Who should replace Steve Waugh ??

[iamdavid]

Ch 9 commentary team veiws:

A couple of them even mentioned Michael Bevan

 

[Cloete]

A couple of them even mentioned Michael Bevan

I think they're dead right. For about 5 years I've been saying Bevan is more suited to Tests. His First Class average is a "handy" 55. He just didn't fire when he had the chance. But if a second chance is given I think he'll do well. I mean his style of play just suits Tests perfectly. He used to be bad agaisnt the short ball but now he's pulling brilliantly and doesn't seem to have too much trouble with it.

They'll never look back if they do give him a run, unfortunately I just don't think he's going to have that kind of luck.

 

[krkode]

Yeah, Bevan would make a great player, I think. He can even bowl, no? *looks at Bevan's 10 wicket haul* :wow:

 

[iamdavid]

Yeah, Bevan would make a great player, I think. He can even bowl, no? *looks at Bevan's 10 wicket haul* :wow:

*recalls just how poorly the West Indies played him in that match*

 

[age_master]

the problem with bevan is that he is 33 and nearly 34 by the tour of Sri Lanka

and that he doesn't bowl very often at all these days.

 

[Anil]

In the short term, no one an really replace Waugh.....he has been just too phenomenal a player.....in the long term maybe someone like Michael Clarke....he impressed me with his cool-headed cameo in the TVS cup final.....however it's too soon to say....

 

[Craig]

Yeah I know but at test level batting at number six he is not going to make many big big scores especialy batting at the speed he does.

And he does get out early alot!

He does not look as solid at the crease or as technicaly correct as Clark and in all the test inning's he has playd were he has scored over 50 he has been droped at least once.

I suppose you might say I just have not been very impressed by him.

Doesnt make any sense what' so ever.

You tie down Clarke and does gets himself out. And I can name you a few members in the Australian team who keep dropped at least once.

If he's so slow then why did he make a double 100 in one-day against England?

 

[Eclipse]

If he's so slow then why did he make a double 100 in one-day against England?

lol dident you see that game?

I wont say anything more let's hope you can make an easy assumption.

Any way Clark has a better techneque than Love and even if he get's himself out somtime's that's somthing he will get better at not doing with time.

 

[Craig]

I did.

 

[Eclipse]

I did.

Good then dont ask me a question you should allready know the answere to.

The bowling in that match was horible by England Love just put away the many many bad ball's all day.

 

[Craig]

Yeah Clarke made a styleish 50 and North made a 30-odd.

Anyway does he need to be an all out aggressor like Clarke?

 

[Eclipse]

Yeah Clarke made a styleish 50 and North made a 30-odd.

Anyway does he need to be an all out aggressor like Clarke?

No I have no problem with deffensive or slightly deffensive batsman but IMO they should bat higher than number six so they have time to make hundred's.

I dont think Love has the techneque to be a top test batsman even if he does have the temprement.

Clark does have the techneque and will develope the temprement.

 

[Craig]

Ideally he should bat at 3 or 4, but there is no chance of batting at number 3 for Love.

Unless ponting decides he wants to bat at 4.

 

[Eclipse]

Ideally he should bat at 3 or 4, but there is no chance of batting at number 3 for Love.

Unless ponting decides he wants to bat at 4.

Yep but there is no way Ponting is going to give up his number 3 spot.

I just have not been very impressed with Love even against bangledesh Mushrafi troubeld him.