View Poll Results: Would you sub out Nathan Lyon for Trent Bridge?

Voters
27. You may not vote on this poll
  • No - Lyon has been dicked around with enough

    19 70.37%
  • Yes - Lyon for Faulkner

    0 0%
  • Yes - Lyon for Starc

    1 3.70%
  • Yes - Lyon for Bird

    4 14.81%
  • Programmatic specificity will lead Labor to victory

    3 11.11%
Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 66
Like Tree3Likes

Thread: Australia - should they field four quicks?

  1. #31
    International Captain Ruckus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Yes
    Posts
    7,108
    Fitness in the clear, Harris and Pattinson are two absolute lock-ins for me. If those two **** up then there isn't much else the coach or whoever could have done, because they are the best two bowlers we have. The third spot is less consequential, but I still would be picking Bird, because I wouldn't even be that surprised if he managed to outshine the other two. I doubt Siddle would do that though.

  2. #32
    International 12th Man Julian87's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Ashfield
    Posts
    1,663
    Is it just me or does there not appear a real chance that Faulkner will play as an all rounder in the first test anyway?

    I realise this game atm is just a tour game and they're giving plenty of blokes a hit out but there aren't really any logical choices for the #6 position (barring Smith who isn't playing and was only a late addition to the squad).

    I don't really agree with such a bowling heavy side at all but it does seem a chance of happening and would make this thread a tad irrelevant.

  3. #33
    International Coach flibbertyjibber's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Mrs Miggins pie shop
    Posts
    11,287
    I would think Wade has more chance of playing the first test than Faulkner. I'd be very surprised if Faulkner was to play any of the upcoming 10 tests between the sides.

  4. #34
    Hall of Fame Member FaaipDeOiad's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    19,102
    Yeah I don't really think #6 is a specialist position, realistically anyone should be able to bat there, but Faulkner there or at 7 would a big surprise. The batting is definitely tough to pick since there's quite a few guys who you wouldn't say are locked into a position, basically just Rogers, Clarke and Watson who are 100% to play in the first test, fitness permitting. But I think the most likely option is that some combination of Hughes, Cowan, Khawaja and Warner fills the rest of the top 6, with the three that haven't punched anyone in the face lately being the easy picks. The fact that everyone made some runs against Somerset just makes it more likely they'll stick with that group.
    I know a place where a royal flush
    Can never beat a pair


  5. #35
    Hall of Fame Member Marcuss's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Above you
    Posts
    15,446
    Pick McDonald = problems solved.

  6. #36
    Global Moderator Spark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    A Blood Rainbow
    Posts
    32,222
    Quote Originally Posted by FaaipDeOiad View Post
    Yeah I don't really think #6 is a specialist position, realistically anyone should be able to bat there, but Faulkner there or at 7 would a big surprise. The batting is definitely tough to pick since there's quite a few guys who you wouldn't say are locked into a position, basically just Rogers, Clarke and Watson who are 100% to play in the first test, fitness permitting. But I think the most likely option is that some combination of Hughes, Cowan, Khawaja and Warner fills the rest of the top 6, with the three that haven't punched anyone in the face lately being the easy picks. The fact that everyone made some runs against Somerset just makes it more likely they'll stick with that group.
    It's not a specialist position but there are certain types of players who do better there than others IMO (I've harped on about this for ages though)
    + time's fickle card game ~ with you and i +


    get ready for a broken ****in' arm

  7. #37
    Cricket Web: All-Time Legend Top_Cat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Location
    Adelaide, South Australia
    Posts
    23,066
    Quote Originally Posted by hendrix View Post
    I would think that both Harris and perhaps Bird are above Starc in the pecking order.
    Nah, no way is Bird above Starc. Bird's latest injury was ill-timed but it's reality that the selectors clearly put Starc ahead at the moment. They certainly have been giving him a ton of chances in all forms.

    Harris not a lock for the first Test yet either but if he pulls up well in the next FC game, that should see him through with a few wickets a bonus. Lehmann being the coach does nothing but help his chances but, at this stage, Pattinson/Siddle/Starc a huge chance as the first Test line-up.
    The Colourphonics

    Bandcamp
    Twitderp

  8. #38
    Request Your Custom Title Now! Spikey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    All Glory To The Nev
    Posts
    32,498
    Quote Originally Posted by Julian87 View Post
    Is it just me or does there not appear a real chance that Faulkner will play as an all rounder in the first test anyway?

