***Official*** Australia in South Africa

[pasag]

As much as it is great to have a go at Symonds. He still is the best option at No 6 outside Hodge and Watson. Hussey and North are fast becoming overrated and a case of anyone but Symonds, regardless how inconsistent they might be. Hussey improved his consistency in the last couple seasons, but North still has a bit more do on that front for mine.

He's not the best option if he's out of form.

 

[pup11]

Wouldn't really call his FC season "great guns". Average at best.

Yeah maybe went a tad OTT, but still for a man who can't buy in a run OD games atm, he is having a pretty solid FC season so far.

 

[chaminda_00]

He's not the best option if he's out of form.

If your picking side purely on form, you might as well drop Mike Hussey as well. He still averages 40 odd in Test cricket and even though he looked average in the last Test series. At times he still looked better then some others.

 

[pup11]

He's not the best option if he's out of form.

Lets be honest when has he actually been in form in test cricket, now you would say he has been gun in test cricket for the last two years, but the fact is he has been doing that pretty riding on his luck.

Virtually every susbstantial innings of his in the last two years in test cricket have had a few umpiring decisions or dropped chances going in his favour, the last two series he played in, he didn't get the luxury and his performances are for all to see.

 

[chaminda_00]

Well for one that's one of the poorer of the better ODI batting lineups in the world and if they maintained that line-up they'll start losing a lot more (obviously with Smith coming back this isn't likely to happen). The fact that won the series without Smith was great, but it's not something that'd continue. But we're talking about Tests anyways. Without Steyn their Test bowling doesn't look all that flash and there's no way it's better than a full strength Australian lineup and definitely not better than India's. Steyn transforms their Test side from a good one to an superb one, just like Smith does the same for their ODI side.

I actually think that batting line up has a fair bit of potential, it is pretty well balanced for mine. Not doubt if you replace Smith with McKensie it makes a huge difference. Though I still think they can win alot of matches with batting line up.

At full strength Australia is better, but I was actually thinking more about what line up Australia will have next series without Lee and Clark. I would still back the South African line up over the Australian one.

India yeah without Steyn they are better, but I don't think they are that far behind. I have to admitt I think Kumble loss will hurt them a fair bit short term until there 4th bowler is established.

I don't really think it Steyn or nothing. I reckon they have a better shot at winning series without their strike bowler then India or Australia, due to their depth.

 

[pasag]

If your picking side purely on form, you might as well drop Mike Hussey as well. He still averages 40 odd in Test cricket and even though he looked average in the last Test series. At times he still looked better then some others.

Who said anything about picking a side purely on form? When a players out of form you don't drop them automatically but at the same time you don't pick them either if they're not in the side. I've only ever advocated picking Symonds when he was in good form and playing well and he's clearly not. It would be absurd to take him overseas and place him in front of one of the best fast bowling attacks on their home soil.

 

[pasag]

I actually think that batting line up has a fair bit of potential, it is pretty well balanced for mine. Not doubt if you replace Smith with McKensie it makes a huge difference. Though I still think they can win alot of matches with batting line up.

At full strength Australia is better, but I was actually thinking more about what line up Australia will have next series without Lee and Clark. I would still back the South African line up over the Australian one.

India yeah without Steyn they are better, but I don't think they are that far behind. I have to admitt I think Kumble loss will hurt them a fair bit short term until there 4th bowler is established.

I don't really think it Steyn or nothing. I reckon they have a better shot at winning series without their strike bowler then India or Australia, due to their depth.

Yeah, I'm not saying that they'd become a poor side, just that they'd go back to being just a good side. Good sides obviously win their fair share of matches as well.

And yeah Ntini/Morkel/Nel > Johnson/Siddle/Bollinger at this stage.

 

[pup11]

Well for one that's one of the poorer of the better ODI batting lineups in the world and if they maintained that line-up they'll start losing a lot more (obviously with Smith coming back this isn't likely to happen). The fact that won the series without Smith was great, but it's not something that'd continue. But we're talking about Tests anyways. Without Steyn their Test bowling doesn't look all that flash and there's no way it's better than a full strength Australian lineup and definitely not better than India's. Steyn transforms their Test side from a good one to an superb one, just like Smith does the same for their ODI side.

I agree with this to some extent, but frankly speaking, don't think any of the South African bowlers were really that great in the test series (apart from Steyn at the G), but still they managed to run through the Aussie batting line-up pretty regularly, of course some poor shots also contributed to that.

In their own backyard the South African bowlers are likely to prove a lot more difficult to handle for the Aussie batsmen, and if their performance against them in Australia is anything to go by, i am afraid the worst might be yet to come.

 

[pup11]

Do you guys really think Nel still has a chance to make a comeback for South Africa, though i too think he might be a better choice than Morne Morkel, but still i don't think the South African selectors think on those lines.

