Disappointed theres no Scott Muller
I'd go with Johnson, but I'd give MacGill a go in at least Sydney, if not also other venues.
Part of the reason is because I wouldn't pick Watson because I think he's rubbish.
Id pick Macgill with Watson to be honest. Macgill IMO is a better bowler than Bracken and Clark combined and Johnson still needs to prove himself a little bit more. Id have Watson because he deserves a run in the test side for his batting, and while his bowling isnt great, he would certainly be a decent option if Brisbane or on of the other pitches ends up being a seamer's paradise. Well better than not having a third seamer at all.
Tendulkar = the most overated player EVER!!
Beckham = the most overated footballer EVER!!
Vassell = the biggest disgrace since rikki clarke!!
it has to be Stuey
Damn, I'd change my vote to Tait after today's display. 3-12 at one point, and should have been 4-12 (Giles was SO plumb). Admittedly the Poms were having their first hit out of the tour, but in conditions that didn't assist swing at all, he made their openers and captain look like gooses. For the psych factor alone has to be seriously considered - nothing like comprehensively beating the opposition captain to knock out his middle stump!
GOOD OLD COLLINGWOOD - PREMIERS IN 2010Originally Posted by Irfan
Is Cam White, Is Good.
He'll have another game against them to make his case, but I don't see how he can be picked based on that. It was a fine performance, but it was a one day game, and England's first outing for the series. He'd need to back it up with a haul of wickets in the FC game for South Australia and have Clark and Johnson struggle to get a spot.
I know a place where a royal flush
Can never beat a pair
True enough. I think this performance has got him right back in the frame, and if he has another good game for SA, they should go with him.Originally Posted by FaaipDeOiad
I'd like to see Tait brought on to bowl whenever Flintoff arrives at the crease. He beat him so comprehensively today, and its the sort of pressure point you just have to keep kneeling on as hard as you can until you get that satisfying "crack"...
As I said in the other thread, Johnson and Clark are coming off very good performances too, and the fact that this one was in Australia, on TV and against England shouldn't necessarily make it more important. Johnson had the best of Pietersen and took 3 wickets against them in India after all, and he was also consistent in the other matches there and took 4/11 against India in Malaysia. Clark has been in very solid form with both bat and ball since returning from his injury as well, and just recently took 6/39 in a Pura Cup game and made a half century as well.Originally Posted by Matt79
Tait bowled well, but I don't think he's done as much to convince the selectors that he will be a reliable option in the tests as Johnson and Clark have.
It`d be foolish to pick MacGill for the first Test, and I don`t think the selectors will. Out of Johnson and Clark for mine.
member of Liverpool FC and Melbourne City
Originally Posted by Nnanden
why? he likes bowling at the GABBA and England can play legspin
Member of CW Green
Kerry O'Keefe - Worlds funniest Commentator
A lot of people see Watson at #6 as a selection that allows Australia to pick MacGill but it also gives them the opportunity, if they have a reasonable level of confidence in Watson's bowling to do a job, to take a risk and select a high risk reward bowler as the third seamer with Watson to pick up the slack if it doesn't work out.Originally Posted by FaaipDeOiad
I don't think Tait has done enough to deserve selection but he has the tools to be considered strongly by the selectors. The top end series is what really hurt Tait's chances initially, Tait bowled poorly himself and Mitchell Johnson took his chance and leapfrogged him in the queue. Also, he has had a mixed start to the domestic season. He took wickets in both pura cup games against a weakened NSW, although in the first match he only really cleaned up the tail, while against the Vics he got a bit of stick and only finished with the solitary wicket IIRC.
The other thing to take into consideration is that his best and most fearful spells have come with the new ball and he is not going to get that in the Test side unless McGrath completely falls apart.
So WA were bowled out for 208 on the "road" and Symonds was the chief destroyer with 3-18, it's a crazy world. I was listening to a bit of it on the radio early and they were saying that Johnson started off erratically before coming back to dismiss Hussey and Martyn, and then the ten and jack at the end. I think I'll just give up trying to second guess the selectors now.
Johnson has always had the inside running IMO (since Malaysia that is), and I still expect him to play in Brisbane. One reason is the one you point out above about Tait and the new ball. Johnson has only ever had the new ball for Australia in the Bangladesh ODIs, and his best spells have come first or second change. He should get use of the ball after 10-12 overs in Brisbane if he plays, but he will not get it new, and that's going to have to be something the bowler in question can deal with.
Johnson is a risk like Tait, which is fine because hopefully Watson can do a job keeping it tight if necessary, but he's more likely to come off than Tait I think, and has got the potential to be a great bowler, perhaps even more than Tait. Clark is the safe option and could be a reasonable choice, but with McGrath and Warne both fit and ready to go I just don't feel he's necessary. He can always play later tests if Johnson doesn't come off and MacGill isn't chosen.
I swear I had a post entirely based on your last sentence.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)