*Official* Australia in Zimbabwe Thread

[Mister Wright]

I agree with the need to plan, but it needs to be balanced against form and experience.

I think the paying public deserves better than to have every ODI between here and WC2007 treated as a warm up game. Players like Boof, Kaspa and Bevan are unlikely to be on the scene for WC2007, but I reckon all are worthy of any spots they earn at the moment. The ODI side is carrying enough planning burden at the moment with the continued selection of Michael Clarke, who will prove himself, but has been a little disappointing so far.

Fair enough, but there is enough experience with Ponting, Hayden and Gilchrist in the side.

We can't have Bevan rescuing us all the time if we are in trouble. The young guys need to do it, because they are going to be at the World Cup. The Australian Selectors aren't baby sitters and can't look after Bevan just because of his fine record. The World Cup is big business and big money. The decisions need to be made now, not in two years time. The young guys need the experience, and they will be the experienced ones come 2007.

 

[Gaijin-san]

The ODI side is carrying enough planning burden at the moment with the continued selection of Michael Clarke, who will prove himself, but has been a little disappointing so far.

Ha, I leave most of the Clarke-bashing alone these days but I'll bite that. You are the funniest man alive. What are you doing here when you should be at a comedy club?

 

[bennyr]

Ha, I leave most of the Clarke-bashing alone these days but I'll bite that.

Good. That bit was in there mainly for your consumption, but I did mean it. Here are the batting stats from the VB series:

Name Mat I NO Runs HS Ave SR
MG Bevan 7 7 1 195 75 32.50 83.69
MJ Clarke 10 9 1 248 63 31.00 89.85

Given that this performance was one of the contributing factors in Bevan losing his contract are you seriously going to say that Clarke is currently pulling his weight with the bat? He will, he is very bloody talented, but he is not pulling his weight with the bat yet, and that is all I'm saying.

 

[Mister Wright]

Good. That bit was in there mainly for your consumption, but I did mean it. Here are the batting stats from the VB series:

Name Mat I NO Runs HS Ave SR
MG Bevan 7 7 1 195 75 32.50 83.69
MJ Clarke 10 9 1 248 63 31.00 89.85

Given that this performance was one of the contributing factors in Bevan losing his contract are you seriously going to say that Clarke is currently pulling his weight with the bat? He will, he is very bloody talented, but he is not pulling his weight with the bat yet, and that is all I'm saying.

I'm not the biggest Clarke fan by any stretch. He needs much more experience in the domestic four day game if he is going to be successful as the 'new white hope'. But at least he is going to be a chance of making the next World Cup.

 

[bennyr]

I'm not the biggest Clarke fan by any stretch. He needs much more experience in the domestic four day game if he is going to be successful as the 'new white hope'. But at least he is going to be a chance of making the next World Cup.

Therefore he should keep his spot in the ODI side. I have no problems with Australia carrying Clarke at the moment, but let's leave it at that until he starts consistently making decent scores.

This outburst was started by age_master asking questions about whether Boof Lehmann would be in selectors minds for 2007. He probably isn't, but who do we drop him for and can that player offer Australia the same value in 2004? Katich? Hussey?

I don't think so.

 

[age_master]

Good. That bit was in there mainly for your consumption, but I did mean it. Here are the batting stats from the VB series:

Name Mat I NO Runs HS Ave SR
MG Bevan 7 7 1 195 75 32.50 83.69
MJ Clarke 10 9 1 248 63 31.00 89.85

Given that this performance was one of the contributing factors in Bevan losing his contract are you seriously going to say that Clarke is currently pulling his weight with the bat? He will, he is very bloody talented, but he is not pulling his weight with the bat yet, and that is all I'm saying.

well you have to remember that bevan ran him out on one occasion....

you might also note that Clarke is an excellent fielder, far superior to bevan and also picks up the odd wicket, so his contribution to the team is not always just limited to his batting, which bevans seemed more and more to be. Clarke can also score runs quickly from the first ball, again something which bevan doesn't do much anymroe, these days he takes his sweet time playing himself in, Clarke also slogs a hell of alot better than bevans....

