***Official*** Australia in India 2012/13

[uvelocity]

cowan could have been out 3 times before he got to 18

[Spikey]

Originally Posted by uvelocity

cowan could have been out 3 times before he got to 18

#shanewatsonthoughts

[uvelocity]

I feel like a pedi and a facial #shanewatsonthoughts

[Jono]

Watson is a prick, Eddie Cowan is a top bloke. But I think you'd have to be blind Freddie to think Cowan is more likely to score runs in this series than Watson.

[Jono]

[Dan]

Originally Posted by uvelocity

cowan could have been out 3 times before he got to 18

Michael Clarke should have been given out twice by the time he made 20. But he wasn't.

[uvelocity]

Originally Posted by rvd619323

Michael Clarke should have been given out twice by the time he made 20. But he wasn't.

at least he looked likely

[Top_Cat]

Honestly, the Watson opening batsman train has been gaining momentum for some time and it seems fairly clear to me the selectors are keen to keep him in the side whether bowling or not (whilst pretending to give him a rocket about his bowling to the public). Is just a case of waiting for Cowan to fail enough. Shane Watson opening the batting is inevitable.

Get the feeling that the selectors weren't just expecting Cowan to be a foil for the stroke-players but to score big tons himself. That he's fallen into the former category is probably a disappointment so with Watto giving up the boots and someone like, say, Henriques taking up his role, probably working out pretty nicely for them.

[NUFAN]

I don't hate Cowan but I think it's fairly obvious that if Khawaja had the opportunity that Ed has had, he'd be performing the role as good or more likely better.

Basically the good things that Cowan offers with the bat are usually the things that Usman gets critized for.

[Spikey]

usman has no hustle skip

[oldmancraigy]

Originally Posted by NUFAN

I don't hate Cowan but I think it's fairly obvious that if Khawaja had the opportunity that Ed has had, he'd be performing the role as good or more likely better.

Basically the good things that Cowan offers with the bat are usually the things that Usman gets critized for.

Agreed.

Khawaja has almost the same test average as Cowan, despite Usman being told he's batting for his life every innings, while Cowan has been told he's never getting dropped...

Much prefer Khawaja since he can bat 4 'properly' for us.

[SJS]

Originally Posted by rvd619323

Michael Clarke should have been given out twice by the time he made 20. But he wasn't.

I wish it happens again and again to India till BCCI gets it . . .

[oldmancraigy]

Originally Posted by Philhughesisbes

Khawaja to bat at 4, Watson to open and Doherty to replace Starc would be my changes.So we would have something which looks like.
1.Watson
2. Warner
3.Hughes
4.Khawaja
5.Clarke
6.Henriques
7.Wade
8.Siddle
9.Pattinson
10.Lyon
11.Doherty

Ofcourse I"m a fan of Clarke batting at number 4 but we all know that won"t happen.

So instead of 1 bloke going for 5 an over we'd have 2 of them??

It's not Doherty's fault the selectors took him over there, but if he plays, it IS his fault that he can't bowl.

Mind you, having a matching set of useless spinners could be fun?

From the squad they have, they might as well just pick Smith and Maxwell as the spin options in the hope that we can either bat long enough to draw all the tests, OR that Pattinson will get some help in one test match from the other quicks and we snaffle a sneaky win.

[SJS]

Originally Posted by Prince EWS

I actually reckon Henriques has a better setup to deal with that than he does the moving ball at medium pace. He always has a lot of time to play his shots and his footwork is very precise. Always someone I associated with hard hands though, hence my surprise and his ability to play spin so well here.

Originally Posted by social

His footwork and judgement of length has been really impressive here - has barely looked in trouble

Originally Posted by Burgey

He's played so late, that's what has surprised me most. What you say about the medium pace stuff is right, so I expected him to struggle against prodigious turn. But he's played two gems.

Originally Posted by ajdude

yeah hope the **** never makes his debut

Henriques has been a revelation.

It is not just the runs he has scored and the fact that he did it in the situations that he did but the technique he reveals. Every now and then one sees a youngster come along and display a game (and I am referring to the technical aspects only) that really warms the heart. So much hype is heard or shoved down our ears about young batsmen whose flat-bed, front-foot only, play-through-the-line-and-the-rest-be-damned etc techniques that one wonders who was supervising the nets when these guys were learning the game.

Then comes a boy like Henriques. There is so much that I like about him and much has been mentioned here but let me mention just one which is an aspect where even veterans including some all time greats have been found wanting and refusing to understand the folly of the bad technique they employ which is the legacy of the changes in the lbw laws.

I refer to his playing the ball, even in defense, in front of the pads. This is one of the most important aspects of playing the sharply turning ball. Hiding the bat behind the pads, which is what the alternate method is most of the time, is always an inferior ploy and shows a lack of confidence and refusal to meet the ball where one feels it will be at the time of contact. The pad as a second line of defense has metamorphed, for most, as a first line of defense and the bat as an appendage and a circumstantial evidence of " look-I-am-offering-a-stroke", and then into a way of playing the ball even when actually offering a stroke.

Meeting the ball in front of the pads in defense (front foot defense) and besides or in front of the pad in stroke play is what should be emphasised but fewer and fewer batsmen around the world are doing this with the resultant miseries even against moderately competent spinners if the tracks start to take turn.

So many people support the bat behind the pad method only because so many people never learn how to play quality spin on helpful tracks which once again emphasises the need for bowler friendly conditions to help produce top notch techniques.

Play the ball in front and you have to learn to actually play it where it is not just put bat and pad in the approximate area where the ball is going to be.

Play the ball in front and the soft bat pad ballooned catches will be replaced, if you do edge it, with sharper and more difficult to quickly catch chances.

Playing the ball in front of the pads does not mean playing it early. It just means playing it and not waiting for it to come and hit where it will.

With the umpires less and less likely to offer the batsmen the benefit of doubt this discredited reason for hiding the bat behind the pads is also not very relevant today.

Of course, BCCI's reluctance to adopt the UDRS means that games involving India still give the batsmen some incentive to play for getting these 'doubtful benefits' from unsure umpires.

By the way, it is the Indian batsmen who benefit more from BCCI's refusal to adopt the technology and the Indian bowlers who suffer from the stance but we all know which players count with BCCI don't we and which, or rather who, amongst them counts the most

[Turbinator]

Sehwag better not screw it up here. A 9 wicket doesn't sound as nice.