Go Back   Cricket Web > Cricket Discussion > Cricket Chat



Finding Seams on Apples - Order Your Copy!


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 27-12-2012, 04:58 AM   #1 (permalink)
Global Moderator
 
Spark's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: A Blood Rainbow
Posts: 26,757
Solving the Watson conundrum

So benchy says he'd pick Watson as a specialist bat for India/the Ashes whatever happens. Burgey'd move him to #6. I say that he's not picking his own place in the side without his bowling. I'm sure spikey had something useful to say, but I must have missed it, and uvelocity won't read the debate for six hours anyway.

Safe to say that there's conflicting thoughts on what we do with the all-rounder who often resembles a particularly thoughtlessly laid out china shop during an earthquake.

Thoughts, ****s?
__________________
+ and the buzz surrounds it does +


* * *

in which cribb demonstrates the power of the jinx


Quote:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spark View Post
[Dhoni on 99] Barely seen any of the day's play (for sanity's sake), but here's a competition that might be fun: things more common than a Tim Bresnan wicket
Quote:
Originally Posted by Prince EWS View Post
3) Dhoni scoring a composed, valuable Test hundred against good bowlers
Quote:
129.1 Anderson to Dhoni, OUT, Dhoni is run out on 99!
Spark is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 27-12-2012, 05:01 AM   #2 (permalink)
Request Your Custom Title Now!
 
benchmark00's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Vote 1 Tangy
Posts: 30,098
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spark View Post
So benchy says he'd pick Watson as a specialist bat for India/the Ashes whatever happens. Burgey'd move him to #6. I say that he's not picking his own place in the side without his bowling. I'm sure spikey had something useful to say, but I must have missed it, and uvelocity won't read the debate for six hours anyway.

Safe to say that there's conflicting thoughts on what we do with the all-rounder who often resembles a particularly thoughtlessly laid out china shop during an earthquake.

Thoughts, ****s?


Let me just put my thoughts here first:

Watson as a specialist bat alone is in Australia's top six batsmen... However I think that can only be achieved if you tell him he won't bowl and he needs to give it up. I don't think that should happen though, because he's a more valuable package with his bowling, and without this bowling he's by no means a lock, but I'm still confident he's in the best 6 bats.
__________________
Parmi | #1 draft pick | Jake King is **** | PM me for my list of CW posters you shouldn't talk cricket with in Cricket Chat
Come and Paint Turtle
Quote:
Originally Posted by dontcloseyoureyes View Post
The members of this site surely realise that they pretty much copy everything m00pheh does or says? Nearly every acronym used on this site was invented in msn group convos 5 years ago. Anyone remember DAC?

You're all in a cult ffs.
benchmark00 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 27-12-2012, 05:04 AM   #3 (permalink)
Global Moderator
 
Spark's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: A Blood Rainbow
Posts: 26,757
Thing is, though, where does he bat? I'm with Burgey insofar as I think that, given his injury record - and if you make him bowl then I think you have to accept that - he has to bat #6 and his game is just so ill-suited for #6 at Test level for whatever reason it's not funny. But bat him anywhere else and he becomes a destabilising influence on the batting order at precisely the time we need to lock it down. Tricky tstl. I definitely agree that he's more valuable with his bowling but I'm not really cool with him going in and out of the order all the time in such key positions.

And I say that as someone who once strongly advocated him batting #4 in the first place.

Last edited by Spark; 27-12-2012 at 05:05 AM.
Spark is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 27-12-2012, 05:08 AM   #4 (permalink)
Request Your Custom Title Now!
 
benchmark00's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Vote 1 Tangy
Posts: 30,098
If he bowls, he should bat at four. As a bat alone, probably opener.
benchmark00 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 27-12-2012, 05:09 AM   #5 (permalink)
Englishman
 
BoyBrumby's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Doing the stance
Posts: 42,642
Quite so.

Watson shouldn't be batting at #6, IMHO. No lower than four. Him starting against spin, for all his improvment in that regard, is never going to be pretty so the chances of it happening should be minimised as much as possible
__________________
- As featured in The Independent.

