Page 14 of 380 FirstFirst ... 412131415162464114 ... LastLast
Results 196 to 210 of 5686

Thread: ***Official*** Australia in South Africa

  1. #196
    International Debutant inbox24's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    2,108
    Quote Originally Posted by Clapo View Post
    If you're going to pick Hughes, pick him has an opener. To do otherwise would just be ****ing crazy afaic. As has already been mentioned, Greg Blewett anyone?
    Ricky Ponting, Justin Langer, Damien Martyn anyone?

    It's ridiculous to not play a gem of a batsman just because he's batting out of position. If he's quality like those aforementioned blokes then he'll do well.
    Inappropriate signature.
    --Moderators

  2. #197
    BARNES OUT dontcloseyoureyes's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    WILDCARD, BITCHES
    Posts
    28,291
    One of Hughes "other 50's" was a 90-odd against Tasmania as well.
    The one, the only CW Black
    Code:
    47.3 W Coppinger to Heads 
        Smacked the ball straight into the groin of Iwuajoku who has fallen over, 
        miraculously with the ball still caught in his scrotal area! Out!

  3. #198
    Hall of Fame Member NUFAN's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Marrickville
    Posts
    17,988
    Quote Originally Posted by inbox24 View Post
    Ricky Ponting, Justin Langer, Damien Martyn anyone?

    It's ridiculous to not play a gem of a batsman just because he's batting out of position. If he's quality like those aforementioned blokes then he'll do well.
    Well, Ponting certainly improved when he was moved to number 3 and Langer's move was from 3 to opener. Martyn was always a middle order bat for all of his career so their is a difference.

    Really I don't see how we couldn't find room for Hughes. If you really want Jaques in the XI and are reluctant to move Katich it makes more sense moving Jaques even over Hughes.

    I'm pretty sure Phil Jaques could handle 3 or 4.

  4. #199
    International Coach pup11's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    India
    Posts
    12,146
    Quote Originally Posted by NUFAN View Post
    Well, Ponting certainly improved when he was moved to number 3 and Langer's move was from 3 to opener. Martyn was always a middle order bat for all of his career so their is a difference.

    Really I don't see how we couldn't find room for Hughes. If you really want Jaques in the XI and are reluctant to move Katich it makes more sense moving Jaques even over Hughes.

    I'm pretty sure Phil Jaques could handle 3 or 4.
    I mean why is everyone so keen on squeezing Jaques into the side, he has been good so far in his test career, but despite his best efforts Katich was prefered as the opener ahead of him in India.

    After that he had that back surgery, and has just made his comeback to cricket recently, and to make matters worse he hasn't made many runs either, whereas on the other hand there is a young bloke who is in red hot form and has done everything this season that the selectors could have hoped from him.

    So AFAIC Hughes has his nose slightly ahead of Jaques currently in the race for the test opening slot, and Jaques should consider himself unlucky here, he got injured at the wrong time and a bloke like Hughes made most of it.

    Therefore either Jaques should go to South Africa as the reserve opener, or he should not go at all and rather play in the SS for NSW and get some runs again under his belt and boost his confidence.


  5. #200
    Hall of Fame Member NUFAN's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Marrickville
    Posts
    17,988
    Quote Originally Posted by pup11 View Post
    I mean why is everyone so keen on squeezing Jaques into the side, he has been good so far in his test career, but despite his best efforts Katich was prefered as the opener ahead of him in India.

    After that he had that back surgery, and has just made his comeback to cricket recently, and to make matters worse he hasn't made many runs either, whereas on the other hand there is a young bloke who is in red hot form and has done everything this season that the selectors could have hoped from him.

    So AFAIC Hughes has his nose slightly ahead of Jaques currently in the race for the test opening slot, and Jaques should consider himself unlucky here, he got injured at the wrong time and a bloke like Hughes made most of it.

    Therefore either Jaques should go to South Africa as the reserve opener, or he should not go at all and rather play in the SS for NSW and get some runs again under his belt and boost his confidence.
    Are you sure of this? I thought in the lead up that their was talk that Katich would have to be patient and bide his time as backup batsman. This was until Jaques's injury. Can someone else confirm this?

  6. #201
    International Regular stephen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    aus
    Posts
    3,773
    Quote Originally Posted by oldmancraigy View Post
    A few years younger?

    Are you for real?

    Let's just start on the 'form' issue:

    Hughes has had an extra 2 innings - but having said that, he's made 4 centuries and one 82* in 15 digs. Has 3 other 50s.
    Rogers has 3 centuries in 13 digs and 3 other 50s.

