Runs are runs and if we ignore them on the basis of aesthetics then guys like Sehwag, Amla, and Chanderpaul would never have been given another go at test cricket
Amla? Amla's a fairly aesthetic batsman IMO.
do you think people will be allowed to make violins?
who's going to make the violins?
That wasnt the case in India so I hope a miracle cure has been discovered in the meantime
Secondly, you've weakened Australia's already dodgy batting lineup by ensuring our tail starts at 8. Sorry but that prospect doesnt exactly fill me with joy
Thirdly, you've taken ONE McDonald bowling performance (in a match where he scored 68 btw) and somehow drawn the conclusion that it's representative of his career.
He averages 33 with the ball in test cricket not 103 and for the most part, SA couldnt hit him off the square i.e. he'll do the job
As I've said earlier, IF the weather forecast for Brisbane is correct then McDonald would be a good bet because you know what you'll get
BTW< Harris is highly unlikely to be fit so talk of him is wishful thinking in the extreme
Runs against NZ. Hard to come by these days with our bowling attack.
He got shown up in England and I reckon he has a bit to work on before returning to the test side.
And lol at the aesthetics. I never said he shouldn't be picked because he's ugly. Geez, I support Sinclair and Ingram.
He was dropped, scored nearly 1000 runs last season and succeeded in his comeback test
If he scores runs in the leadup to the first test (i.e. is in form this year) then I honestly dont know what else people can ask of him.
IMO, the only way we'll find out whether the Ashes was merely an aberration (as opposed to a fatal flaw) is to actually play him
I fully expect him to contribue in a few innings over the course of Ashes, once he bats more responsibly. If you dont, i'm not going to try to convince you otherwise ATM. Performances in the Ashes shall prove this.
Once a proper strong top 6 is picked with North dropped. Then AUS should & woudl not be relying on him to score runs at all. Just for example if he comes it with AUS 400/6, TO score a good quick-wire 30-50.
Originally Posted by social
Even if Watson is 100 % fiit as he was in India (he has looked this lazy & latargic since the NZ series earlier this year & took those 5 wicket hauls vs PAK). If Brisbane conditions do turn out to be as you suggest. He would be far more effective than McDonald in such a line-up, if needeed to bowl as the 5th bowling option behind the 4-main quicks. So no need to pick McDonald.
I've already articulated my position on Johnson above. By no means in the XI i chosen would that tail start from # 8 with him. The likes of Hilfenahaus & Harris/Siddle are no joke tailedners, they certainly can contribute.
McDonald scored that 68 with AUS basically having no hope of winning, with no pressure to perform. His batting is not good enought to give consistent runs @ # 6/7 @ test level for AUS.
As i laready said, it wasn't as if the SA batsmen couildn't hit him off the square. They where rather never in a position to in the first two test TO HIT him him off the square, because of how superb Johnson/Hifly/Siddle bowled in the 1st two test. Especially Johnson who shocked them with amount of inswing he got in SA - they certainly wouldn't have expected that based on what they faced from him in AUS. The SA batsmen where never in a position to be able to take of advantage of McDonald since he was an obvious weaklink, until the final test @ Capetown when they got accustomed to the AUS pace trio on flat pitch & absolutely slaughtered McDonald. So McDonald bowling tight in those 1st two test in SA was him feeding of the pressure Johnson/Siddle/Hilfy created.
If conditions are correct as you suggest. I would pick Harris, Siddle or George (form & fitness permitting) over McDonald without a doubt. Since they would clearly provide a more wicket-taking threat in such conditions.
We shall see what happens with Harris between now & the 1st test. Even if he isn't fit, the likes of Siddle or George should be next in line.
Last edited by aussie; 16-10-2010 at 11:59 PM.
Enough people always agree with my POVs on this site at a given time in a thread. The world of cricket POVs/opinions does not end on CW.net. So i dont care if the majority of the CW regulars & elitist dont with sotimeme i say at a given time, since i dont come on here to change minds - but rather to state my positions on various cricket matters.
Guys, stop discussing aussie and talk about the Ashes. He should be allowed to have a discussion without people discussing the discussion.
And Shri if you reply to or completely ignore this, I'll campaign for your banning. So much ****-stirring from you lately; keep a lid on it.
Rejecting 'analysis by checklist' and 'skill absolutism' since Dec '09
Rejecting 'selection deontology' since Mar '15
'Stats' is not a synonym for 'Career Test Averages'
Originally Posted by Jeffrey Tucker
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)