Bracken's test chances

[FaaipDeOiad]

Yeah it's silly to write off Symonds to such a degree. I'm no fan of his and I don't think he should be in the test side ahead of Watson, but he certainly showed some class in Melbourne, and there's no telling what sort of difference that might make to him as a player. He's shown in ODIs that he's a fairly capable batsman in a range of conditions, and the forms aren't so different as to render his achievements there irrelevant, especially given that a lot of the same criticisms of him as an ODI batsman were rightly levelled at him prior to the 2003 WC.

Mind you, if he gets picked ahead of Watson I'll be pretty annoyed as well. The main reason Symonds shouldn't be in the side is because we have so many superior options, not because he's totally hopeless.

 

[Prince EWS]

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.

But there's nothing to suggest he will be a good test player. Preserving with players who have excellent domestic records, or those who are young are were picked as project players has its merits, but persisting with a guy who is not outstanding at first class level, has a poor technique, can be broken apart mentally and isn't particularly young makes as much sense as chucking me in there and saying "Oh, not all players are instant successes" when I fail.

 

[Salamuddin]

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.

.

I presume you're talking wrt test cricket. ODI's fair enough.
But I can't see how Bracken would make too many test sides tbh based on what I'v seen of him.

He wouldn't make a full strength Pakistan ....I'd have any of Asif, Akhtar and Gul over him.
Could possibly make NZL , as BOnd is pretty much their only decent seamer.
Doubt he'd make India (I rate Munaf and Sreesanth higher and I can't honestly see how Bracken would be any more effective than Zaheer khan or for that matter Irfan Pathan)
And if the Windies actually picked an attck of Taylor, Lawson, Colleymore/Collins, I can't see how he'd make their team.
I'd probably take Zoysa and/or Dilhara over him so he wouldn't make Sri Lanka either.

So only the Kiwis, Bangladesh and Zimbabwe would probably accept him
He'd be far from a shoo-in most sides.

 

[Richard]

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.

I find it pretty astounding that Hussey is not considered a certainty to open next season, TBH. Especially with the Watson and Symonds both deserving a spot situation.

 

[simmy]

Bracken is class. And deserves to have a test place imo. The fact that we are even discussing him being left out shows the depth in the Aus side currently.

 

[Perm]

I find it pretty astounding that Hussey is not considered a certainty to open next season, TBH. Especially with the Watson and Symonds both deserving a spot situation.

They don't want to upset Hussey's rhythm, he's fine where he is. Consider they have Rogers and Jaques fighting it out for the opening spot there is no real need to shift Hussey.

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

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?

There's a year between games, and they are different players who aren't really expected to play the same roll. Symonds is never going to be more than support with the ball at test level, while the hope is there that Watson will. There's a distinct chance that Watson and Symonds will both play and Hussey will open (though I think that's a bad idea), but Watson has the #6 spot locked down if he's fit, IMO.

 

[Perm]

I presume you're talking wrt test cricket. ODI's fair enough.
But I can't see how Bracken would make too many test sides tbh based on what I'v seen of him.

He wouldn't make a full strength Pakistan ....I'd have any of Asif, Akhtar and Gul over him.
Could possibly make NZL , as BOnd is pretty much their only decent seamer.
Doubt he'd make India (I rate Munaf and Sreesanth higher and I can't honestly see how Bracken would be any more effective than Zaheer khan or for that matter Irfan Pathan)
And if the Windies actually picked an attck of Taylor, Lawson, Colleymore/Collins, I can't see how he'd make their team.
I'd probably take Zoysa and/or Dilhara over him so he wouldn't make Sri Lanka either.

So only the Kiwis, Bangladesh and Zimbabwe would probably accept him
He'd be far from a shoo-in most sides.

He would make the Sri Lankan side IMO. Vaas, Malinga, Brackn and Dilhara/Zoysa would probably be the situation. I don't think he would make the Indian or Pakistan lineup, but he would have a good chance for the West Indies because he is actually accurate, unlike all of the bowlers you mentioned (Collymore excepted)

 

[Prince EWS]

I find it pretty astounding that Hussey is not considered a certainty to open next season, TBH. Especially with the Watson and Symonds both deserving a spot situation.

The same Symonds who averages under 27 after 13 tests and in the low 40s in first class cricket? Regardless of what he did in his last outing, he's proven he isn't good enough to demand selection. Given your theory of first chance averages as well, I'm sure he'd probably only average a tick over 20.

If you give any decent first class batsman with a reasonable amount of talent enough chances, they will eventually score runs. They won't do it consistently though and hence they'll only average around 30 or lower. That's the difference between being a good first class batsman and being test standard, essentially. There is nothing special about Symonds's technique to suggest differently, nor his first class record, nor his age. What kept him in the side was his ability to be used as another bowling option - and if Watson was picked as well, that would no longer be a factor. Symonds doesn't deserve selection as a specialist batsman over Hodge, Jaques, Rogers or a number of other players, and Watson should be considered above him for the allrounder's role.

 

[Salamuddin]

He would make the Sri Lankan side IMO. Vaas, Malinga, Brackn and Dilhara/Zoysa would probably be the situation. I don't think he would make the Indian or Pakistan lineup, but he would have a good chance for the West Indies because he is actually accurate, unlike all of the bowlers you mentioned (Collymore excepted)

what with his test average of 42 ? I';d much rather have Fernando and Zoysa as choices for nmy third seamer.

