An Australian Team all under the age of 30

[ChipSomeSixes]

Most of the Australian team today is over 30, soon alot of players will be retiring. who would you pick for Australia if all plaers were under 30?

I would chose:

1. Phil Jaques, 27, NSW
2. Tim Paine, 22, TAS
3. Chris Rogers, 29, WA
4. Michael Clarke, 25, NSW
5. Adam Voges, 27, WA
6. Shane Watson, 25, QLD
7. Brad Haddin, 29, NSW (WK)
8. Dan Cullen, 22, SA
9. Mitchell Johnson, 25, QLD
10. Ben Hilfenhaus, 23, TAS
11. Shaun Tait, 23, SA

 

[mohammad16]

thats one crap team

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

Most of the Australian team today is over 30, soon alot of players will be retiring. who would you pick for Australia if all plaers were under 30?

I would chose:

1. Phil Jaques, 27, NSW
2. Tim Paine, 22, TAS
3. Chris Rogers, 29, WA
4. Michael Clarke, 25, NSW
5. Adam Voges, 27, WA
6. Shane Watson, 25, QLD
7. Brad Haddin, 29, NSW (WK)
8. Dan Cullen, 22, SA
9. Mitchell Johnson, 25, QLD
10. Ben Hilfenhaus, 23, TAS
11. Shaun Tait, 23, SA

I'd go for Travis Birt above Voges, and I'm not sure about Cullen, but there's no obvious choice to go ahead of him. Other than that, I agree.

Incidentally, I don't think it's a crap team at all. Johnson is a quality bowler, Tait is getting there, and Hilfenhaus has come miles in the last 12 months or so. Jaques, Clarke, Watson and Haddin are class batsmen and the two who aren't currently playing regularly for Australia (Jaques and Haddin) would be for most other countries. Rogers has been in phenomenal form in the last couple of years too, and Birt's looking like a future star. The only real weak link in the side is the spin bowling department.

It's probably not as proven as some sub-30 sides you could pick for other countries, but very few of those players have any significant international experience due to the strength of the older players in the group, so mainly that's through lack of opportunity.

EDIT: Also, you could have Rogers open with Jaques and pick someone else in the middle order instead of Paine. Cosgrove or Voges for instance.

 

[adharcric]

India Under-30 Team

1. Wasim Jaffer
2. Gautam Gambhir
3. Mohammad Kaif
4. Virender Sehwag
5. Yuvraj Singh
6. Subramaniam Badrinath
7. Mahendra Singh Dhoni
8. Harbhajan Singh
9. Zaheer Khan
10. Sreesanth
11. Munaf Patel

Reserves: Suresh Raina, Dinesh Karthik, Ramesh Powar, VRV Singh, Irfan Pathan

 

[Jono]

That Australian side is pretty decent, though at test level I think the bowling would come up short.

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

That Australian side is pretty decent, though at test level I think the bowling would come up short.

IMO, most bowling attacks with an average age of 23 would come up short at test level. McGrath/Gillespie/Warne/Lee would still have been a fair attack when they were all in their early 20s, but aside from Gillespie none of them were particularly near their peak.

 

[Dravid]

1. Wasim Jaffer
2. Gautam Gambhir
3. Mohammad Kaif
4. Virender Sehwag
5. Yuvraj Singh
6. Subramaniam Badrinath
7. Mahendra Singh Dhoni
8. Harbhajan Singh
9. Zaheer Khan
10. Sreesanth
11. Munaf Patel

Reserves: Suresh Raina, Dinesh Karthik, Ramesh Powar, VRV Singh, Irfan Pathan

Sehwag sure doesn't look under-30

 

[Johnners]

Most of the Australian team today is over 30, soon alot of players will be retiring. who would you pick for Australia if all plaers were under 30?

I would chose:

1. Phil Jaques, 27, NSW
2. Tim Paine, 22, TAS
3. Chris Rogers, 29, WA
4. Michael Clarke, 25, NSW
5. Adam Voges, 27, WA
6. Shane Watson, 25, QLD
7. Brad Haddin, 29, NSW (WK)
8. Dan Cullen, 22, SA
9. Mitchell Johnson, 25, QLD
10. Ben Hilfenhaus, 23, TAS
11. Shaun Tait, 23, SA

Like Fuller i'd have Birt ahead of Voges, and i'd probably pick Cosgrove ahead of Rogers as well. If Cam White decided to bowl himself more in FC games i'd be tempted to play him instead of Cullen, or another option would be to play Cullen's SA teammate Cullen Bailey.

The only other spot i'd considering fiddling with is WK, Chris Hartley is the best gloveman in Australia apart from Gilly imho.

1.Jaques
2.Paine
3.Cosgrove
4.Clarke (C)
5.Birt
6.Watson
7.White/Cullen/Baileyv (Hartley would only bat 8 if White was the spinner)
8.Hartley (WK)
9.Johnson
10.Hilfenhaus
11.Tait

 

[Perm]

New Zealand Under 30 Side

1. Jamie How
2. Tim McIntosh
3. Ross Taylor
4. Lou Vincent
5. Jesse Ryder
6. Jacob Oram
7. Brendon McCullum (wk)
8. Daniel Vettori (c)
9. James Franklin
10. Kyle Mills
11. Mark Gillespie

Notable omissions: Hamish Marshall, Jeetan Patel, Peter Fulton, Andre Adams.

