• Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

Aussie- Should they go in with a 4th quickie or Hodge?

pup11

International Coach
I think its a tricky situation for the Aussies to be in with Watson ruled out atleast till the semi-finals.


So Hodge is looking like the most likely replacement for Watson, but can't see how effective Hodge would be batting at no.7 or no.6 (which would mean Hussey goes further down the order which is also not good)


Considering that Aussie batting is in top form, i would rather pick Clark or Johnson instead of Hodge. What do guys think?
 

Barney Rubble

International Coach
I think its a tricky situation for the Aussies to be in with Watson ruled out atleast till the semi-finals.


So Hodge is looking like the most likely replacement for Watson, but can't see how effective Hodge would be batting at no.7 or no.6 (which would mean Hussey goes further down the order which is also not good)


Considering that Aussie batting is in top form, i would rather pick Clark or Johnson instead of Hodge. What do guys think?
Now, see, this is why not picking Cameron White was a massive error. They have a side so stacked with top order batters and bowlers who can't really bat that they're in danger of becoming rather unbalanced.

They either have to pick an extra quick and bat Hogg at 7 - he's probably not good enough to bat there, and Bracken isn't good enough for 8 either - or they pick Hodge and play either him or Hussey in a spot where they could end up being completely wasted.

White at 7 would provide a few overs to fill in for those Watson could have bowled, and would be suited to that position in the order. The selection of Brad Haddin was an unnecessary one when White was in reserve, and the selectors could pay the price for this.
 

Prince EWS

Global Moderator
Now, see, this is why not picking Cameron White was a massive error. They have a side so stacked with top order batters and bowlers who can't really bat that they're in danger of becoming rather unbalanced.

They either have to pick an extra quick and bat Hogg at 7 - he's probably not good enough to bat there, and Bracken isn't good enough for 8 either - or they pick Hodge and play either him or Hussey in a spot where they could end up being completely wasted.

White at 7 would provide a few overs to fill in for those Watson could have bowled, and would be suited to that position in the order. The selection of Brad Haddin was an unnecessary one when White was in reserve, and the selectors could pay the price for this.
White is no better a one day bowler than Symonds or Clarke though. I've maintained that since before he was picked.
 

Prince EWS

Global Moderator
As for the matter at hand, I know most people are going to say Hodge here. But they won't do it for the right reasons. They'll go for Hodge because he was unlucky to be dropped in the first place - they'll go for Hodge because he was unlucky to lose his test place - or they might even go for Hodge because he's a Victorian and we have some ridiculously biased members here.

However, the best option for the side, in my mind, is Johnson. Australia's top order has been near invincible so far - so much so that Watson has rarely got a bat. When he has, he's just been required to bash at end and, to his credit, he's done a good job of it - striking at above 100 and not being dismissed. But in all fairness, this role isn't something I'd pick a specialist for, unless they were brilliantly suited to it, which Hodge isn't. Don't get me wrong - Hodge is a gun batsman and I think he'd a do a great job at 4 or 5 in the ODI side if a position came up there for him, and he'd probably do as good a job as Watson batting 7. But there is a better way to utilise this position than smashing a few runs at the end - something which Hogg can probably do nearly as well as Hodge anyway.

Australia's bowling is undisputedly their weak point. They've had massive runs piled upon them recently, and with Lee missing from their attack, it could quite easily go wrong. Watson's good bowling form in this WC - even though he wasn't taking any wickets - has been vital to Australia's success so far IMO. Even though Watson is clearly a batting allrounder, his bowling has been of more use due to the balance of the rest of the side. Johnson himself is an under-rated batsman too - even though he hasn't shown much at ODI level yet due to limited chances, he's gunned it for Qld in FC cricket whenever he's been given the chance averaging over 50 last season, and from all reports, his batting would idealy suit the one day game at #8 because he's adept at rotating the strike. I reckon he's good enough for #8, even if Hogg isn't good enough for #7 - and the awesomeness of the Australian top order more than makes up for that IMO.

Idealy you'd have Watson or Hopes at #7 to, in effect, save Australia's arse either way - but with neither of those players actually available, Australia's relative strengths and weaknesses have to be taken into account. There's no doubt that Hodge deserves the spot more than anyone else, but there's equally no doubt that Johnson would provide more to the team - so he's my pick.
 

TT Boy

Hall of Fame Member
Now, see, this is why not picking Cameron White was a massive error. They have a side so stacked with top order batters and bowlers who can't really bat that they're in danger of becoming rather unbalanced.

They either have to pick an extra quick and bat Hogg at 7 - he's probably not good enough to bat there, and Bracken isn't good enough for 8 either - or they pick Hodge and play either him or Hussey in a spot where they could end up being completely wasted.

White at 7 would provide a few overs to fill in for those Watson could have bowled, and would be suited to that position in the order. The selection of Brad Haddin was an unnecessary one when White was in reserve, and the selectors could pay the price for this.
White's bowling is currently no better than what Brad Hodge would send down or even Michael Hussey and White’s shown that his nothing more than a late innings cow corner slogger. Hodge and Hussey can bat like loons if need be, only difference is they can also bat when their team needs them the most.