 

[pasag]

what with his test average of 42 ? I';d much rather have Fernando and Zoysa as choices for nmy third seamer.

From five Test, the last being years ago and anyways, it's obvious he's a much better bowler these days.

 

[Richard]

The same Symonds who averages under 27 after 13 tests and in the low 40s in first class cricket? Regardless of what he did in his last outing, he's proven he isn't good enough to demand selection. Given your theory of first chance averages as well, I'm sure he'd probably only average a tick over 20.

If you give any decent first class batsman with a reasonable amount of talent enough chances, they will eventually score runs. They won't do it consistently though and hence they'll only average around 30 or lower. That's the difference between being a good first class batsman and being test standard, essentially. There is nothing special about Symonds's technique to suggest differently, nor his first class record, nor his age. What kept him in the side was his ability to be used as another bowling option - and if Watson was picked as well, that would no longer be a factor. Symonds doesn't deserve selection as a specialist batsman over Hodge, Jaques, Rogers or a number of other players, and Watson should be considered above him for the allrounder's role.

Average as I think Symonds to be in Tests, I can't possibly argue that someone whose last 2 scores were 156 and 48 does not deserve to play the next game.

 

[Mister Wright]

But there's nothing to suggest he will be a good test player. Preserving with players who have excellent domestic records, or those who are young are were picked as project players has its merits, but persisting with a guy who is not outstanding at first class level, has a poor technique, can be broken apart mentally and isn't particularly young makes as much sense as chucking me in there and saying "Oh, not all players are instant successes" when I fail.

He scored a century in his last test and has been in good form during the World Cup. I don't see why he shouldn't be picked. If it comes to the first test and he hasn't been scoring domestic runs and Watson has, then fair enough. But if Symonds is scoring big runs then he deserves to be picked as the incumbent, it's as simple as that and nobody can argue his spot in the side. If he is picked with poor form, especially if Watson is scoring runs, then you could have something to argue about.

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

What kept him in the side was his ability to be used as another bowling option - and if Watson was picked as well, that would no longer be a factor.

What kept him in the side was stellar ODI performances over a number of years, as well as the ability to fill in overs with the ball. Given the ODI performances haven't slackened off and he made a century in his second last test, the removal of the bowling factor doesn't necessarily mean he couldn't be selected. While selectors obviously don't treat the two forms of the game as if they are the same, there's plenty of cross-over, and it's hardly unique to Symonds that having the "right stuff" in one form is considered justification for an extended run in the other. Brett Lee for instance worked his way back into the test side on several occasions through weight of ODI success, and Bracken's name gets thrown around a lot for a test spot as well, and if Australia didn't have so many promising bowlers to choose from at the moment he'd probably play tests next summer too.

I don't think Symonds is a better test batsman than Hodge (say), but when you factor in his fielding and bowling, and most importantly his international experience, it's not that difficult to see why the selectors would be interested in him as a batting option. And that's all ignoring the fact that he made runs in his most recent matches.

 

[Richard]

They don't want to upset Hussey's rhythm, he's fine where he is. Consider they have Rogers and Jaques fighting it out for the opening spot there is no real need to shift Hussey.

I honestly can't see moving to the position he's batted in all his career upsetting Hussey at all.

 

[Perm]

what with his test average of 42 ? I';d much rather have Fernando and Zoysa as choices for nmy third seamer.

He has played five Test matches, three of them against an Indian batting lineup that included Sehwag, Dravid, Tendulkar, Laxman and Ganguly. His Test performances aren't enough to warrant judgement, his chances have been too few.

 

[Prince EWS]

Average as I think Symonds to be in Tests, I can't possibly argue that someone whose last 2 scores were 156 and 48 does not deserve to play the next game.

Selection isn't about rewarding deserving players though - it's about selecting the side most likely to win. I don't think Symonds is a part of that, especially if Watson is in the team as well.

 

[Mister Wright]

They don't want to upset Hussey's rhythm, he's fine where he is. Consider they have Rogers and Jaques fighting it out for the opening spot there is no real need to shift Hussey.

How will it upset Hussey's rythum if he is selected as opener? He scores runs no matter where he bats. He's had to do it before and he does seem to form a formidible partnerhsip with Hayden when they open together. No reason why Hussey shouldn't be shifted.

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

I honestly can't see moving to the position he's batted in all his career upsetting Hussey at all.

He's been much more impressive down the order IMO. Obviously he's a capable opener, but the innings he's played with the tail and his performances at 4 in the Ashes have been amazing. I'd actually rather see him at 5 or even 6, but there's no real need to push him up to open, especially given that two of the most prolific FC batsmen in Australia in recent years are openers.

 

[Josh]

Average as I think Symonds to be in Tests, I can't possibly argue that someone whose last 2 scores were 156 and 48 does not deserve to play the next game.

I'm going to agree with you, Richard. I was at that game at the 'G and Symonds simply destroyed England, and was more than handy with the ball as well. I can't really see a reason for him to be dropped. Sure, Watson's back; big deal! Andrew Symonds is in form... gun form.

Anyway, like we've said it all depends on what happens closer to the summer, but for me I'd have Symonds frontrunning.