Last edited by morgieb; 28-08-2013 at 04:37 PM.
Want to be the online Don Bradman or Ian Salisbury?
Then join CW Cricket today. It's what all the cool kids desire.
RIP Craig Walsh (Craig) 1985-2012
RIP Hughesy 1988-2014
I agree with playing Watson at 3, FTR, but not for the same reasons. Clarke's a middle order bat, Smith's a middle order bat, if we pick a new batsman you shouldn't debut him at 3. We've basically got the bowling all-rounder batting at 3 to protect the middle order.
Look I don't disagree that he shouldn't bat 3 at the Gabba, all I was saying it's a bit early to be calling this a "solution"........when he's averaging +40 in the position over a period of time then you can say he's nailed down the spot. To me he is still only a couple of low scores away from "where they **** do we play him now" all over again.
It will be interesting to see if the Oval does end up being a turning point in Watsons career, will he repay the faith in the selectors and finally do some justice to the obvious talent that he has. I reckon he owes everyone at least 3 years of solid performances and (just my opinion) I don't think he's got it in him.............time will tell.
I take it that means you think he should bat at 3 at the Gabba?
The thread is titled : "Predict Australia's 17 man squad for the first test in Australia," and Watson is the solution at #3 for the 1st test. After that, like most others, his position will be reassessed.
Hooksey, I think you've completely missed the point of what Adders is saying there. He performed at The Oval at 3, so he should retain that spot. But one big innings does not a 'solution' make. Shaun Marsh made that ton on debut in Sri Lanka, and he most definitely was not a solution.
well, that depends on what sort of solution we're talking about, Watson is a short term solution, so we won't go into the first test thinking "who the **** will bat 3?", but as most people are saying, we will have to wait and see if he is a long term solution.
We can tangle ourselves up in semantics or talk cricket. I prefer the latter.
I think Shane Watson will bat at number 3 at the Gabba, and after that, like most others, his position will be reassessed.
The more interesting discussion is on who will be the 6th batter, the batting cover and how many all rounders in the squad. Hopefully they don't draft Maxwell into the squad if Watson and Faulkner are in it.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)