*Official* Third Test at the WACA

[Howe_zat]

Originally Posted by benchmark00

Should sucker punch them with David Warner and Watson opening the batting imo.

Australia batting for 20 overs has my full backing.

[stephen]

Originally Posted by DeusEx

I would be all for picking O'Keefe, because he looks promising with the ball and the bat. But I wasn't talking about him because it seems at this stage very unlikely he will even come under consideration. Furthermore, the whole premise of having North as the 'main' spinner is because it is assumed he will be retained in the team. As this test has shown, it is our batting which is the main problem atm, hence making North the main spinner allows his position to be of better value, and allows another batsmen into the middle order. Once again, you cannot possibly argue that having Hauritz as the main spinner and North as the no. 6 would be better than having North as the main spinner and an extra proper batsmen (e.g. Khawaja).

Compare the line-ups, which one do you think would be more likely to succeed:


1.

Watson
Katich
Ponting
Clarke
Hussey
Khawaja
North (spinner)
Haddin
Fast bowler
Fast bowler
Fast bowler

2.

Watson
Katich
Ponting
Clarke
Hussey
North
Haddin
Hauritz
Fast bowler
Fast bowler
Fast bowler

But it isn't an either-or situation. You can jettison North without making other changes you know.

[Ruckus]

Originally Posted by stephen

But it isn't an either-or situation. You can jettison North without making other changes you know.

Yeah of course, but that isn't what I was talking about. I was referring to the likely scenario of North being retained. Frankly, if it was up to me I would probably have O'Keefe and Cameron/Copeland in the team...

[The_roc]

On the radio this morning they were saying Rolton was next Aussie in line for a batting spot. Anyone else heard this?

[Spark]

[DragonPunk]

Originally Posted by NUFAN

Word on the street is that S Marsh will debut at his home ground in the 3rd Test.

I wouldn't mind that, he's in form and made a lot of runs for WA this season thus far.

[centurymaker]

Originally Posted by DeusEx

I would be all for picking O'Keefe, because he looks promising with the ball and the bat. But I wasn't talking about him because it seems at this stage very unlikely he will even come under consideration. Furthermore, the whole premise of having North as the 'main' spinner is because it is assumed he will be retained in the team. As this test has shown, it is our batting which is the main problem atm, hence making North the main spinner allows his position to be of better value, and allows another batsmen into the middle order. Once again, you cannot possibly argue that having Hauritz as the main spinner and North as the no. 6 would be better than having North as the main spinner and an extra proper batsmen (e.g. Khawaja).

Compare the line-ups, which one do you think would be more likely to succeed:


1.

Watson
Katich
Ponting
Clarke
Hussey
Khawaja
North (spinner)
Haddin
Fast bowler
Fast bowler
Fast bowler

2.

Watson
Katich
Ponting
Clarke
Hussey
North
Haddin
Hauritz
Fast bowler
Fast bowler
Fast bowler

How are you possibly going to take 20 wickets with line-up 1?
Line-up 2 is more likely to take 20 wickets, although it is still quite unlikely to do so.
Bowlers are doing worse than batsmen imo.
1000+ runs for 5 wickets is absolutely rubbish. Even a state team would've done better.

[Spark]

Not great but the pitches have been flat. 245AO is much more inexcusable for mine.

[centurymaker]

Originally Posted by Spark

Not great but the pitches have been flat. 245AO is much more inexcusable for mine.

Australia actually need to win the ashes, so they have to win tests. They can't win if the bowlers don't take 20 wickets. I would drop north for another bowler, who can perferably bat a bit.
Since the pitches are flat, good batting performances should be around the corner.

[Howe_zat]

Would play Smith + 4 seamers. I still consider Smith a batsman, maybe a batting all-rounder in one-day cricket, but is more likely to get wickets than North. (Also runs).

For fast bowling, I'd take Dougie, Siddle, Harris and Cameron.

Personally I hope Doherty plays for as long as possible. I've tried to give him the benifit of the doubt, I don't think you can judge a cricketer by one match. But I can't bring myself to consider XD as Test match standard.

[Ruckus]

Originally Posted by centurymaker

How are you possibly going to take 20 wickets with line-up 1?
Line-up 2 is more likely to take 20 wickets, although it is still quite unlikely to do so.
Bowlers are doing worse than batsmen imo.
1000+ runs for 5 wickets is absolutely rubbish. Even a state team would've done better.

Seeing as though I didn't even specify the fast bowlers, you're assuming Hauritz is going to make a significant difference (I'm pretty sure Hauritz hasn't made much of a difference before.)? As we don't have a very good spin bowler at the moment, Watson + 3 other quicks are going to have to take the bulk of the wickets. Whether you like that or not, it is the reality. Don't see at all how you can justify the batsmen are doing better than the bowlers...bowlers have failed in unfavourable conditions, batsmen have failed in favourable conditions.

[benchmark00]

Didn't think I'd ever say this, but if Australia are looking to pull the trigger and take 20 wickets at any cost, the best option is Jason Krejza.

[Spark]

Originally Posted by Howe_zat

Would play Smith + 4 seamers. I still consider Smith a batsman, maybe a batting all-rounder in one-day cricket, but is more likely to get wickets than North. (Also runs).

For fast bowling, I'd take Dougie, Siddle, Harris and Cameron.

Personally I hope Doherty plays for as long as possible. I've tried to give him the benifit of the doubt, I don't think you can judge a cricketer by one match. But I can't bring myself to consider XD as Test match standard.

I said this a couple of times but today I really did start wishing we had Hauritz, because he really could've made use of the rough which was well wide of off stump and reasonably full.

[GingerFurball]

Originally Posted by Spark

You're not seriously suggesting playing North as a specialist spinner are you? Geez, I at least was just having a bit of a laugh, but...

Is it such a terrible shout? He's got a better FC record than pretty much any other Aussie spinner.

[Spark]

Because, as I said, he only has to bowl when he feels like he's bowling well.