"This is not the time for namby-pamby promising youngsters who might just do something; not the time for building for the future. Pragmatism rules and they don't come more pragmatic than Rogers."
- Victor Marks makes the case for stiff-legged and stiff-armed 35 year old left-handers in Ashes squads
BoyBrumby is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 27-12-2012, 05:10 AM   #6 (permalink)
Dan
Global Moderator
 
Dan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Australia
Posts: 3,101
Drop him from the Test side and be done with it already.


Watson's of more value as a ODI and T20 opener and all-rounder than he is in the Test team. His batting is thoughtless - he feels for the ball early, plays around his front pad with alarming regularity, can't play quality spin and doesn't make any bloody hundreds. Yes, he's a gun Shield bat, but we can't persist with an all-rounder in the top 4 who can't make tons, can't bowl overs and can't stay on the park.

Having Watson coming in-and-out every second Test destabilises the squad; Hussey suddenly gets more bowling thrust upon him, and a new batsman gets introduced to the XI every five minutes as we pick then discard them.

In ODIs, his batting can be devastating as he can get away with his mediocre footwork by using his great eye and power, and his bowling is the equivalent of a front-liner, without the strain of 20+ overs on a day. He can't get through more than 10 without breaking down, as we've now seen.

He just doesn't have the concentration to bat for long periods; he's had more than enough chances to rectify it. Keep him as a gun limited-overs player and blood someone in the Test squad.

Do we bring in Khawaja or an all-rounder (Maxwell, Henriques the frontrunners)?
Dan is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 27-12-2012, 05:12 AM   #7 (permalink)
Global Moderator
 
Spark's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: A Blood Rainbow
Posts: 26,757
Doesn't he have stacks and stacks of big FC hundreds, though? Can clearly bat for a long time. I just think his technique makes him easily tied down for long periods even when set, and that just puts far too much constant pressure on him as he's not getting off-strike. I'm sort of with benchy in that his best spot is still #4 IMO but it's so annoying.

As I said, the *real* problem with him batting anywhere other than #6 is more the fact that you'll have to have him going in and out of the order all the time.
Spark is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 27-12-2012, 05:13 AM   #8 (permalink)
Dan
Global Moderator
 
Dan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Australia
Posts: 3,101
On a side note, there's this Tasmanian bloke by the name of Ponting making runs and taking wickets. Shame he isn't playing.

Or we SOS Katman. Best all-rounder in the country still.
Dan is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 27-12-2012, 05:13 AM   #9 (permalink)
Request Your Custom Title Now!
 
benchmark00's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Vote 1 Tangy
Posts: 30,098
Quote:
Originally Posted by rvd619323 View Post
Drop him from the Test side and be done with it already.


Watson's of more value as a ODI and T20 opener and all-rounder than he is in the Test team. His batting is thoughtless - he feels for the ball early, plays around his front pad with alarming regularity, can't play quality spin and doesn't make any bloody hundreds. Yes, he's a gun Shield bat, but we can't persist with an all-rounder in the top 4 who can't make tons, can't bowl overs and can't stay on the park.

Having Watson coming in-and-out every second Test destabilises the squad; Hussey suddenly gets more bowling thrust upon him, and a new batsman gets introduced to the XI every five minutes as we pick then discard them.

In ODIs, his batting can be devastating as he can get away with his mediocre footwork by using his great eye and power, and his bowling is the equivalent of a front-liner, without the strain of 20+ overs on a day. He can't get through more than 10 without breaking down, as we've now seen.

He just doesn't have the concentration to bat for long periods; he's had more than enough chances to rectify it. Keep him as a gun limited-overs player and blood someone in the Test squad.