    So the 'form' doesn't really lean either way - if anything you could argue that Hughes is the better century maker?
    The advantage leans towards him slightly.

    Now to the argument that "Rogers has been in form longer": this is false.
    Rogers certainly made more runs over the previous 2-3 season - but that's because Hughes had only just started and was playing his first games as an 18-19 year old.
    Having said that, Hughes entered this season with a career average over 50 (now 60), Rogers with a career average below 50 (now 49).

    Now to the 'age discrepancy'.
    Rogers is more than 11 years older than Hughes.
    He had a shot last summer, he didn't look great, and why should we pick a guy who will give Australia one good season before people start talking about his age.
    Hughes has an OUTSTANDING first class record already at just 20 years of age. Far superior to that of Ponting or Clarke when they made their debuts at a young age (neither averaged over 50 at the time). But look at their imposing test records now? It doesn't guarantee Hughes will do the same - but just because they did well doesn't mean he WON'T do well. The evidence points towards an extremely healthy test career for Hughes.

    Put Hughes in now, and in 2 years Test cricket will be his oyster - and he'll still have another 15 years before he reaches the age Matty Hayden retired at.

    This is a guy who has the talent to be a permanent fixture at the top of the order for a long time. We're not the top team in the world right now - why on earth would we pick an ageing batsman with a worse record over the boom youngster who has the world of cricket at his feet?
    If Rogers was 5 years younger, he might have an argument. He's not, so he doesn't.

    Hughes is in ridiculous form, it's stupid not to pick him now.
    Ok, I take your point that he is a young talent performing well. I even had him in my side.

    It's a bit rich looking at a guys average after two seasons and saying that he'll perform over the guy who has been doing it at that level now for a decade.

    Just looking at their stats this season:

    Hughes, PJ - 891 runs at 74.25 with 3 half centuries and 4 centuries
    Rogers, CJL - 778 runs at 77.80 with 3 half centuries and 3 centuries

    The statistical difference between the two is insignificant.

    I personally believe that Rogers' experience means that he will be better opening on the South African greentops facing Steyn and Ntini than the inexperienced Hughes.

    I am also of the belief that the best option for the Ashes is to have Rogers/Jaques opening alongside Katich (actually i'd like to see Katich dropped to 4, Hussey and Clarke shuffled down and both play tbh). I think that it would be easier to drop Rogers for Jaques than Hughes, regardless of how well Rogers performs in South Africa. I would still have Hughes in the side, but filling the number 6 position for this tour.

    You bring up Hayden - here was a man who was not seriously picked until he was 30 years old. He did a fantastic job for the country for a long period of time, and most people consider him in the top two openers of the last thirty years. Why then cannot Rogers do a similar job? Given that Rogers has had all of one test (while he was out of form in the state competition mind you) to prove himself I think he deserves another chance. The guy has 31 first class centuries and a tripple hundred to his name for goodness sakes.

    All this Hughes hype is almost like the Warner hype, except for tests instead of Twenty20s.

    I want to see Hughes do well. I just don't think it's in the short-medium term interests of the national side to have him picked as opener for South Africa over Rogers.

    Jaques needs to find some form in the state competition. Jaques is the encumbant and deserves his test spot back once he's had some time in the middle.

  7. #202
    Cricketer Of The Year four_or_six's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    9,189
    Quote Originally Posted by NUFAN View Post
    Are you sure of this? I thought in the lead up that their was talk that Katich would have to be patient and bide his time as backup batsman. This was until Jaques's injury. Can someone else confirm this?
    They did actually say that Katich was going to be picked anyway. But then again, they said Watson would be a strong chance of being in the team even if Symonds was there, which was blatantly rubbish as he was no-where near the test team. I think they say those kind of things to try to give the players more confidence. Whether it was actually true about Katich, I don't know.

  8. #203
    International Regular stephen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    aus
    Posts
    3,773
    Quote Originally Posted by four_or_six View Post
    They did actually say that Katich was going to be picked anyway. But then again, they said Watson would be a strong chance of being in the team even if Symonds was there, which was blatantly rubbish as he was no-where near the test team. I think they say those kind of things to try to give the players more confidence. Whether it was actually true about Katich, I don't know.
    Oh for the days where Watson was our backup allrounder

  9. #204
    You'll Never Walk Alone Nate's Avatar
    Bowling tgfg Champion! Carmageddon Champion! Rainman Champion! DTunnel Champion!
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    New South Wales
    Posts
    26,932
    Will be extremely surprised if the squad is anything other than -

    Ricky Ponting
    Michael Clarke
    Doug Bollinger
    Brad Haddin
    Nathan Hauritz
    Ben Hilfenhaus
    Phil Hughes
    Michael Hussey
    Phil Jaques
    Mitchell Johnson
    Simon Katich
    Andrew McDonald
    Bryce McGain
    Peter Siddle
    Jesus saves

    proudly supporting Liverpool FC

  10. #205
    Hall of Fame Member TT Boy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    .
    Posts
    16,568

  11. #206
    You'll Never Walk Alone Nate's Avatar
    Bowling tgfg Champion! Carmageddon Champion! Rainman Champion! DTunnel Champion!
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    New South Wales
    Posts
    26,932
    Haha, oh snap!

