Australian test selection 2020/21

[Red]

what does this actually have to do with anything

Big bunch of irrelevant whataboutism.

I was responding to Aussie Tragics post about Warner and Starc's concerns with ongoing bubbles.

Cheers for the pile on, what i'd expect from you guys tbh. gagf.

 

[Red]

but i mean they're not medical staff so they can get ****ed imo

Not my point at all and I didn't say anything close to that. Get ****ed yourself.

 

[Burgey]

You can tell we are talking about young, newly married men here, in that they're saying they actively want to spend more time with their missus.

 

[TheJediBrah]

Not like they can get up to much on tour anyway with restrictions. Might as well spend time with the wife.

 

[aussie tragic]

What's the deal with Langer. As Coach and Selector he has openly stated that Burns is ahead of Pucovski despite the massive difference in Shield form (Burns 57 runs @ 11.40 vs Puckovski 495 runs @ 247.50)

Langer has now come out and publicly said Puckovski will not be considered for the middle order either.

Cricinfo: Australia's coach Justin Langer has sharpened focus on a looming duel between Joe Burns and Will Pucovski for an opening spot in the Test team, declaring that Pucovski will not be considered to start the series against India ahead of Travis Head or Matthew Wade in the middle order.

So basically Puckovski is not being selected unless he gets 200 in the A game while Burns gets a duck (unless Warner says he still wants his good mate Burns of course as Langer was leaving it up to him).

 

[TheJediBrah]

Maybe I'm just being optimistic but I'm hoping that's all just talking **** to the media to outwardly support the team, but realistically Langer, Warner and co. are already locked in to the "Burns is gone, Pucovski will play" train.

Because yeah, unless they know a lot personal stuff that we aren't privy to then Burns playing ahead of Pucovski would be pure insanity

 

[Victor Ian]

Can one team handle *** and poo at the same time?

 

[Victor Ian]

Throw in a bit of head and there is just no class.

 

[stephen]

Maybe I'm just being optimistic but I'm hoping that's all just talking **** to the media to outwardly support the team, but realistically Langer, Warner and co. are already locked in to the "Burns is gone, Pucovski will play" train.

Because yeah, unless they know a lot personal stuff that we aren't privy to then Burns playing ahead of Pucovski would be pure insanity

Now that Burns is in the squad and they've backed him, he'll get two tests to prove himself. If he has two poor tests in a row I think he'll be replaced. But with Puc bashing down the door it'll be Burns going for the right reasons if he goes, instead of the last few times he was dropped.

 

[Starfighter]

They should just pick which one they think is best. 'Incumbency' is bull****, especially if it loses you matches.

 

[Starfighter]

Bitterly disappointed to see that the halcyon days of being able to write BS uncensored are over.

 

[Nintendo]

They should just pick which one they think is best. 'Incumbency' is bull****, especially if it loses you matches.

BullSh1t*

 

[TheJediBrah]

Now that Burns is in the squad and they've backed him, he'll get two tests to prove himself. If he has two poor tests in a row I think he'll be replaced. But with Puc bashing down the door it'll be Burns going for the right reasons if he goes, instead of the last few times he was dropped.

I hope you're wrong. That would be a disgrace.

 

[Starfighter]

BullSh1t*

It's how you keep players around beyond their use by date. Why stick with an 'incumbent' if there is a better option?

 

[Nintendo]

It's how you keep players around beyond their use by date. Why stick with an 'incumbent' if there is a better option?

I was seeing if I could bypass the swear filter, wasn't calling out your comment.

 

[Burgey]

Pucovski will play. He'll pop one up off a half tracker to short leg in the first dig for about 12, then nick off for bugger all in the second. All while drawing Rob Quiney's Nine-like comments from the Victorian apologia here.

If he does play, it rules out any notion of Patto playing given the "no more than one Victorian" rule.

 

[TheJediBrah]

Pucovski will play. He'll pop one up off a half tracker to short leg in the first dig for about 12, then nick off for bugger all in the second. All while drawing Rob Quiney's Nine-like comments from the Victorian apologia here.

If he does play, it rules out any notion of Patto playing given the "no more than one Victorian" rule.

speaking of 2011 jokes

no rule against new material brah

 

[NotMcKenzie]

"no more than one Victorian" rule.

Which is a recent rule, not applicable to Border's 1987 WC- (though O'Donnell was born in NSW) or 1989 Ashes-winning sides.

Or is that why Dean Jones was dropped?

 

[Burgey]

Which is a recent rule, not applicable to Border's 1987 WC- (though O'Donnell was born in NSW) or 1989 Ashes-winning sides.

Or is that why Dean Jones was dropped?

Yes.And you will note that it wasn’t until Merv Hughes retired and Warne was the only Victorian certain starter that Aus reached number one. I know Reiffel and Fleming were around but only on the edges, and rightly so as both were pretty average tbh (Reiffel >>> Fleming though).

Then in 97 you had Elliott opening the batting, and even an Aus side in England with Taylor, the Waughs, Warne, Ponting and McGrath nearly lost the Ashes. That’s how corrosive and awful Victorians are to the Australian side.

 

[Spikey]

They should just pick which one they think is best. 'Incumbency' is bull****, especially if it loses you matches.

well yes of course, but the problem is selectors very rarely actually do that. this seems to be an incumbency vs form battle which is hardly a winning selection formula