 

[Mister Wright]

...Clarke also slogs a hell of alot better than bevans....

Straight down the throat of fielders!

 

[Linda]

I agree with the need to plan, but it needs to be balanced against form and experience.

I think the paying public deserves better than to have every ODI between here and WC2007 treated as a warm up game. Players like Boof, Kaspa and Bevan are unlikely to be on the scene for WC2007, but I reckon all are worthy of any spots they earn at the moment. The ODI side is carrying enough planning burden at the moment with the continued selection of Michael Clarke, who will prove himself, but has been a little disappointing so far.

If a side being picked needs to be balanced between form and experiance, well isnt that what the Aussie team is?!
Sure, they drop Bevan, Mr Experiance himself, but theres mountains more experiance from Hayden, Gilchrist, Ponting, Lehmann, McGrath, Martyn, ect ect ect...
And then theres a nice little mountain of raw talent in there for the future like Clarke, Watson, Tait, ect ect.

 

[ash chaulk]

Clarke is pure class Bat, bowl and fielding.

 

[age_master]

Straight down the throat of fielders!

umm no... (especially not compared to bevans efforts...)

 

[Gaijin-san]

The selectors should definitely stick with Clarke, but if they want his efforts to improve over the more recent ones I think he needs to know what the Aussie team wants him to be. Do they want him to be down at number 6 for a while longer? Do they want him to go up to 4/5? Do they want him to be an aggressive batsman who can slog or replace Bevan now he's gone?

 

[Andre]

well you have to remember that bevan ran him out on one occasion....

But of course Clarke didn't run out anyone through the course of the VB Series and Sri Lanka

 

[Lions81]

I really don't see what the Australians see in Clarke. He seems a rather mediocre bat and nowhere near the league of someone like Bevan. Confidence in your players, especially younger ones, is to be admired, but I think pushing Bevan out the door is something more akin to arrogance. Steve Waugh's form had permanently deteriorated and other players deserved his ODI spot, but I don't think anyone was really more deserving of the spot than Bevan. Repeatedly saying Michael Clarke is good won't make it so. I think Bevan should have been persisted with.

 

[Lions81]

his contribution to the team is not always just limited to his batting, which bevans seemed more and more to be. Clarke can also score runs quickly from the first ball, again something which bevan doesn't do much anymroe, these days he takes his sweet time playing himself in, Clarke also slogs a hell of alot better than bevans....

I don't know if I agree with that. Bevan is the model for finishers in one-day cricket. He knows exactly how to pace himself, when to play his shots, and when to keep his cool and rotate the strike. Clarke may appear to slog better than Bevan, but that's more because he has no idea when to go for the fence and when not to. Bevan is the man I want coming in to bat at 4 or 5 down, and I think it was a confidence thing for the first few Aussie batsmen to know that they could bat as aggressively as they wanted, because if they got out, well Bevan was there to anchor the innings anyway. I'm sure they don't have that same confidence in Clarke.

 

[bennyr]

If a side being picked needs to be balanced between form and experiance, well isnt that what the Aussie team is?!
Sure, they drop Bevan, Mr Experiance himself, but theres mountains more experiance from Hayden, Gilchrist, Ponting, Lehmann, McGrath, Martyn, ect ect ect...
And then theres a nice little mountain of raw talent in there for the future like Clarke, Watson, Tait, ect ect.

I'm not disputing that there is sufficient experience left. I'm disputing that the person replacing Bevan will perform as well as Bevan. Sure, leave him out for Zimbabwe and blood someone else - it won't affect the result, but he's still amongst the best 11 one day players IMO, and not offering the man a contract devalues the ODI's Australia plays prior to the next World Cup to the status of Warm up games.

Hell, I'm not even convinced that Bevan was the most deserving of the chop from the one day team. I'm not deliberately trying to stir Linda with the following statement (maybe just a little bit), but Martyn only averaged 26.12 in the VB series, significantly less than Bevan's 32.50. He may have scored them a little quicker, but Martyn will be 36 in 2007, so I'd reckon he might have been a better candidate.

That's not to say I want Martyn out. I just want to see Australia field close to their best side in the next VB series (which I reckon includes both Martyn and Bevan), not some WC2007 training squad.

 

[Magrat Garlick]

To bring some news from the other front - the new captain, and probably still their wicket-keeper, Tatenda Taibu, made two ducks in the Logan Cup recently for his team Mashonaland. He isn't their first choice keeper anymore, either. Some other guy named Tafadzwa Mufambisi (aged 17) has taken his place. Instead, Taibu is back to bowling off-spin. And guess what? He's their top wicket-taker, with 12 wickets @ 19 apiece (He failed a bit in the recent game, though, against Heath Streak's Matabeleland. Ended with 0/55 off 24.2 overs).

So the Zimbabwean first choice keeper isn't keeping in the domestic league - maybe this Mufambisi guy will get the call-up, since he seems to be in favour in Mashonaland (I'd hope not - it would just add to the ridiculous situation).

 

[luckyeddie]

Well, at the moment the crisis in Zimbabwe regarding Streak's resignation remains unresolved - the talk being that up to 15 Zimbabwean cricketers may call it quits over political interference in selection.

cricinfo article

 

[Linda]

I'm not disputing that there is sufficient experience left. I'm disputing that the person replacing Bevan will perform as well as Bevan. Sure, leave him out for Zimbabwe and blood someone else - it won't affect the result, but he's still amongst the best 11 one day players IMO, and not offering the man a contract devalues the ODI's Australia plays prior to the next World Cup to the status of Warm up games.

Ok, fair enough, but them dropping him clearly says to me that selectors dont think he is one of the best 11 in the country, at least thats what I gather from there statements.

Hell, I'm not even convinced that Bevan was the most deserving of the chop from the one day team. I'm not deliberately trying to stir Linda with the following statement (maybe just a little bit), but Martyn only averaged 26.12 in the VB series, significantly less than Bevan's 32.50. He may have scored them a little quicker, but Martyn will be 36 in 2007, so I'd reckon he might have been a better candidate.

That's not to say I want Martyn out. I just want to see Australia field close to their best side in the next VB series (which I reckon includes both Martyn and Bevan), not some WC2007 training squad.

I know you dont think Martyn should be out, but are you seriously saying he would of been a better candidate than Bevan to be dropped from the contracted list? We all know he had a shocking VB series, but lets not forget 2003, or even that he plays in the Test team aswell (in which he's doing quite well at the moment)...
I shouldnt be getting stirred up, should I?! :P

As for the "training squad", I still think your making the wrong assumptions. Just because all these players are contracted doesnt mean they'll all be playing at once! Theres not that many youngins anyway, IMO. They aren't having a Carlton moment, thats for sure.

 

[age_master]

I don't know if I agree with that. Bevan is the model for finishers in one-day cricket. He knows exactly how to pace himself, when to play his shots, and when to keep his cool and rotate the strike. Clarke may appear to slog better than Bevan, but that's more because he has no idea when to go for the fence and when not to. Bevan is the man I want coming in to bat at 4 or 5 down, and I think it was a confidence thing for the first few Aussie batsmen to know that they could bat as aggressively as they wanted, because if they got out, well Bevan was there to anchor the innings anyway. I'm sure they don't have that same confidence in Clarke.

yeah we all know how well bevan has done of late.... Bvean is past it get over it and move on.

PS Bevan has always been a crap slogger, even Gillespie is a better slogger than him... Bevan cant even control the pace of his innings most of the time anymore... his starts are getting slower and generally have not accelerated as much as they have in the past, he seems to lack the ability to really go after it these days...

 

[Craig]

Well, at the moment the crisis in Zimbabwe regarding Streak's resignation remains unresolved - the talk being that up to 15 Zimbabwean cricketers may call it quits over political interference in selection.

cricinfo article

Clealry the ZCU or Mugabe dont want their team to do well at cricket.