*Official* Second Test at the Adelaide Oval

[pasag]

The thing is, for who? Siddle was the only reason England were kept to a low 1st-dig score. Hilfenhaus was the best, most reliable bowler in the long second innings. Doherty coming out would mean a radical change of tactics. Johnson was the cricketer of the year 12 months ago and removing him would severely weaken the tail.

Personally, I wouldn't bother with Doherty, but the selectors clearly see things differently. Wouldn't be surprised - and would be pleased - to see an unchanged attack.

1/517

Anyone, really.

 

[NUFAN]

We should probably bat the century maker Haddin at 6 and have North coming in at 7.

8 Doherty* 9 Harris 10 Siddle 11 Bollinger isn't a terrific tail but lets just get 20 for 600 with the ball and trust our top 6 to step up to the plate

* Honestly if O'Keefe came in at 8 our tail would look solid and our bowling would look better.

 

[Noble One]

Hilfenhaus would be the first seamer I would replace. He had a solid winter period for Australia, but since coming back to Australia he has shown zero form for Australia or Tasmania. He would be the one bowler who might find form by going back to Shield cricket and taking the wickets like he once did. His lack of swing this game was quite alarming.

 

[DragonPunk]

IMO all this talk of strengthening our tail is bull****, pick bowlers to bowl out the other team and your top six batsmen should be able to do the bulk of the batting.

 

[Spark]

Partial agree, you don't want a bunny tail though. However I've seen enough from Doherty, Siddle and Hilfenhaus to know that they're capable of adding 100 runs or so in partnership with a recognised bat, which is about what you expect from your tail.

 

[Noble One]

Not as if replacing Johnson actually weakens the tail. I would be happy to have a tailender who is guaranteed a useful 15-20 runs each time they bat, rather than someone who scores 70 every 10 innings, and 10 in the other 9.

 

[Ruckus]

IMO all this talk of strengthening our tail is bull****, pick bowlers to bowl out the other team and your top six batsmen should be able to do the bulk of the batting.

I think the key word there though is "should". I don't think anyone would be advocating strengthening the tail if our top 6 were reliable - people are just trying to put up suggestions which compensate for the bad decisions made by selectors, à la Marcus North.

 

[DragonPunk]

I think the key word there though is "should". I don't think anyone would be advocating strengthening the tail if our top 6 were reliable - people are just trying to put up suggestions which compensate for the bad decisions made by selectors, à la Marcus North.

Yeah North is a worry but besides him and possibly the injured Clarke, I think our top six is looking alright. Ponting looked pretty good in his innings this afternoon.

 

[Son Of Coco]

I hit my head against a brick wall when depth of batting is a concern in relation to picking our best bowlers

Yeah, me too. If they bowl well enough, how they bat shouldn't come into consideration.

 

[Spark]

Ponting and Hussey back to near their best is massive for us. Clarke is never more than an innings or two away nowadays, he's been like that for four years now, and if those three are firing...

Ponting 82.28
Hussey 91.60
Clarke 77.80

Those numbers go into the ridiculous territory if you only count tests that actually mattered, though.

 

[Ruckus]

Yeah North is a worry but besides him and possibly the injured Clarke, I think our top six is looking alright. Ponting looked pretty good in his innings this afternoon.

I'm not convinced with Ponting yet. So often players look good, but still don't manage to get the runs. E.g. Ponting looked great in India, but failed to convert 70's four times.

Then there is Hussey as well. It is quite possible he might return to his bad form, I really don't know...

 

[Spark]

As I said he's a hundred away.

And to write off Hussey when he's scored such a positive, fluent hundred is ludicrous. Can't a guy be in form nowadays?

 

[Ruckus]

And to write off Hussey when he's scored such a positive, fluent hundred is ludicrous.

Not really, more than two years of mediocre form puts at least some doubt in my mind.

 

[DragonPunk]

He seems though to have gone, screw it i'm going to play my natural game.

 

[M0rphin3]

So north is officially a bowling all rounder now?

 

[Howe_zat]

Ponting and Hussey back to near their best is massive for us. Clarke is never more than an innings or two away nowadays, he's been like that for four years now, and if those three are firing...

Ponting 82.28
Hussey 91.60
Clarke 77.80

Those numbers go into the ridiculous territory if you only count tests that actually mattered, though.

What are these figures?

 

[Spark]

Series averages 2006-7. If you make it just the first live test all three averages go well over 100.

 

[robelinda]

Adelaide is such a tough test match for bowlers. I've always been against picking two spinners, they just get carted, as overseas teams have found over the years. You need some tight accurate bowling, guys like Johnson who just wang up and let go will get punished more severely. Stuart Clark type bowlers are useful to tie an end up. I can see Trott just eating up that leg side short fence, just like the Indians, they always bat well at Adelaide. Stifling tight bowling is the order of the day, I'd drop Mitch for Dougeh. MAYBE Xavier for Harris, i'd love Harris to be there, but not sure if losing a frontline spinner is the answer, depends how North is used I guess.

 

[Howe_zat]

Series averages 2006-7. If you make it just the first live test all three averages go well over 100.

Fair point. Remember, though, that was was against a broken Harmison, Saj Mahmood, Ashley Giles and Bad Jimmy (TM)

 

[Goughy]

Has Stuart Clark officially been put out to pasture?