63Likes
LinkBack URL
About LinkBacksad00b doing some good work on debutOriginally Posted by adub
ad00b doing some good work on debut
Don't think my Test match selections are ever bad, its just the ODIs where I have no problems with the team mixing and matching and giving blokes a chance. Absolute joke that Henriques hasn't hit a ball in a game for so long while being completely fit.
I don't see the point of that really when Clarke is so good at 5 and Doolan always bats high up in the order for Tasmania. Personally I just think the team looks so much more solid with him at 4. Clarke at 5 isn't an issue when we have another batsman and a keeper behind him. Its not Chanderpaul at 5 ahead of Ramdin and Sammy.
I know it's a stretch, but consider how many hapless young batsmen we've sent in at 3 and they've failed, yet Smitteh comes in to number 5/6 and has some success, I honestly think it's the best way to go, at least for the first series or 2 with Doolan
There are two colours in my head
I know Clarke's stats at 5 are incredibly good. But cricket isn't just stats and I think if the guys above him can get through a bit he will be fine at 4. That can allow whoever is coming into the side a better chance at success IMO
Current Favourite XI 1. Cook 2. Gayle 3. Sangakarra 4. Clarke* 5. Chanderpaul 6. Al Hasan 7. De Kock+ 8.Johnson 9.Harris 10. Herath 11. Steyn
Stat of the Day.
Mitchell Johnson has bowled 15 innings in test matches against England.
His economy rate was more than 3.5 in all but two of them and over 4.0 in 53% of them (8/15) for an overall economy rate of 4.03 rpo.
I still don't see what purpose it serves moving Clarke up the order when he has been so brilliant when coming to the crease at 3 wickets down and so average at 2 down. Steve Waugh batted the majority of his career at 5 and 6 and I'm happy to use the Chanderpaul example again as I can't remember any instance where Clarke has finished the innings not out for a low score because he has run out of partners.
Someone like Doolan is a top order batsman who has recently had experience opening the batting at First Class level. Moving him to 4 is already protecting him a little but at the same time not completely shifting him around to protect him. We can agree to disagree..
I agree with adub's rant on this:
***Official*** Australia in Sri Lanka
bat d00ls at 6.
The sort of general malaise that only the genius possess and the insane lament.
Yep that really isn't too much of a surprise given the fact he bowls about 1.5 to 2 ordinary balls per over. Johnson is the biggest pressure release, he takes ages to bowl overs so we struggle with overrates which mean we can't always bowl who we want to bowl to at times and I still have my theory that he doesn't preserve the ball as well as the other quicks. He is only ever forgiven when he has a good days when he looks excellent.
Last edited by NUFAN; 10-11-2013 at 03:55 PM.
and that's my biggest issue with his selection. i just don't see how he fits in with the established bowling plan
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
Yeti Sports 1.5 Champion! Really hope these are going to continue so I can keep stealing them and putting them on Facebook.
How many of the 15 innings are wicketless?
Can accept a guy going for runs if he takes wickets regularly but not as though Johnson does against us.
probably like none of them except for brisbane
Ok with Chadd or Dougeh but not MJ.
If Watson can't bowl I can see Faulkner getting picked. Him and MJ would be a bad idea. Weakens the batting and bowling.
Stat of the Day (addendum)
Mitchell Johnson has failed to take a wicket in 20% of his innings against England (3/15)
tbf to Johnson his strike rate (51.2) and wickets per innings (2.3) are fine. There's no question he take wickets (even if a lot of them are off absolute **** bowling).
It the fact that he just makes it so easy for the opposition to rack up their score that hurts us more than the opposition. A guy taking wickets as often as he does should not be averaging 34.42 against a side, yet Johnson does against England. 4.03 rpo explains why.
As a comparison, Englands run rate against Australia in tests including Mitchell Johnson - 3.58. That means the rest of the bowlers were still going at about 3.45 rpo which is too high I'd suggest, but how hard must it be to reign in batsmen that are off to a flyer thanks to the **** at the other end giving them pies to feast on. In games against England featuring Mitchell Johnson:-
Michael Beer 2.94 rpo
Xavier Doherty 3.03 rpo
Nathan Hauritz 3.10 rpo (and no I'm not looking for any of those ****s back in the side (although Hauries sub 35 test average doesn't stack up too bad), but clearly the Poms weren't driving their scoring rates up over 3.5 off the back of the spinners)
Ben Hilfenhaus 3.00 rpo
Peter Siddle 3.5 rpo (still a bit high, but not outrageous)
Cook, Trott and friends will be licking their lips at the prospect of getting a few early boundaries away off Johnson to get their innings going.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