 

[chaminda_00]

Who said anything about picking a side purely on form? When a players out of form you don't drop them automatically but at the same time you don't pick them either if they're not in the side. I've only ever advocated picking Symonds when he was in good form and playing well and he's clearly not. It would be absurd to take him overseas and place him in front of one of the best fast bowling attacks on their home soil.

What makes you think say Dave Hussey or North will perform better against the same attack. Hussey looked decent this OD series and got a lot of starts but didn't go on. Symonds in Test series got a few starst but didn't go. Regardless of the fact Symonds hasn't scored any runs at domestic level. When it comes to International cricket both have been in similar form against bascially the same side.

North still has a bit more work to go before he get considered for mine. He been in good form, but it not like he is breaking down the selectors doors like Hodge and Katich were.

If your going to pick a player purely on form it would be Klinger not Dave Hussey or North. I would be more confident Symonds can score runs in SA then Dave Hussey or North.

 

[chaminda_00]

Do you guys really think Nel still has a chance to make a comeback for South Africa, though i too think he might be a better choice than Morne Morkel, but still i don't think the South African selectors think on those lines.

He not a better option then Morne. But he is a better option then Albie, Tsotsobe and Parnell.

 

[pasag]

What makes you think say Dave Hussey or North will perform better against the same attack. Hussey looked decent this OD series and got a lot of starts but didn't go on. Symonds in Test series got a few starst but didn't go. Regardless of the fact Symonds hasn't scored any runs at domestic level. When it comes to International cricket both have been in similar form against bascially the same side.

North still has a bit more work to go before he get considered for mine. He been in good form, but it not like he is breaking down the selectors doors like Hodge and Katich were.

If your going to pick a player purely on form it would be Klinger not Dave Hussey or North. I would be more confident Symonds can score runs in SA then Dave Hussey or North.

....

 

[chaminda_00]

So Katich to six or Hughes or Jaques. Or maybe Mike Hussey?

 

[dontcloseyoureyes]

So Katich to six or Hughes or Jaques. Or maybe Mike Hussey?

Jaques
Hughes/Rogers
Ponting
Katich
Clarke
Hussey
Haddin
+ whatever 4 bowlers the nutjobs pick

 

[chaminda_00]

He wanted Klinger as his opener...

 

[dontcloseyoureyes]

He wanted Klinger as his opener...

Nah he doesn't.

In any case, I wasn't talking about that. I was just naming who I think they should pick because it related to your moving Katich down the order point.

 

[chaminda_00]

Nah he doesn't.

In any case, I wasn't talking about that. I was just naming who I think they should pick because it related to your moving Katich down the order point.

Fair enough, I would go with the same line up personally as well. Rogers. Hughes and Jaques are/were banging down the door. If they don't go with Hodge then those three should get first shot over the middle order options.

 

[pasag]

I'm a bit undecided at the moment

Katich
Hughes
Ponting
Hussey
Clarke
Hodge / D Hussey

Moving Katich down the order is a bit too dodgy for me, don't want to mess with someone opening so well. A bit torn over Hodge, 34 is pretty old but I reckon he still has a lot of good cricket in him and is in the top 4 middle order batsmen in the country.

 

[pup11]

I'm a bit undecided at the moment

Katich
Hughes
Ponting
Hussey
Clarke
Hodge / D Hussey

Moving Katich down the order is a bit too dodgy for me, don't want to mess with someone opening so well. A bit torn over Hodge, 34 is pretty old but I reckon he still has a lot of good cricket in him and is in the top 4 middle order batsmen in the country.

Yeah agree with this...

Moving Katich down the order or Mussey to open shouldn't even be considered, they are doing well at the positions they are batting at currently and moving them around wouldn't be fair.

I won't have Symonds in the test side nor McDonald for that matter, and the options narrow down to either picking Hodge/Dussey/ North.

North would have the most viable option out of all the three, because he is a decent offie and he is a pretty good batsman too, but atm his FC form is looking a bit dodgy, so therefore it has to be either Hodge or Dussey.

In that case my choice would be Dussey, he is better suited to batting at no.6 than Hodge, can bat sensibly and can also bat aggressively and counter-attack when required.

 

[four_or_six]

I think this is empty logic. You either take his ODI career at face value, in which case he should be in the Test team as he is one of the top ODI bowlers, or you don't, in which case, the form in this series has been irrelevant.

I wasn't necessarily saying it was right. I just think that he's an outsider for selection anyway, but if he'd taken stacks of wickets in the ODIs it might have pushed his case more. It would have shown form, at least.

Perhaps he was a bit unlucky but I don't think he had a good ODI series really. Basically the Saffas saw him off, if he'd taken one wicket each match (on average) with the new ball, things would probably have been significantly different.