Krejza's selection, as Robert has said, made some amount of sense on pitches like this. Krejza, apparently, has been for a while a bowler who can sometimes bowl really well on a turner but will often bowl very poorly.Na, piss off. Was a better selection at the time of his selection than Krejza was.
Having said that, Krejza has earned another gig although I agree with PEWS as per usual.
Holding a half-decent length would do it.Kreja has looked very good at times during the 4th test. Maybe someone like Warne could give him tips how to keep his runs down.
I'm actually not sure about that. His consistency in length is pretty poor indeed (he actually keeps a pretty good line) but he got hit a lot in this game even when he hit perfectly good areas. His lack of variation makes him pretty easy to hit - you can bank on the flighted off break virtually every ball and really set yourself. As long as it doesn't turn appreciably more than you expected and he doesn't have anyone set for the shot out at deep midwicket, you can slog sweep a lot of his "good" balls. Obviously you need to be a good player of the shot, but he's not going to have you undone by the arm ball or the top spinner as he doesn't really possess those balls.Holding a half-decent length would do it.
The thing is though, I don't know if Krejza would take a couple of wickets in Australian conditions. I'm a massive fan of the bloke but he's not going to get much from Australian pitches. This is a slight on the pitches more than the bowler as I think he's good for cricket and we should be trying to get more like him into the game, but unless it's the fifth day he's not going to get any turn, and without turn he's just a punching bag.I think if Watson plays, you can afford to have Krejza as someone who is a bit expensive but might take a couple of wickets. I'm not sure if that holds for Symonds or not.
Well true, and they could play five quicks in Brisbane... but I think it would need to be someone a bit different like Bracken, and he's obviously ootq as he's injured.The thing is though, I don't know if Krejza would take a couple of wickets in Australian conditions. I'm a massive fan of the bloke but he's not going to get much from Australian pitches. This is a slight on the pitches more than the bowler as I think he's good for cricket and we should be trying to get more like him into the game, but unless it's the fifth day he's not going to get any turn, and without turn he's just a punching bag.
Firstly, it was a dead rubber and the retirement of MacGill meant it was the last opportunity to blood a spinner before the Indian tour.Krejza's selection, as Robert has said, made some amount of sense on pitches like this. Krejza, apparently, has been for a while a bowler who can sometimes bowl really well on a turner but will often bowl very poorly.
Casson was basically selected for a Test tour on the back of 3-and-a-half good games or something, when the rest of his First-Class career has been woefulness personnified.
If Casson was the only spin option, four seamers should have been chosen. It's not like the pitch for that Test was crying-out for someone to bowl spin.
Hogg hasn't exactly had enormous success in the longer game anyway, has he?Firstly, it was a dead rubber and the retirement of MacGill meant it was the last opportunity to blood a spinner before the Indian tour.
Secondly, he was taken over as back-up to MacGill and was bowling as well as anyone else at the time of his selection and thus got over the line on the basis of his batting. The fact that he was picked ahead of Brad Hogg for several Pura Cup games while at WA also suggests that his first-class career wasn't always completely woeful.
As you have clearly yourself endorsed time and again that finger spinners are not effective on all surfaces, therefore its clear despite Krejza' success in the current test, he would struggle on tracks that don't offer him any assistance, so finding a serviceble wrist spinner was important for the Aussie selectors and out of all the availiable options in Australia atm, Casson is the best of the lot after Bryce McGain and that is why he was there in the Caribbean, yeah Casson is hardly a bowler (atm) who would strike fear into the hearts of the batsmen, but still he has some skill that can be worked on.Hogg hasn't exactly had enormous success in the longer game anyway, has he?
I realise he was taken as second-choice to MacGill, but even if no-one foresaw MacGill retiring mid-series there was always a possibility of injury like with Warne in 2004/05 when Hauritz got to play, and he's even worse than Casson or Krejza.
Casson did not come close to deserving selection. Four seamers would've been far better.
He got Marshall out with an attempted flick which was inside-edged, and I forget how the other top-order batsman, think it was Bravo, he got out fell.As you have clearly yourself endorsed time and again that finger spinners are not effective on all surfaces, therefore its clear despite Krejza' success in the current test, he would struggle on tracks that don't offer him any assistance, so finding a serviceble wrist spinner was important for the Aussie selectors and out of all the availiable options in Australia atm, Casson is the best of the lot after Bryce McGain and that is why he was there in the Caribbean, yeah Casson is hardly a bowler (atm) who would strike fear into the hearts of the batsmen, but still he has some skill that can be worked on.
As far as playing four seamers is concerned, Australia weren't able to win the 2nd test in West Indies on the back of their seam attack, and then lack of variety in the attack, over-rates, these are all problems that come along with an all pace attack, and its not as if Casson was horrible or anything in that test, despite being hit around he bowled well and took crucial wickets in the second innings.