    In that case, it'll probably be Jaques out and knowing the selectors, White, Thornley or Ferguson.
    Last edited by Nate; 04-02-2009 at 01:53 AM.

  12. #207
    Global Moderator Matt79's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Colll----ingggg---woooooodddd!!!!
    Posts
    17,426
    Quote Originally Posted by NUFAN View Post
    Are you sure of this? I thought in the lead up that their was talk that Katich would have to be patient and bide his time as backup batsman. This was until Jaques's injury. Can someone else confirm this?
    Pretty certain Jaques was ahead of Katich til he got injured.
    Quote Originally Posted by Irfan
    We may not like you, your filthy rich coffers or your ratbag scum of supporters but by god do we respect you as a football team
    GOOD OLD COLLINGWOOD - PREMIERS IN 2010

    Is Cam White, Is Good.

  13. #208
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Rahmaniverse
    Posts
    7,358
    Hauritz will get the nod ahead of McGain.

  14. #209
    U19 12th Man
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    211
    Quote Originally Posted by stephen View Post
    Ok, I take your point that he is a young talent performing well. I even had him in my side.

    It's a bit rich looking at a guys average after two seasons and saying that he'll perform over the guy who has been doing it at that level now for a decade.

    Just looking at their stats this season:

    Hughes, PJ - 891 runs at 74.25 with 3 half centuries and 4 centuries
    Rogers, CJL - 778 runs at 77.80 with 3 half centuries and 3 centuries

    The statistical difference between the two is insignificant.
    exactly my point?
    Except that Hughes has made more centuries - so if you had to pick between the 2, you go for the guy who 'goes on with the job'??

    I personally believe that Rogers' experience means that he will be better opening on the South African greentops facing Steyn and Ntini than the inexperienced Hughes.
    This is what I don't understand?
    What experience does Rogers' have (a) playing on "South African greentops" or (b) facing Steyn and Ntini??

    If you want to point to the experience of his first class career you can do so
    HOWEVER
    When people do that, it's normally because the 'experienced' guy has a weight of runs at a potent first class average vs a younger talent who scores runs but also fails and hence has a lower average.

    While 49 is certainly a good average, it is hardly 'potent', and to make matters worse, Hughes sits on a princely 60.

    What you're FAILING to grasp here is that Hughes isn't some prodigy like pup (who was picked in a test side of 'talent' with a first class average of barely 40 at the time. He's a prodigy like no other whose mass of runs is ALREADY unbelievable since making the step up to first class, and who just looks like a batsman who will tear an attack apart on any given day (he has hit the most boundaries in the Shield this year!)

    You bring up Hayden - here was a man who was not seriously picked until he was 30 years old. He did a fantastic job for the country for a long period of time, and most people consider him in the top two openers of the last thirty years. Why then cannot Rogers do a similar job?
    Because Rogers isn't Hayden.
    Hayden finished with 79 first class centuries - by my calculations that gives Rogers another 48 to go in just 5 and a half years.
    Not likely.

    All this Hughes hype is almost like the Warner hype, except for tests instead of Twenty20s.
    Huh?

    IS that because nobody has scored more runs than Hughes in the first class format this year?
    You might note his accomplishments in the other forms of the game too - he can chip in another 4-5 half centuries through his ODD and T20 performances...

    I want to see Hughes do well. I just don't think it's in the short-medium term interests of the national side to have him picked as opener for South Africa over Rogers.
    If the selectors were to pick a slow paced opener like Rogers, who has already failed and looked outclassed at the test level; and that opener were to fail in South Africa and they win the series - THEN the selectors would be taken to the back paddock and shot, gutted and dragged around behind camels. And Rogers is dropped for the Ashes.
    Should Hughes be taken, he fail, we lose - the selectors can still be commended for blooding the youngster against the best, and Hughes can retain his spot for the Ashes and beyond without any problems - it's called an 'investment' for the future.

    You might not think Hughes has the talent to succeed at test level - fine, that's your call.

