especially relevant, provided that his figures aren't embarassing. As it is they are merely average.Quote:
Originally Posted by Nnanden
Wouldn't Bell and Pietersen swap spots?Quote:
Originally Posted by Hanuma
IMO Pietersen needs to bat in the top 5. Batting at 4 suits him well for me.
I think Vaughan should bat at 5. He's a very, very good player of spin and should have dropped down before IMO.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hanuma
Vaughn is saying he'll be fit on the radio now.
I take it Collingwood would pay for his return? Imagining he was fit I'd say the Ashes tommorrow;
Tresco
Strauss
Vaughn
Cook
Pietersen
Bell
Flintoff
C.Read
M.Hoggard
S.Harmison
M.Panesar
Is it atall likely we'll only play 4 bowlers? We do only need to draw the series to retain the ashes.
yea i agree, along with Trescothick, KP & Flintoff (to an extent), he is one of England few good players of spin when in good form.Quote:
Originally Posted by greg