    I realise this game atm is just a tour game and they're giving plenty of blokes a hit out but there aren't really any logical choices for the #6 position (barring Smith who isn't playing and was only a late addition to the squad).

    I don't really agree with such a bowling heavy side at all but it does seem a chance of happening and would make this thread a tad irrelevant.
    Faulkner wouldn't bat 6, it'd be Haddin, and my god it would be stupid as ****
    Indians can't bowl - Where has the rumour come from as I myself and many indian friends arwe competent fast bowlers ?

    With the English bid I said: Let us be brief. If you give back the Falkland Islands, which belong to us, you will get my vote. They then became sad and left

  9. #39
    International Vice-Captain MW1304's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    South Central
    Posts
    4,167
    Best batsman available goes at 6. Faulkner is not the best batsman available, bowling should have absolutely nothing to do with anything. I would be surprised if anyone other than Khawaja or Smith plays there.

  10. #40
    State Vice-Captain MrPrez's Avatar
    Tournaments Won: 1
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    South Africa
    Posts
    1,092
    Simple stuff really.

    Basic Test format should be

    6 batsmen
    1 keeper
    4 bowlers.

    In the assumption that one of the top 6 can bowl a bit. Even if it's just a few overs of offspin or dibblies.

    If you don't have anyone at all bowleable, then you maaay get away with selecting a slightly worse batsman at 6 who can bowl part-time.

    If you've got Watson in your top 6 there is absolutely no reason to play someone like Faulkner unless he's in as one of the four specialist bowlers.
    @CowsCorner - 202 followers and counting!

    Disclaimer: I am a biased South African. Anything I say is likely to have something in it that ultimately favours the Proteas.

  11. #41
    International Vice-Captain MW1304's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    South Central
    Posts
    4,167
    Especially if your bowling is your (in this case, much much) stronger suit. Play the better bat. And tbh whether Haddin would bat above him or not is immaterial.

  12. #42
    Cricketer Of The Year Cabinet96's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    London, England
    Posts
    9,243
    Playing Faulkner at 7 would be daft, but it's definitely something I can see Australia doing. I'd be disappointed more than surprised if Faulkner played.
    Quote Originally Posted by Flem274* View Post
    This English top three are cornflakes. They're not the most exciting thing out but they're pretty effective. Then the middle order are the sugar. Would be too much on their own but added to the cornflakes they add some much needed interest

    When KP returns he will be the banana..

  13. #43
    International Debutant Adders's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    HMP Oz.
    Posts
    2,171
    Quote Originally Posted by MrPrez View Post
    Simple stuff really.

    Basic Test format should be

    6 batsmen
    1 keeper
    4 bowlers.

    This, the Aussies have to play their 6 best batsmen and stop ****ing around with bits and pieces players in the No 6 position. The way their bowling attack is being talked up this shouldn't even be a discussion.

  14. #44
    You'll Never Walk Alone Nate's Avatar
    Bowling tgfg Champion! Carmageddon Champion! Rainman Champion! DTunnel Champion!
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    New South Wales
    Posts
    26,903
    I felt sorry for Starc, and voted for him in case he reads CW.
    Jesus saves

    proudly supporting Liverpool FC

  15. #45
    International 12th Man Tangles's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Polar Vortex
    Posts
    1,599
    Quote Originally Posted by Adders View Post
    This, the Aussies have to play their 6 best batsmen and stop ****ing around with bits and pieces players in the No 6 position. The way their bowling attack is being talked up this shouldn't even be a discussion.
    It's not a discussion for most fans but after seeing Maxwell play test cricket we realize the selectors don't like simple solutions.

Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast


Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Dangerous on their day- Quicks
    By Goughy in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: 30-12-2010, 11:29 PM
  2. 3 quicks
    By ret in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 27
    Last Post: 17-06-2008, 04:13 AM
  3. Replies: 6
    Last Post: 13-03-2007, 06:01 PM
  4. India's Quicks - what do you think?
    By deeps in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 25
    Last Post: 08-07-2006, 06:11 AM
  5. who are the genuine 'quicks'?????
    By anzac in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: 11-03-2003, 02:50 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •