Bracken's test chances

[Mister Wright]

It will all depend on early season form. I think only Clark and Lee are certainties for a test bowling spot. If Bracken takes a lot of early wickets then he has just as much chance of Johnson, Tait, Hilfenhaus. I think the one in the best form will get the spot.

 

[pup11]

I think there is also a strong case of looking at Dizzy Gillespie as an option, he is only 32 and i think his experience would be really handy when Aussies play outside Australia.



I hope the selectors stop treating Dizzy as trash he is one of the best bowlers Australia has produced in recent-times.

 

[pup11]

MacGill's domestic form has been dire, but he seems like the only good spin option atm.



Do you guys think Dan Cullen and Cullen Bailey would be ready for international cricket in 2 years time??



I personally see Cullen as more of an odi bowler who keep things tight and works on a batsman's patience to pick wickets (more or less in the Vettori mould), i can see Bailey become a good test-match bowler but both are in dire form atm.

 

[Matt79]

I think there is also a strong case of looking at Dizzy Gillespie as an option, he is only 32 and i think his experience would be really handy when Aussies play outside Australia.



I hope the selectors stop treating Dizzy as trash he is one of the best bowlers Australia has produced in recent-times.

Gillespie has played his last game for Australia, barring a dinosaur running amok and devouring five or six of the other prospects around the place. He was a great bowler for Australia, but he hasn't aged well and after some initial positives in the domestic comp after getting dropped he hasn't been producing the kind of results to put him ahead of the current crop. The selectors are going to be focused on finding a couple of bowlers who have the potential to be consistent performers over the next few years - at best Dizzy would be a stop-gap measure for one more season.

 

[Matt79]

I've previously argued - to considerable derision - that Bracken would get a spot in the starting line up of pretty much any other national team at the moment. England and maybe South Africa would be the exception to that statement - which I still think is pretty true.

That said, he's trying to get into the Aussie team and that's a harder proposition. Clark and Lee, as have been mentioned, are the certainties. Watson if fit will probably get a go ahead of Symonds, although Roy might have done enough to hang onto his position. I'd say Tait has moved himself ahead of Johnson as the first choice for the 3rd seamer's position - in a sense he's reclaimed it as he was in that position in 2005 for the Ashes, until he was injured. I'd see Tait as third seamer and Johnson as 12th man for most of the next series, injuries permitting. That said, Bracken would be a solid performer if he got a go, and it could well happen if there is an injury or two.

 

[Richard]

It will all depend on early season form. I think only Clark and Lee are certainties for a test bowling spot. If Bracken takes a lot of early wickets then he has just as much chance of Johnson, Tait, Hilfenhaus. I think the one in the best form will get the spot.

Kyle talking-up a NSWer... never thought I'd see the day!

 

[Richard]

I bloody hope so. Have a feeling it'll Symonds though.

Is there seriously any chance Symonds will not be in the lineup?

I really want him to be proven conclusively substandard before being dropped, myself.

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

Symonds won't play ahead of Watson IMO. He may play, depending on injuries to Watson or other batsmen, and potentially if Hussey opens he might play as a batsman too, but if Hussey stays at 4 and everyone is fit, Symonds won't be in the test team next summer.

 

[Richard]

So Watson will just userp him? Suprising.

 

[andyc]

So Watson will just userp him? Suprising.

I'd certainly hope so. The public outcry will be cringeworthy though.

 

[Perm]

So Watson will just userp him? Suprising.

He should do, Watson is by far the better Test player.

 

[Mister Wright]

Kyle talking-up a NSWer... never thought I'd see the day!

Let's just be clear...I wasn't saying I think he should be selected or anything. But, you have to give the guy credit as Fuller said he is close to the all time great ODI fast bowler class and he looks to be in great form. Even though he hasn't performed that well in the past, I think a lot of positions will be up for grabs depending on early season form this summer. If one of Tait, Hilfenhaus, Johnson or Bracken are in irresistible form then they will be selected. MacGill is far from a certainty either, although I think he would have to start the season very poorly not to be selected or one of the other spinners would have to be averaging 3 or something to get picked.

Also, if neither or Rogers or Jaques or even one of the older openers around the state are not pressing for selection with early season form, I think Hussey could be moved to opener and allow both Watson and Symonds to play.

 

[pasag]

Yeah I can also see both Symonds and Watson in the Test side tbh.

 

[Johnners]

Bracken won't make the test team again imo. He, like Bevan was, has been key-holed as a OD specialist, and pretty much nothing he will ever do in the Pura Cup, or in ODI's will get him another test cap. That said, i believe he would be about the 3rd/4th in line for the spot.

I'd say Johnson would have his nose in front at this stage, just in front of Hilfenhaus & then Tait. I honestly don't believe they'll choose Tait & Lee in the same team without McGrath there. Sure Clark has proven to be gun, but he's no McGrath, and we haven't really seen him thoroughly tested. I'll be extremely disappointed if Tait gets ahead of Johnson purely based on his ODI form. I've no doubt that Tait is the better ODI bowler, but afaic Johnson is, and has the ability to be, a far better bowler at test level. Same goes for Hilfenhaus.

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

So Watson will just userp him? Suprising.

It's not that surprising really. When has Symonds ever been picked ahead of Watson? If Watson had been fit at the start of the Ashes he would have played, and if he hadn't been injured again before the Boxing Day test he would have played the last two tests as well. Symonds made some runs after that obviously, but Watson's bowling is also a factor in his appeal as a selection, and he's probably a better prospect as a test batsman anyway.

In reality, I'd say Watson probably would have played more or less every test since the 2005 Ashes if he'd not kept getting injured, aside from the possibility of a run of bad form. The selectors are clearly keen to get him in the side and give him an extended run, and he'll get that as soon as he's fit.

 

[Prince EWS]

Is there seriously any chance Symonds will not be in the lineup?

I really want him to be proven conclusively substandard before being dropped, myself.

He proved that to me before he'd even played a match TBH. His first class record is average and his technique as well as his mental strength are both completely dire. There's no way on earth he's a better test prospect that Watson, but he may just get picked anyway.

 

[Prince EWS]

Yeah I can also see both Symonds and Watson in the Test side tbh.

Well, as much as I'll be glad for Watson if that happens, the very fact that Symonds is there will insight the biggest rant of all time from me. If the above were to happen, it would mean Symonds was being selected as a specialist batsman - and if him being selected as an allrounder wasn't bad enough, that'd almost be enough to make me give up on the game altogether. That would be saying that Symonds is a better test option than Brad Hodge, Chris Rogers and Phil Jaques. Not to mention another 10 guys I could probably name as a better test specialist batting options.

 

[pasag]

Well, as much as I'll be glad for Watson if that happens, the very fact that Symonds is there will insight the biggest rant of all time from me. If the above were to happen, it would mean Symonds was being selected as a specialist batsman - and if him being selected as an allrounder wasn't bad enough, that'd almost be enough to make me give up on the game altogether. That would be saying that Symonds is a better test option than Brad Hodge, Chris Rogers and Phil Jaques. Not to mention another 10 guys I could probably name as a better test specialist batting options.

Haha, can't wait.

 

[Mister Wright]

He proved that to me before he'd even played a match TBH. His first class record is average and his technique as well as his mental strength are both completely dire. There's no way on earth he's a better test prospect that Watson, but he may just get picked anyway.

That's really harsh IMO. Not all players are instant stars in test cricket. Even those with amazing domestic records don't always turn out to have good careers, see Bevan. And some take a while to adjust to the new level, see Steve Waugh. Who knows, now that Symonds has found he can create an important, substantial innings at test level he could do it consistently. All you have to do is look at how he improved as a ODI player after his breakthrough innings in the opening game of the 2003 World Cup.

 

[Richard]

It's not that surprising really. When has Symonds ever been picked ahead of Watson? If Watson had been fit at the start of the Ashes he would have played, and if he hadn't been injured again before the Boxing Day test he would have played the last two tests as well. Symonds made some runs after that obviously, but Watson's bowling is also a factor in his appeal as a selection, and he's probably a better prospect as a test batsman anyway.

Ifs. What you say is undoubtedly true, but Symonds has now got his chances and, finally (with thanks to Rudi or whoever it was gave him n\o when he was lbw to Panesar at the MCG) has taken one.

Surely you can't drop a player who has performed in the immidiate past for one who is unproven?