• Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

So who will be number 400 for Australia?

Craig

World Traveller
Well Australia is on 398 Test caps (while England can't be too far away from 650, and how many random selections were in those selections?) and with Langer, Warne and McGrath now retiring, and Jaques and MacGill are two replacements who will come in (well more then likely) and Johnson to replace McGrath (appears the likely case at this point or it will be Tait) and we have 399, so who will be the 400th?

Will it be Rogers? Haddin? Hilfenhaus? Bailey? Or somebody from left field?
 

James90

Cricketer Of The Year
I had this discussion with Mr Casson not long ago. He decided it would be Cosgrove and I mentioned Haddin. Now it looks as if Rogers is the best chance.

Worth noting that Dan Cullen has also played a test.
 

Craig

World Traveller
I think it will depend if Gilchrist and Hayden decide to go as well. Especially Gilchrist first ahead of Hayden.
 

Perm

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Johnson or Rogers, I will go for Rogers with Johnson being #399 but they will both debut in the same match. It's interesting to note that Australia's next scheduled test matches are against Zimbabwe.
 

James90

Cricketer Of The Year
What did CA decide about cap allocation? It's alphabetical as opposed to batting order when debuting in the same game, yeah?
 

Craig

World Traveller
What did CA decide about cap allocation? It's alphabetical as opposed to batting order when debuting in the same game, yeah?
It is alphabet.

A similar thing happened when Michael Slater and Brenden Juilen both made their Test debut against England in the 1st Test in 1993 (Old Trafford IIRC?), and Juilen is ahead of Slater because he is ahead alphabetically.

However the twist is that Slater thought he was first because he thought he made his debut for Australia before Juilen, because he opened the batting with Taylor when Australia batted 1st and thus got a tattoo to indicate the number 355 on his ankle, but a few years ago CA (or ACB back then) cleared that issue up and Juilen was number 355 and Slater was 356.
 

James90

Cricketer Of The Year
To be fair, after Slater had the number branded on his arm and a personalised plate on his Ferrari they allowed him to keep the number.
 

FaaipDeOiad

Hall of Fame Member
Johnson will be 400 IMO. Jaques will debut in the same match and be 399.

edit: Haha, just remembered Jaques has played two tests. Johnson to be 399 then, and Haddin to be 400.
 

SirBloody Idiot

Cricketer Of The Year
Johnson for me.

Hilf and Johnson to debut v. India in the first test.

We won't play Zimbabwe, whenever we get the chance to play them, they magically lose test status.
 

Neil Pickup

Cricket Web Moderator
If Rogers ever plays Test cricket I'm going to take so much crap it's unbelievable. He was overseas at my club in 2002 (before I joined) and since then I may have made several comments when debate has been instigated to the effect of his not being a Test cricketer.
 

Craig

World Traveller
Johnson will be 400 IMO. Jaques will debut in the same match and be 399.

edit: Haha, just remembered Jaques has played two tests. Johnson to be 399 then, and Haddin to be 400.
So you predict Gilchrist will retire from cricket after the World Cup? I think he could keep going but drop one format of the game.
 

Prince EWS

Global Moderator
The fact that the next test is against Zimbabwe is significant IMO. Some players like Gilchrist and MacGill may elect not to tour (even though that could be disasterous to MacGill's career...) in which case the likes of Haddin or Bailey could be selected. That would really throw a spanner in the works.
 

FaaipDeOiad

Hall of Fame Member
The fact that the next test is against Zimbabwe is significant IMO. Some players like Gilchrist and MacGill may elect not to tour (even though that could be disasterous to MacGill's career...) in which case the likes of Haddin or Bailey could be selected. That would really throw a spanner in the works.
Very unlikely that the next test will be against Zimbabwe IMO. In fact, I'd be absolutely stunned if it was. Australia won't play any tests until Sri Lanka next summer.
 

Top