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

Hartley in front of Haddin is a joke. This stuff about him being the "best gloveman" is not only unproven, it's also splitting hairs. Would you also pick Healy instead of Gilchrist? The fact is, Haddin is a fine batsman who averages 40 in FC cricket and 50+ in recent years. He's probably in the top 10 batsmen outside of the test side in the country. On top of that he's a perfectly good keeper to both pace and spin and can easily hold down that spot in the team. If Haddin kept like Jimmy Maher it'd be relevant, but he's easily good enough.

Anyway, I think Rogers has done a fair bit more than Paine to warrant a spot, too. Not only is he more experienced in a variety of condtions, he's also got a better FC average. A shade under 50 compared to 42. Paine might be better in a few years, but not yet.

 

[howardj]

Heal as the tweaker ahead of Cullen.

 

[chaminda_00]

I would go with:

1. Phil Jaques
2. Chris Rogers
3. Mark Crosgrove
4. Michael Clarke
5. Adam Voges/Travis Birt
6. Shane Watson
7. Brad Haddin
8. Cam White
9. Mitchell Johnson
10. Ben Hilfenhaus
11. Shaun Tait

Rogers would get a slot as opener, Paine is slighty below and would only play as keeper IMO. Birt or Voges is a toss up, i rather go with Birt, but due to lack quality of spinning options Voges might get infront. White gets the spin bowling all rounders option, most of the spinners in Australia are pretty useless, so atleast White can bat and not really that far behind the rest as a spinner. Most of the attack will rely on the three seamers anyway.

Looking at other countries possible under 30s, Australia is not that bad, but they will come back to the field in hurry, but Hussey and Ponting will keep them above the pack for a while.

 

[Johnners]

Hartley in front of Haddin is a joke. This stuff about him being the "best gloveman" is not only unproven, it's also splitting hairs. Would you also pick Healy instead of Gilchrist? The fact is, Haddin is a fine batsman who averages 40 in FC cricket and 50+ in recent years. He's probably in the top 10 batsmen outside of the test side in the country. On top of that he's a perfectly good keeper to both pace and spin and can easily hold down that spot in the team. If Haddin kept like Jimmy Maher it'd be relevant, but he's easily good enough.

Anyway, I think Rogers has done a fair bit more than Paine to warrant a spot, too. Not only is he more experienced in a variety of condtions, he's also got a better FC average. A shade under 50 compared to 42. Paine might be better in a few years, but not yet.

Don't get me wrong, i think Haddin is a top WK, and is streets ahead of Hartley in WK/Batsmen terms, but i reckon as a pure keeper that Harts is slightly better. I guess you could say it's my QLD bias coming through On the note of his batting, i think i've mentioned a couple of times myself, that i think Haddin deserves an ODI spot purely because of his batting.

I'd pick Haddin ahead of Hartley more often than not, the XI i posted above was a possible alternative.

Another name that could be thrown into the middle order Mix could be Shaun Marsh? He's definetly behind Cosgrove & Birt, but imo probably on Par, or just below Voges.

Anyones thoughts on George Bailey?? He had a good year along with Birt last year for Tassy, yet doesn't seem to be getting the same accolaides?

 

[Jono]

IMO, most bowling attacks with an average age of 23 would come up short at test level. McGrath/Gillespie/Warne/Lee would still have been a fair attack when they were all in their early 20s, but aside from Gillespie none of them were particularly near their peak.

Yeah I understand but its interesting that a team like India only misses out on Kumble from its bowling attack (loses Sachin, Dravid and Laxman (and Ganguly as well) from its batting however which is obviously big)) but Australia has lost every one of its bowlers.

Hell that bowling line-up adharcric put out may in fact be the bowling line-up India fields in a year or two, depending on how long Kumble can or wants to go on for. You can either see that as a positive or negative I guess.

 

[vic_orthdox]

Marsh needs to make a lot more runs. Bailey = underrated, Tassie's "Jamie Cox syndrome" striking again.

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

Yeah I understand but its interesting that a team like India only misses out on Kumble from its bowling attack (loses Sachin, Dravid and Laxman (and Ganguly as well) from its batting however which is obviously big)) but Australia has lost every one of its bowlers.

Hell that bowling line-up adharcric put out may in fact be the bowling line-up India fields in a year or two, depending on how long Kumble can or wants to go on for. You can either see that as a positive or negative I guess.

That's fair enough, but India's bowling attack isn't exactly brilliant. I don't think England of 2005 loses anyone except Giles if you cut out the 30+ guys, but none of them were around 22 or 23 either, so I think experience does play a part.

 

[Jamee999]

England

1 A Strauss
2 A Cook
3 I Bell
4 K Pietersen
5 E Joyce
6 A Flintoff
7 C Read
8 S Broad/S Jones
9 M Hoggard
10 L Plunkett/S Mahmood
11 M Panesar

 

[aussie]

England

1 A Strauss
2 A Cook
3 I Bell
4 K Pietersen
5 E Joyce
6 A Flintoff
7 C Read
8 S Broad/S Jones
9 M Hoggard
10 L Plunkett/S Mahmood
11 M Panesar

add Steve Davies to the mix & you could be looking at the next #1 side in the world.

 

[silentstriker]

Hell that bowling line-up adharcric put out may in fact be the bowling line-up India fields in a year or two, depending on how long Kumble can or wants to go on for. You can either see that as a positive or negative I guess.

Very much a negative.

 

[silentstriker]

add Steve Davies to the mix & you could be looking at the next #1 side in the world.

Highly doubtful. The aussie u-30 is still the most talented IMO.