Room For Symonds in Aus test side?

[Prince EWS]

What's with the avatar?

You're in serious danger of joining the once-a-week-avatar-change group.

I remember the days when you used to have that bird on a perch pretty much indefinately.

Relevance?

It'll go back to something more semi-permanent soon.

 

[Richard]

Relevance?

You'd posted 2 in a row with this latest avatar, which gave me the excuse to ask the question that's been in my mind for a few avatars now.

It'll go back to something more semi-permanent soon.

Go that self-posting-ID thing IMO. I need to add it to my collection too.

 

[howardj]

Symonds will be in the 1st Test team at the Gabba.

Ponting has said as much.

 

[Matt79]

Yeah, Symonds shouldn't be in the team if Watson is fit. So the question becomes, IF Symonds isn't in, do you think they'd rather have Hodge into the middle order than Jaques or Rogers opening. The answer to that would then decide whether Watson would be at 1 or 6.

 

[Richard]

Symonds will be in the 1st Test team at the Gabba.

Ponting has said as much.

He has?

Not the first time he's stuck-up for his old mate thus flying in the face of all logic (Katich SL 2003\04 - the worst ever Test selection AFAIC).

 

[Prince EWS]

Yeah, Symonds shouldn't be in the team if Watson is fit. So the question becomes, IF Symonds isn't in, do you think they'd rather have Hodge into the middle order than Jaques or Rogers opening. The answer to that would then decide whether Watson would be at 1 or 6.

Watson won't open unless Symonds is playing if Ponting is to be believed.

 

[Matt79]

^^ Katich England 2005? With Hussey killing it over there in county, after tearing up the ODIs?

 

[Matt79]

Watson won't open unless Symonds is playing if Ponting is to be believed.

Was it that definite, or was he just saying if they wanted to play both of them, Watson opening would be the way to do it?

 

[Prince EWS]

Was it that definite, or was he just saying if they wanted to play both of them, Watson opening would be the way to do it?

He pretty much said that Symonds will be in the team, so Watson's only hope would be to open the batting. He then went on to say that if Watson opened, he'd only be looking at bowling 10 or so overs a day, so another allrounder such as Symonds would be doing a similar amount of bowling as well. It has so many cross references that defy logic when pitted against each other - just so Symonds can play.

 

[howardj]

Watson, as far as I know, has never opened in FC cricket.

It's one hell of a stretch for him to do so in a Test match.

I don't think we should be that desperate to have him in the team.

Opening requires a certain temperament; something that's built up over many years.

My hope is that he overtakes Symonds- and if he's as good as people think, he will.

 

[Matt79]

He pretty much said that Symonds will be in the team, so Watson's only hope would be to open the batting. He then went on to say that if Watson opened, he'd only be looking at bowling 10 or so overs a day, so another allrounder such as Symonds would be doing a similar amount of bowling as well. It has so many cross references that defy logic when pitted against each other - just so Symonds can play.

Its a terrible conspiracy. I blame you for taking down your syntax violations signature, tbh...

 

[Prince EWS]

Its a terrible conspiracy. I blame you for taking down your syntax violations signature, tbh...

It's still there.

 

[Richard]

^^ Katich England 2005? With Hussey killing it over there in county, after tearing up the ODIs?

I think that's just using hindsight to be clever, TBH. Virtually no-one thought Hussey should have been playing at the time - he was an opener, Katich had performed well not so long ago, and in fact I always had and still do rate Katich very highly.

Dropping him in 2003\04 for Symonds was nothing short of a disgrace. Who on Earth drops someone who's scored an unbeaten century and a half-century in the previous Test for someone who's never played a Test before? It was plain madness, and I was delighted it was reversed in the Third Test.

 

[Matt79]

It's still there.

but sometimes you post without ticking the "Show your signature" box... very careless work - now looks whats going to happen!

 

[Prince EWS]

but sometimes you post without ticking the "Show your signature" box... very careless work - now looks whats going to happen!

Nah - it's the forum settings. Signatures are only shown once per page.

 

[Richard]

He pretty much said that Symonds will be in the team, so Watson's only hope would be to open the batting. He then went on to say that if Watson opened, he'd only be looking at bowling 10 or so overs a day, so another allrounder such as Symonds would be doing a similar amount of bowling as well. It has so many cross references that defy logic when pitted against each other - just so Symonds can play.

I'll say it again - if you have Hussey and Watson in a side, and choose to open with Watson, you've gone mad.

Regardless of Watson's technical skills, Hussey possesses the same plus the added caveat of actually being an opener.

If Symonds has to play, surely the only thing that makes sense is to have Hussey opening?

 

[Prince EWS]

I'll say it again - if you have Hussey and Watson in a side, and choose to open with Watson, you've gone mad.

Regardless of Watson's technical skills, Hussey possesses the same plus the added caveat of actually being an opener.

If Symonds has to play, surely the only thing that makes sense is to have Hussey opening?

If Symonds has to play, surely nothing makes sense at all.

 

[Richard]

Well, possibly no - but surely making one silly decision doesn't mean you have to make 2 others?

 

[Matt79]

I think that's just using hindsight to be clever, TBH. Virtually no-one thought Hussey should have been playing at the time - he was an opener, Katich had performed well not so long ago, and in fact I always had and still do rate Katich very highly.

Dropping him in 2003\04 for Symonds was nothing short of a disgrace. Who on Earth drops someone who's scored an unbeaten century and a half-century in the previous Test for someone who's never played a Test before? It was plain madness, and I was delighted it was reversed in the Third Test.

That's not true though. I clearly remember the Sky commentators (Botham in particular IIRC) mentioning their disbelief that Hussey wasn't in the test team virtually every ODI match, and the Channel 7 guys back here were making similar comments. And the weak links who appeared to be the logical candidates to make way were Katich, and to a lesser extent Clarke.

And I also remember an article in the Australian "Inside Cricket" magazine before the tour commenced which contained an interview of Katich where he said he was keen to go because his previous tour had been a disaster and he was keen to show that had been an abberation.

So there was discussion of the fact Katich had struggled in English conditions and discussion of Hussey's blindingly obvious fine form before the Test serious started.

And I don't dispute Katich had been treated hideously in the past, but he got slack that he didn't, in 2005, deserve because of those previous unfairnesses, IMO.

 

[Hoggy31]

Symonds has done nothing wrong in his last few tests to strip him of his spot, he'll play. Watto's got to open for QLD and wait for Hayden to retire imo.