***Official*** 2nd Test at the Adelaide Oval

[Laurrz]

Well, an in-form Gilchrist can bat wherever the hell he wants.

i agree

the form bit is my concern

[dontcloseyoureyes]

Nah, don't go with 5. What's the point? One bowler gets severely under-bowled and you weaken the batting significantly.

[FaaipDeOiad]

There's no way they will pick five bowlers, it'd be stupid.

There's two options as far as I can see, which are to go in with the same team, or to drop a batsman and a bowler for Watson and MacGill. Clarke and Clark the obvious choices to go, but it's plausible that they'd get rid of Martyn or Lee.

I doubt they'll bring in Watson without the second spinner after Clarke made runs, though they would have picked him without MacGill in Brisbane. Personally I'm leaning towards them keeping the same side.

[pasag]

Yep, they'll stick with the same side imo. They have decided already I think, when do we find out?

[dontcloseyoureyes]

I'd play Watson with MacGill in Adelaide. There's an argument for dropping Lee and keeping Clark, but Adelaide won't crack up like Brisbane.

In any case, whoever isn't picked for the 11 is hard done by IMO. Everyone in consideration deserves to play.

[Johnners]

I'd be keeping the same side, with perhaps Watson coming in (depending on fitness of course) for either Clarke or Martyn.

[FaaipDeOiad]

I'd play Watson with MacGill in Adelaide. There's an argument for dropping Lee and keeping Clark, but Adelaide won't crack up like Brisbane.

In any case, whoever isn't picked for the 11 is hard done by IMO. Everyone in consideration deserves to play.

Yeah I agree. It'll be unlucky for Clark, Lee, Watson and Clarke if any of them miss out, but one of them has to. Then there's MacGill, who is always unlucky.

[silentstriker]

Maybe its because I am not Australian but I don't see how you can drop a guy that just took seven wickets for you - pitch or not. I mean, I don't know why that would even be an option.

[FaaipDeOiad]

Maybe its because I am not Australian but I don't see how you can drop a guy that just took seven wickets for you - pitch or not. I mean, I don't know why that would even be an option.

Horses for courses, simply. It'd be like if Stuart MacGill took 7 wickets in Adelaide, and the WACA looked to be a traditional Perth wicket and was rock hard and quick and offered nothing for the spinners. They'd drop him for someone like Clark.

Obviously Clark will be unlucky to get dropped, but if they want to pick MacGill because of the surface they have to drop someone, and it'd be extremely harsh to drop Lee after one poor test when he led the attack last summer in McGrath's absence. I'm pretty sure Clark knows that he's done enough to keep himself in the minds of the selectors now, and if he gets dropped for MacGill it'll only be a temporary thing.

[shortpitched713]

Maybe its because I am not Australian but I don't see how you can drop a guy that just took seven wickets for you - pitch or not. I mean, I don't know why that would even be an option.

Not quick enough, imo. Bring in Tait!

Seriously though, I think they're just going to bring in Watson for Clarke, as Clarke really didn't seize his opportunity ala Clark and Langer.

[silentstriker]

Horses for courses, simply. It'd be like if Stuart MacGill took 7 wickets in Adelaide, and the WACA looked to be a traditional Perth wicket and was rock hard and quick and offered nothing for the spinners. They'd drop him for someone like Clark.

Obviously Clark will be unlucky to get dropped, but if they want to pick MacGill because of the surface they have to drop someone, and it'd be extremely harsh to drop Lee after one poor test when he led the attack last summer in McGrath's absence. I'm pretty sure Clark knows that he's done enough to keep himself in the minds of the selectors now, and if he gets dropped for MacGill it'll only be a temporary thing.

I dunno, if MacGill takes 7 wickets, I'd keep him even at Perth...until he proves he can't.

[silentstriker]

IMO you pick your best horses regardless of the courses, with very few exceptions.

[social]

There's no way they will pick five bowlers, it'd be stupid.

There's two options as far as I can see, which are to go in with the same team, or to drop a batsman and a bowler for Watson and MacGill. Clarke and Clark the obvious choices to go, but it's plausible that they'd get rid of Martyn or Lee.

I doubt they'll bring in Watson without the second spinner after Clarke made runs, though they would have picked him without MacGill in Brisbane. Personally I'm leaning towards them keeping the same side.

Clarke hasn't done enough for mine and with it being a back-to-back test, I think they should include Watson for a bit of back-up bowling at his expense.

[oz_fan]

I'd play Watson with MacGill in Adelaide. There's an argument for dropping Lee and keeping Clark, but Adelaide won't crack up like Brisbane.

In any case, whoever isn't picked for the 11 is hard done by IMO. Everyone in consideration deserves to play.

Thats what I'd do as well. Agreed that anyone who misses out is unlucky.

[Matteh]

I dunno, if MacGill takes 7 wickets, I'd keep him even at Perth...until he proves he can't.

I didn't know you were a 90s England selector...