*Official* Third Test at Old Trafford

[Cabinet96]

Basically if it isn't turning then we don't need two spinners anyway, and if it is a real bunsen then I'd back Root to be decent backup for Swann, showed in the last Test that he can bowl.

The people in the know seem to think reverse is more likely than turn anyhow, so stick with Bres please.

Yeah, I'd suspect Bresnan to be much more useful at OT than at Lords, so I'll be pretty gutted if they leave him out.

Re Monty. Like others I think it's a nice option to have in the squad even if I don't think he should or would play. There is normally a decent amount in it for the seamers at Old Trafford and given the weather has turned it'll be a risk. Then again since the wicket was turned 90 degrees the wickets have been kind of unpredictable. The last game at Old Trafford in the championship both teams played two spinners and they took 20 out of the 25 wickets in the game so in that respect it is wise to have Monty in the squad in case a similar wicket is prepared.

I think the Oval is the game where Monty should play. Much more like a subcontinental wicket with no pace and slow turn meaning nothing much in it for the seamers.

These next two matches at Old Trafford and Chester Le Street are both decent wickets for Australia. OT had pace and bounce (it may not this year, who knows?), and C-L-S is the lowest scoring ground in county cricket - always swings and seams and has decent pace and inconsistent bounce in the wicket.

I've always maintained that Australia's best chance to win a game is at C-L-S because there might be something in it for the seamers. Only thing is, because it's their first real major test match, they might want to make sure they get five days in so could offer up a road.

 

[Esperance]

Monty to top score and get a 10fer.

 

[theegyptian]

I've always maintained that Australia's best chance to win a game is at C-L-S because there might be something in it for the seamers. Only thing is, because it's their first real major test match, they might want to make sure they get five days in so could offer up a road.

Yes they're bound to try and flatten it out a bit otherwise the game could be over in less than 3 days.

 

[Expressway76]

Monty to top score and get a 10fer.

Monty to take all 20 wickets and break the record for most catches in a match by fielding from his own bowling. He will break Lara's test batting record and break his own record in the second dig.

 

[Jarquis]

Monty's in because Swann has a niggle doesn't he?

 

[Furball]

I assumed it's because the selectors want to keep their options open in terms of maybe picking two spinners.

 

[Top_Cat]

Chappelli piles on.

Ian Chappell: 'The worst batting side to leave Australia's shores' | Cricinfo Magazine | ESPN Cricinfo

No surprise there's no mention of who's played a large part in shaping said faulty system. Would make for an awkward chip shop convo I guess.

 

[dermo]

ftr in a fox sports poll 2226 people have selected James Pattinson in their side for the 3rd test

 

[HeathDavisSpeed]

ftr in a fox sports poll 2226 people have selected James Pattinson in their side for the 3rd test

Maybe they're keen to shore up the batting by playing him in the top order?

 

[The Battlers Prince]

Pattinson isn't the man to go if Bird is to come in. The Bird man displaces Siddle, and I don't think Siddle will go. Bit of a shame.

 

[uvelocity]

schearzie an avid fox sports pollster

 

[Riggins]

too good.

 

[Riggins]

schearzie tipping bird to have a strong debut.

 

[Tangles]

Would have been better to post in the other thread.

 

[dermo]

stunning

 

[social]

Strong feeling that Oz will pick same "top" 7 albeit in different order

Watto - chosen one but no better than Faulkner IMO

Rogers - deserves another go

Uzi - one decent knock so let him stay and work out how good he is for a change

Clarke

Smitteh - future

Prince - future or past so let's call him the present

Haddin - no better than Wade but line has been drawn in the sand

 

[uvelocity]

other things that are stunning: olivia wells

 

[the big bambino]

you can have the opinion but you can't say its indisputable because the same guidance you are taking compares watsons record from different points in time

True but they are the best stats available and a counter opinion would have to come up with something else to persuade me otherwise. The reason Watson was preferred as opener then was probably the same reason people don't see him as a 6 now; they don't want to him start him against spin. Over the years you can add the reversing ball into the pads.

 

[the big bambino]

Hayden was an opener through and through, never played anywhere else and that is what he was born to do.

Watson was never an opener, he got chucked in there in desperation, did OK and a short term fix lasted for nearly 4 years. You're right, neither of us can say whether his better stats opening are down to form at a given time or the position......it is all speculation.

His career was going up and down if not backwards. He was groomed as opener and did hid best work there. The position suited his strengths and negated his weaknesses. Perhaps the original mistake was thinking him a middle order player. Anyways his continued selection is proof how bad our situation is and hopefully will come with the alternative at 1 and 6 that motivates him to produce a lot more.

 

[Tangles]

How does anyone challenge Watson for his spot though when he is sometimes a batsman and sometimes an allrounder? Right now hes a sometimes allrounder who opens the batting for Australia. Would an opener plundering runs in the SS dislodge him? I bet it would just change who he bats with. An allrounder going great guns won't convince them to drop an opener either. IMO if he opens then he needs to be judged as a specialist bat against the other specialists. If hes an allrounder then he needs to be consistently bowling overs and batting at 6, where he could be dislodged by McDonald/Henriques/etc.