Who will be Oz's 2nd opener in their next test series?

[James90]

Jaques and Hayden will be together at the top and rightfully so. I think Katich has worked himself into a position where he's next in line regardless of who of the current batting order misses out. If Hayden and Jaques were to play every game between now and the last Ashes test then it will be Marsh or Hughes who take the spot when it becomes available.

 

[Richard]

Oh and BTW Richard, you'd think that someone who placed such importance in the difference between facing the first ball and standing at the non-stiker's end when it was bowled would be able to correctly differentiate between coming in at the fall at the second wicket and coming in at the fall of the third..

Odd TSTL. Not sure how on Earth that happened. Maybe ODIs were interfering on my thought-pattern, doesn't Clarke bat above Hussey there?

 

[Prince EWS]

Odd TSTL. Not sure how on Earth that happened. Maybe ODIs were interfering on my thought-pattern, doesn't Clarke bat above Hussey there?

Yeah, lots of people seem to make that error. A few times early on, people even insisted that Clarke was batting #4 in Tests with Hussey #5 and I'd have to go up and dig up scorecards links to prove them wrong. It irks me when I see it.

 

[tooextracool]

Oh, and I forgot this too...

The batting-line-ups in said games read:
1991:
Marsh
Taylor
Boon
Border
Jones
Mark Waugh
Stephen Waugh
Healy
In this one, only Stephen Waugh was not a fixture in the team (he was brought in to replace the all-rounder Greg Matthews for the two games in question) and only he and Healy were not proven Test batsmen (both would of course later become such things and how).
1996/97:
Taylor
Hayden
Elliott
Mark Waugh
Stephen Waugh
Blewett
Bevan
Healy
And in this, only Hayden (who only came into the side ITFP after an injury to Elliott, who then returned to briefly bat three) and Bevan were not proven class as Test batsmen and fixtures in the side. Bevan of course always had massive hopes, and Blewett would go on to endure some rocky times, but in 1996/97 he was The Ritz.

To go in with a 3 man bowling attack in India is not only a path to self destruction but also likely to result in serious injuries. Ok so they did it in Australia and the WI last decade but just because they did it, doesnt mean that it deserves to be applauded. Had some of those games gone on longer, they could have been detrimental and a real drain to both the players and the team.Nor is doing so in Australia or the WI comparable with doing so in India where the norm involves innings of over 100 overs especially with the likes of Johnson.

 

[tooextracool]

Is there a reason why Hussey isnt an option on this poll?

 

[Richard]

To go in with a 3 man bowling attack in India is not only a path to self destruction but also likely to result in serious injuries. Ok so they did it in Australia and the WI last decade but just because they did it, doesnt mean that it deserves to be applauded. Had some of those games gone on longer, they could have been detrimental and a real drain to both the players and the team.Nor is doing so in Australia or the WI comparable with doing so in India where the norm involves innings of over 100 overs especially with the likes of Johnson.

The point is, you only do it if the part-timers are good enough (as the Waughs, Blewett, Bevan et al were and as I wonder whether Katich, Symonds, Clarke and Hussey would be) and this basically equates to a fourth specialist.

You only do it if you have so many part-timers that you can essentially just keep trying another one in the very possible event that one of them doesn't bowl very well.