    But you're dead wrong.

    Picking Rogers would be ridiculous - which is why most decent writers don't bring up his name as an option for the tour.

    Jaques needs to find some form in the state competition. Jaques is the encumbant and deserves his test spot back once he's had some time in the middle.
    Jaques was the incumbent 4 series ago. It's not like he missed 2 tests or anything, he's been out for a long time.

    However he has certainly shown that he's a class batsman at the top level in the past, and should be taken on tour because, at 29, he's still a part of the future for this team.

    You like Rogers - that's cool, but please stop pushing him so hard - not many others are bothering...

  15. #210
    International Debutant iamdavid's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    2,112
    Quote Originally Posted by oldmancraigy View Post
    Huh?

    IS that because nobody has scored more runs than Hughes in the first class format this year?...
    errr Klinger ?




    Quote Originally Posted by oldmancraigy View Post
    If the selectors were to pick a slow paced opener like Rogers, who has already failed and looked outclassed at the test level; and that opener were to fail in South Africa and they win the series - THEN the selectors would be taken to the back paddock and shot, gutted and dragged around behind camels. And Rogers is dropped for the Ashes.
    Should Hughes be taken, .
    Failed and looked outclassed at test level?? Thats a bit rich

    He played one test match, in bowler friendly conditions (about the first time this decade I can recall the ball swining that much in a test match in Australia), against a good attack.
    And it isn't like he scratched around and looked terrible either, both innings he got a good nut and was out before he could blink, not to mention he got a questionable lbw.

    Do you by chance remember just how poor Phil Jaques looked at the other end in this same match, or for that matter most of the Australian batsman?


    Quote Originally Posted by oldmancraigy View Post
    You might not think Hughes has the talent to succeed at test level - fine, that's your call.

    But you're dead wrong.

    Picking Rogers would be ridiculous - which is why most decent writers don't bring up his name as an option for the tour.



    Jaques was the incumbent 4 series ago. It's not like he missed 2 tests or anything, he's been out for a long time.

    However he has certainly shown that he's a class batsman at the top level in the past, and should be taken on tour because, at 29, he's still a part of the future for this team.

    You like Rogers - that's cool, but please stop pushing him so hard - not many others are bothering...
    Nobody is really questioning the talent of Hughes, I think thats your one valid point, tbh if I were picking the team I'd have him there, he's done all one could've asked of him and as you point out his numbers have far more substance to them than Clarke's did when he was first picked (although not Ponting's as you claimed before, Ponting had a very similar start to Hughes at Shield level in terms of age and results).
    Add to that he seems to have the ticker to perform when it matters most (his hundred in PC final, scoring most of NSW's runs on a very green pitch in Hobart, and his great performance in this most recent match when all eyes were on him).

    However the way you discount Rogers as a candidate is a little stupid, he's certainly not the most glamorous option and therefore isn't getting the time of day in the media that Hughes is, however he has thousands of first class runs all over the world in all conditions. A very simple and reliable technique against the moving ball and a great temperament, plus he has the runs this season to back it up.

    The Australian selectors could (and recently have) done plenty worse than picking Chris Rogers.

    Additionally I think the value of Jaques' runs last season are being overstated a little, on paper he has what? 900 odd runs at 50....which is great. But having watched just about all of his batting during that period I think the numbers flatter him a little, he played a couple of good knocks against Sri Lanka.Then batted really stupidly (some of the shots he gave his wicket away to were plain daft) and didn't impress anybody at all tbh against India. And then struggled against a below-par WI attack before coming good with a hundred in his last test. I recall at times against India and the Windies hearing murmuring about the security of his spot in the side. And as has been stated Katich was ahead of him in the scheme of things come the start of the India tour (and rightly so).

    I really think it's a pretty even three horse race tbh, can see the merits and pitfalls in picking any of the three.....will be a fascinating decision if they do pick just one as Ponting is suggesting....from an excitment point of view I hope it's Hughes
    Last edited by iamdavid; 04-02-2009 at 05:16 AM.



Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Pakistan Cricket news/views
    By Fusion in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 781
    Last Post: 07-08-2014, 09:08 PM
  2. **Official** New Zealand in Australia
    By James in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 6541
    Last Post: 16-02-2009, 04:49 PM
  3. The Top 9 ODI Nations
    By Athlai in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 49
    Last Post: 26-01-2009, 04:39 PM
  4. England axe Test for South Africa tour
    By biased indian in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 32
    Last Post: 26-01-2009, 12:30 PM
  5. Can South Africa bounce back and win the ODI Series?
    By satheeshv37 in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 18-01-2009, 04:07 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •