Andrew Symonds in contention for Test squad

[Ford_GTHO351]

Here is an article about the possiblity of Symonds being in the Test squad:



Symonds in contention for Test team

IMO I think that he would be very handy in the Test side.

Symonds since the World Cup has shown to be a top ODI player and there is no reason why he shouldn't be tried in the Test side.

What are all your thoughts on this?

 

[Langeveldt]

I think he would be a failure at Test cricket level... The demands on his batting would be too great, and his bowling wouldnt penetrate at all...

 

[age_master]

yeah i have t yo agree i dont think that he would succeed long term, there are enough batsmen that can score runs quickly - sureley he couldn't come in to the test side over Lehmann, Katich, Clarke, Love etc.

the all rounder issue may come up again however whenWatson is fully fit, he has certainly been batting well of late - he also scored his runs quickly and his bowling has been quite effective in the pura cup in the past

 

[iamdavid]

Im sure no-body doubts he has the talent , but does he have the application to succed at the top level?

Im not completely sure about that one asyet , no doubts he would help the balance , I think they'd be more likely to play him as a second spinner/number 7 , than a 3rd seamer as that article suggests.
He's the best feilder in the world IMO & his batting has improved out of sight lately......but in the end I just dont know if he has the patience to succeed against test quality attacks.
As for his bowling its rubbish ...... Katich is a better spin option than him in the longer form....why....he actually turns the ball.

Symonds is not Australia's next genuine test allrounder......Shane Watson is , he can bowl in the high 130's , swings the ball & has improved his control , and his batting has just gone to another level lately.
Now its just a matter of him getting a chance in the test side.

I think Symonds will go to Sri Lanka with the test side...and he may even enjoy some success in those conditions.
But long term I dont think he's got a particularly bright future at test level.

 

[age_master]

He's the best feilder in the world

i rate Ponting above him

 

[marc71178]

Symonds is not Australia's next genuine test allrounder......Shane Watson is , he can bowl in the high 130's , swings the ball & has improved his control , and his batting has just gone to another level lately.

But even that would only get him in the side as a 6th batsman / 4th seamer IMO.

There's no way you'd play him as a 3rd seamer with 1 spinner, and with Gilly at 7, I don't see how he'll get in the side.

 

[Mister Wright]

Im sure no-body doubts he has the talent , but does he have the application to succed at the top level?

Im not completely sure about that one asyet , no doubts he would help the balance , I think they'd be more likely to play him as a second spinner/number 7 , than a 3rd seamer as that article suggests.
He's the best feilder in the world IMO & his batting has improved out of sight lately......but in the end I just dont know if he has the patience to succeed against test quality attacks.
As for his bowling its rubbish ...... Katich is a better spin option than him in the longer form....why....he actually turns the ball.

Symonds is not Australia's next genuine test allrounder......Shane Watson is , he can bowl in the high 130's , swings the ball & has improved his control , and his batting has just gone to another level lately.
Now its just a matter of him getting a chance in the test side.

I think Symonds will go to Sri Lanka with the test side...and he may even enjoy some success in those conditions.
But long term I dont think he's got a particularly bright future at test level.

Once again you have fallen into the trap of rating Symonds on what you have seen at ODI level. Unfortunately Syomonds' first class record is not all that impressive, but he has improved it over the last couple of years. Some of the centuries he has scored for Queensland have come at crucial times and have come regularly over the last couple of years. He has the application to succeed at Test level. His first-class record is far superior than his ODI or list 'a' one-day record and IMO is a far better player in the longer version of the game.

His bowling is not great, but he is a renowned partnership breaker at first class level and his medium pace is more than handy. In his last outing for Queensland he scored 102 & took 3-25 off 12 and he bowled a very consistent line and length and kept the batsman under pressure. While I don't think he should be selected over Love (who has been the most consistent batsman over the last 4-5 seasons) he would be not out of place in the test side.

 

[Langeveldt]

Why do Australia crave an allrounder??? Little point in one when you have a classy bowling and batting lineup on their own....

 

[age_master]

i would pick Katich or Watson over Symonds in the longer vesion of the game

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

What impact is Symonds spin or medium pace expected to have in Sri Lanka? Him being considered as a useful part-time bowler against Jayasuriya and company is a joke.

 

[Langeveldt]

What impact is Symonds spin or medium pace expected to have in Sri Lanka? Him being considered as a useful part-time bowler against Jayasuriya and company is a joke.

And is he supposed to be able to hold his own against Murali in the test arena???

 

[Prince EWS]

Symonds would be useless in the test side, especially in Sri lanka, as I dont think should ever, EVER, bowl off spin. His medium pace is useful in one day matches, but I think it would be ineffective in tests (especially in Sri Lanka), and Australia already have too many big hitters in the test team.

 

[hourn]

Symonds is a fair way back on the pecking order for the test team. but he does have the ability, just not the technique or temperemant to play test cricket.

outside of the four certainties in australia batting - hayden, ponting, langer and gilchris.

the main contendors for the other three spots and one or two touring spots are Lehmann, Martyn, Katich, Clarke, Love, Hodge. The first three are the guys i expect to be filling spots 4-6 for the first test in Sri Lanka, while i'd expect Clarke to go on the tour and Love will go if they take two replacement batsmen, but i think they'll only take one. Hodge next in line.

After that, there is a bit of a gap to the two Hussey brothers. A little bit further back to Shane Watson. Than a group containing Symonds amongst others a little bit further behind Watson.

 

[twctopcat]

Symonds says it himself in the article, all he wants is one chance. Until he has the opportunity to prove himself, which i hope he does, it's useless trying to predict how he will fare. After all you would call ponting, gilly etc big hitters in ODI yet they seem to prosper fairly well in tests. And it isn't necessarily a bad thing having alot of big hitters in a test side, esp if they perform to the standards of the gilly etc.

 

[deeps]

Here is an article about the possiblity of Symonds being in the Test squad:

What are all your thoughts on this?

um, wat is he going to b in the side for? as a specialist fielder? HE DOES NOT have the temperament to play test cricket...HE DOES NOT have the technique to play test criket. HE DOES NOT have the brains to play test cricket......and that's just his fallings as a batsman!
he gets his wickets,from bowling long hops,and the batsman mistiming it! that is less likely to happen in a test match,because the batsman don't need to make runs fast!

If symonds gets into the test team, the australian test team is going 2 b a jokE! I rate lehmann a better batsman AND bowler than him,and i'm 100 percent sure the selectors do too... I rate katich, and Clarke as better batsman and bowlers than him

So why this favourotism to symonds?!
the simple answer

RICKY PONTINg.....symonds is one of pontings favourites,as was seen in the world cup...after warne was sent home,the selecotrs asked him if he wanted to bring steve waugh in... Any1 with half a brain would have brough tugga back,but ponting wanted symonds...It worked out for him there, but no way will it work out in the test level...Ponting has regurlarly argued in favour of symonds

let's hope he doesn't get his way this time...eeven watson is a better player than symonds

 

[Mister Wright]

Re: Re: Andrew Symonds in contention for Test squad

RICKY PONTINg.....symonds is one of pontings favourites,as was seen in the world cup...after warne was sent home,the selecotrs asked him if he wanted to bring steve waugh in... Any1 with half a brain would have brough tugga back,but ponting wanted symonds...It worked out for him there, but no way will it work out in the test level...Ponting has regurlarly argued in favour of symonds

let's hope he doesn't get his way this time...eeven watson is a better player than symonds

For the record - Symonds and Warne were in the same squad selected for the World Cup. Hauritz was Warne's replacement.

 

[southern man]

Why shouldint Symonds deserve a spot, All he can do is try his best and get the best results he can and he has got very good results over the last year.

 

[Mingster]

Why shouldint Symonds deserve a spot, All he can do is try his best and get the best results he can and he has got very good results over the last year.

Because there are better batsmen ahead of him.

However, I agree with that writer on that link, that if Australia were to play 2 spinners and 2 fast bowlers, Symonds would be a handy player to have.

What's wrong with having big hitters (as long as they aren't just pure sloggers) in a Test Team? :rolleyes:

 

[Mr. P]

Re: Re: Andrew Symonds in contention for Test squad

um, wat is he going to b in the side for? as a specialist fielder? HE DOES NOT have the temperament to play test cricket...HE DOES NOT have the technique to play test criket. HE DOES NOT have the brains to play test cricket......and that's just his fallings as a batsman!
he gets his wickets,from bowling long hops,and the batsman mistiming it! that is less likely to happen in a test match,because the batsman don't need to make runs fast!

If symonds gets into the test team, the australian test team is going 2 b a jokE! I rate lehmann a better batsman AND bowler than him,and i'm 100 percent sure the selectors do too... I rate katich, and Clarke as better batsman and bowlers than him

So why this favourotism to symonds?!
the simple answer

RICKY PONTINg.....symonds is one of pontings favourites,as was seen in the world cup...after warne was sent home,the selecotrs asked him if he wanted to bring steve waugh in... Any1 with half a brain would have brough tugga back,but ponting wanted symonds...It worked out for him there, but no way will it work out in the test level...Ponting has regurlarly argued in favour of symonds

let's hope he doesn't get his way this time...eeven watson is a better player than symonds

Ridiculous...when did anyone suggest that Ponting wanted Symonds in the test side, or indeed guarenteed him a spot?:rolleyes:

In fact, without Symonds we would have had a hard time winning the world cup, and he hasn't failed us since.

So really Ponting made the right choice, and at the same time, has never said anything with the words 'Symonds' and 'Test Side' in the same sentence.:rolleyes:

 

[hourn]

Symonds says it himself in the article, all he wants is one chance. Until he has the opportunity to prove himself, which i hope he does, it's useless trying to predict how he will fare. After all you would call ponting, gilly etc big hitters in ODI yet they seem to prosper fairly well in tests. And it isn't necessarily a bad thing having alot of big hitters in a test side, esp if they perform to the standards of the gilly etc.

Symonds has to wait in line.

good performances from ODI games don't get you into the test team.

Good performances in first class cricket get you into the test team.

On that basis he's still behind Clarke, Hodge, Love, Husseys x 2 and Watson, and is probably about level with about 5 other guys........

He has the talent no doubt. just not the temperemant or technique yet.