Do we bring in Khawaja or an all-rounder (Maxwell, Henriques the frontrunners)?
Pretty much disagree with all of that ftr.
benchmark00 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 27-12-2012, 05:13 AM   #10 (permalink)
International Coach
 
social's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: AUSTRALIA
Posts: 11,073
Had great hopes for him but I have had enough of him being treated as indispensible

In a perfect world, I would punt him and would prefer to see our batting order as:

Warner
Cowan
Usman
Clarke
Hughes
Hussey

IMO, without his bowling, he shouldnt be playing as he doesnt score enough runs to be a top order player nor play spin well enough to bat further down
social is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 27-12-2012, 05:18 AM   #11 (permalink)
Dan
Global Moderator
 
Dan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Australia
Posts: 3,101
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spark View Post
Doesn't he have stacks and stacks of big FC hundreds, though? Can clearly bat for a long time. I just think his technique makes him easily tied down for long periods even when set, and that just puts far too much constant pressure on him as he's not getting off-strike. I'm sort of with benchy in that his best spot is still #4 IMO but it's so annoying.
Yeah, he has 17 FC tons in 190 innings. But that doesn't counter the fact that he's made a grand total of 2 Test tons in let's say 30 Tests (ignoring the first handful where he batted at 7). From a bloke being touted as the best in the country at one point, that's pretty poor. Hick or Ramprakash-esque, I would call it.

We were criticising Khawaja and advocating the selection of Hughes for exactly the same reason; it's one thing to deal with being tied down at Shield level - you can hit your way out of it given time. That doesn't happen at Test level.

Look, if he wasn't injured every five minutes, I'd want him persisted with for quite a while. But when he's destabilising it every sixty seconds by buggering up his calf, we may as well put the investment in someone else.

EDIT:
@Benchmark
Fair enough, I definitely understand why you disagree. However, IMO he's never going to be fit enough to play the amount of Test cricket required to make him worthwhile. May as well extend his career in the shorter formats and be done with it.

Last edited by Dan; 27-12-2012 at 05:20 AM.
Dan is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 27-12-2012, 05:19 AM   #12 (permalink)
State Vice-Captain
 
Debris's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: sydney
Posts: 1,259
Quote:
Originally Posted by social View Post
Had great hopes for him but I have had enough of him being treated as indispensible

In a perfect world, I would punt him and would prefer to see our batting order as:

Warner
Cowan
Usman
Clarke
Hughes
Hussey

IMO, without his bowling, he shouldnt be playing as he doesnt score enough runs to be a top order player nor play spin well enough to bat further down
You know that he averages more than both Khawaja and Cowan, right? Probably a lot more as an opener. And this is with his batting probably affected by bowling a lot.
Debris is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 27-12-2012, 05:21 AM   #13 (permalink)
Request Your Custom Title Now!
 
benchmark00's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Vote 1 Tangy
Posts: 30,098
I love Usman, but he is a long way away from being a test cricketer. If you say Watson gets bogged down and he can get away with it by hitting out in shield cricket and you're advocating Usman, well...
benchmark00 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 27-12-2012, 05:26 AM   #14 (permalink)
Dan
Global Moderator
 
Dan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Australia
Posts: 3,101
Quote:
Originally Posted by benchmark00 View Post
I love Usman, but he is a long way away from being a test cricketer. If you say Watson gets bogged down and he can get away with it by hitting out in shield cricket and you're advocating Usman, well...
This I definitely agree with.
Dan is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 27-12-2012, 05:26 AM   #15 (permalink)
Cricketer Of The Year
 
morgieb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Paradise City
Posts: 8,934
I tend to think he shouldn't play if he isn't bowling, but are there better options? Khawaja's pretty much the same player without the bowling, and none of the other guys that are better are eligible (Ponting, Katich) or are likely to get picked (Dussey, Cosgrove).
__________________
4-0

RIP Craig Walsh (Craig) 1985-2012

Proudly supporting the #2 cricketer of all time.
morgieb is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
A Quick Question About Shane Watson Spikey Ashes 2010-2011 15 03-01-2011 05:03 PM
Watson close to bowling comeback: Lillee Eclipse Cricket Chat 26 11-01-2004 05:23 AM
ian harvey Vs Shane Watson vicpride29 Cricket Chat 39 11-06-2003 04:52 AM
Watson, Maybe Bevan OUT age_master World Cup 2003 16 28-01-2003 06:31 AM
Beven & Watson Out of World Cup. Eclipse World Cup 2003 1 24-01-2003 10:19 PM


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 06:22 PM.


Powered by: vBulletin Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2013, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
SEO by vBSEO 3.6.0 PL2
Copyright ©2001 - 2011, Cricket Web