***Official*** 1st Test at The Gabba

[howardj]

Why not 15.

Gilly might get injured on the morning of the game.

 

[howardj]

Plus a shadow for Buchanan in case he gets a digit caught in his laptop or something.

 

[hooligan]

Trescothick

Hi all, this is my first post. Is there any way a message of support can be sent to Marcus Trescothick? Having lived with depression for many years (many more undiagnosed I suspect) I would like to say I hope he gets as good as he can be. Long live cricket!

 

[Laurrz]

:O No Clarke... i did not think that would happen

so Watson is a certainty.... :S that scares me a bit... but im a bit excited about that prospect too letmesee.gif just has to hold his own with the bat... because i think the 4 Australian bowlers will be good enough...

even IF we are in trouble and they are 0/130 or something... i wouldn't expect Watson to be the matchwinner anyway.. hes just there to give flexibility i guess... so he has to be good with the bat

but batting so low ... he might not do well with the tail.

 

[oz_fan]

If you insist on naming a squad of 13, at least make it worthwhile and cover all the options (i.e pick both Warne and MacGill and then wait to see what the pitch is going to offer).

Agreed. It defeats the purpose of naming a 13 man squad when you don't have several options to choose from. I wouldn't be suprised to see Tait picked for the 1st test. There was no need for him to be included in the 13 so there is obviously a reason why he is there ahead of MacGill and Clarke. I would prefer for Johnson to play because of the variety he will bring as a left-armer.

 

[aussie]

good enough squad, let the bloody test start already..

 

[Nate]

Really, really sick of people who state their opinions as fact when they don`t really follow the cricket on all its levels closely. I`m not going to state things about the Indian team, I might say what I think would be better, but most of the time I`m going to be wrong anyway.

People who are surprised at selections or who don`t advocate yonugsters or "randoms" should take a good look at Grade Cricket. You find out a lot by watching those matches. And if you don`t have the time to watch much cricket, than fair enough, you have a life which is tops, but don`t shut-down the opinions of the informed. [/Rant]

Great squad for mine, really not sure if Watson will succeed, but I`m glad they`ve given him the chance. Didn`t think for a second Jaques or Clarke would be chosen based on the selectors. If Tait goes strongly in the Tour Match against England in South Australia, he`s definately in with a brilliant shout. Don`t really mind which of these three make it really, each of them have something - variety, L&L, pace. At this stage I`d probably go with Johnson. Clark`s record at the `GABBA isn`t anything to write home about, Johnson has bowled well there before and knows the ground, and I wouldn`t take the chance with Tait. At this stage.

 

[age_master]

i hope Johnson is the 4th bowler

 

[Poker Boy]

Just seems to me the Aussies still don't know who their fourth bowler is...they've picked three candidates! I'd have picked MacGill instead of Clark to give the option of a second spinner. Watson might be the weak link - what people in Australia won't know is that Flintoff was way out of his depth in Test cricket at the start of his career - it tok him till 2001 to do anyhting with the ball and 2002 to even get a Test 50. I hope England target Watson and see how he copes under pressure - remember KP hammering him in the Bristol ODI last year? But generally we could have all named eight of the Aussie team ages ago and they haven't done anything stupid like droping Langer.

 

[Nate]

Just seems to me the Aussies still don't know who their fourth bowler is...they've picked three candidates! I'd have picked MacGill instead of Clark to give the option of a second spinner. Watson might be the weak link - what people in Australia won't know is that Flintoff was way out of his depth in Test cricket at the start of his career - it tok him till 2001 to do anyhting with the ball and 2002 to even get a Test 50. I hope England target Watson and see how he copes under pressure - remember KP hammering him in the Bristol ODI last year? But generally we could have all named eight of the Aussie team ages ago and they haven't done anything stupid like droping Langer.

1) Good to see people listening to me.

2) Most Aussies who follow cricket a decent amount would know of Flintoff`s average-ness in the early part of his career.

3) MacGill is in crap form, coming back from an injury and the `Gabba is a seaming ground. I`ll be saying it again in a few minutes.

 

[Josh]

Yeah, if England were smart they'd definitely go after Watson. I dunno about him, I reckon his injuries have probably held him back. I still think he's massively overrated.

Time will tell.

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

If anything, Watson is underrated, given the number of people who reckon he's absolutely crap. Watson has all the tools necessary to be a very successful test cricketer. He might not be, but he absolutely needs to be given a decent run in the side, and there's no grounds to disapprove of his selection.

Besides, leaving his FC record aside, he's earnt the selection with his excellent recent ODI performances. There's no doubt England will target him, and he might well struggle, but he still deserves the chance.

 

[Nate]

Wooooord. I`m glad he`s said he`s there as a number six batsmen, would love to see him make runs.

 

[grecian]

Hi all, this is my first post. Is there any way a message of support can be sent to Marcus Trescothick? Having lived with depression for many years (many more undiagnosed I suspect) I would like to say I hope he gets as good as he can be. Long live cricket!

Hi Hooligan, welcome to the site, sorry to hear of your problems.

You could try contacting Marcus here:

ISM

 

[PhoenixFire]

What time is it starting and finishing GMT?

 

[marc71178]

No Hodge in the squad is surprising if you ask me

Why exactly?

Isn't there at least 1 other batsman not named that's well ahead of him in the pecking order?

 

[aussie]

Watson might be the weak link - what people in Australia won't know is that Flintoff was way out of his depth in Test cricket at the start of his career - it tok him till 2001 to do anyhting with the ball and 2002 to even get a Test 50.

Thats true, but i'm sure knowledgeable Australian cricket fans know about Freddie's early woesa in Intl cricket, but unlike Watson he was woefull in test & ODI's up until the period you mentioned, the only notable performance i remember from him between 98-2001 was hill brillaint 80 odd vs Pakistan in Lahore & after that England kept hope in him based on that & his county for for Lancs that he could be a top-allrounder for England & eventually it payed off.

Watson at this stage compared to Freddie during the same period has done most things better than Freddie in FC & International, its just a matter of him living up to his potential now.

 

[PhoenixFire]

Freddie is a lot better than his stats show him out to be. He bowled as well as any bowler I've ever seen at one point, when he bowled 2 inswinging yorkers to Gillespie and McGrath, Waqar would be proud of them.

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

Freddie is a lot better than his stats show him out to be. He bowled as well as any bowler I've ever seen at one point, when he bowled 2 inswinging yorkers to Gillespie and McGrath, Waqar would be proud of them.

Yes, now. He wasn't a particularly good bowler at the start of his international career, though.

 

[Josh]

Why exactly?

Isn't there at least 1 other batsman not named that's well ahead of him in the pecking order?

If you're talking about Clarke...