Do not really see the problem for Australia considering how well their three pace bowlers are currently bowling. Hodge for Watson, simple really considering Watson has taken how many wickets thus far, a gifted wrapped one from a South African, correct?
 

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
Now, see, this is why not picking Cameron White was a massive error. They have a side so stacked with top order batters and bowlers who can't really bat that they're in danger of becoming rather unbalanced.

They either have to pick an extra quick and bat Hogg at 7 - he's probably not good enough to bat there, and Bracken isn't good enough for 8 either - or they pick Hodge and play either him or Hussey in a spot where they could end up being completely wasted.

White at 7 would provide a few overs to fill in for those Watson could have bowled, and would be suited to that position in the order. The selection of Brad Haddin was an unnecessary one when White was in reserve, and the selectors could pay the price for this.
:laugh: When I first set eyes on this thread, I somehow (though only for a second) got a "R" instead of the "H" and a "i" in between the "ge"... :mellow:
 

Burgey

Request Your Custom Title Now!
Now, see, this is why not picking Cameron White was a massive error. They have a side so stacked with top order batters and bowlers who can't really bat that they're in danger of becoming rather unbalanced.

They either have to pick an extra quick and bat Hogg at 7 - he's probably not good enough to bat there, and Bracken isn't good enough for 8 either - or they pick Hodge and play either him or Hussey in a spot where they could end up being completely wasted.

White at 7 would provide a few overs to fill in for those Watson could have bowled, and would be suited to that position in the order. The selection of Brad Haddin was an unnecessary one when White was in reserve, and the selectors could pay the price for this.
But if very side loses its best all rounder they will suffer the same problem re. balance. Take Freddie out of England and the balance of their side would be just as iffy. Not every side has a plethora of all round talent.

As for White, he was given numerous chances at home to cement a place and did nowhere near enough. Every time he batted under pressure, he didn't get the job done.

Just emphasises that ODI is the format for bits & pieces cricketers who may not go near making it in the longer form of the game, I guess.

As for Australia in this game v England - I'd take in an extra bowler and kick England while they are down. Their top order isnt firing but to let Pietersen, Collingwood & Flintoff loose on 3 part timers in the middle overs may be very costly. It runs a risk with the batting, but so be it - I'd back Hayden, Gilly, Ponting, Clarke, Hussey & Symonds to do the job vs England, barring a catastrophe or a complete form reversal by the Aussie top 6.

As for this thread, it just shows all the Watson bashers that he really is a pretty important part of the balance of the Aussie ODI outfit.
 

pup11

International Coach
I think its pretty evident that if the 5th bowling option is gonna be the likes of Symo,Hodge and Clarke then they are more or less gonna give more runs away compared to what Hodge or Hussey batting at no.7 might score.


So i think Aussies just need to back their batsmen and bring in Johnson, because its the Aussie bowling thats more vulnerable atm and its the aspect of their game which is more likely to let them down in this WC.
 

shortpitched713

International Captain
How about Hopes? Would bring balance to the team, but I'm not sure hes good enough. In my opinion Cam White would have been a good option, with Johnson coming in for Hogg for this match. The only problem is that White isn't a very good bowler, but I can see the spin by committee approach with Symonds, White, and Clarke getting the job done.
 

Prince EWS

Global Moderator
How about Hopes? Would bring balance to the team, but I'm not sure hes good enough. In my opinion Cam White would have been a good option, with Johnson coming in for Hogg for this match. The only problem is that White isn't a very good bowler, but I can see the spin by committee approach with Symonds, White, and Clarke getting the job done.
Can't play Hopes - he's not in the squad.
 

shortpitched713

International Captain
I'd be comfortable playing the fourth quick if Lee was playing, I'd still lean towards it now with the lack of a suitable extra bowling option who can bat, but it does leave the tail a bit shaky.
 

FaaipDeOiad

Hall of Fame Member
I think Hodge is probably the best option, all things considered. Obviously it'd be much better having Watson in the team, , but batting down to 6 and no further is a bit risky when the big games come along. Either way Australia are going to be a little short without the all-rounder in there, but the prospect of having Hogg at 7 is probably a little worse than 10 overs from Symonds, Hodge and Clarke.

Having said that, Watson is meant to be fit for the semi finals and Australia are pretty close to there already, so there may not be any big games without him. And of course, Johnson is a pretty handy batsman himself, probably not that much worse than Lee, so if he was picked rather than Clark that could work out decently anyway.

Tough call. I'd lean to Hodge, but I can see both sides of it.
 

dontcloseyoureyes

BARNES OUT
Now, see, this is why not picking Cameron White was a massive error. They have a side so stacked with top order batters and bowlers who can't really bat that they're in danger of becoming rather unbalanced.
:laugh:

Funniest part of this is, in 50 over cricket, White's a top order batsman anyway.

To the matter at hand. I'd take in Johnson. The man can bat well enough to be an 8, Hogg's not a 7 but he'd do a good enough job considering the top order form so far in the WC.
 

FaaipDeOiad

Hall of Fame Member
White's a pretty fine number 7 tbh. He bats higher for Victoria, but Hogg used to bat high for WA too...

Anyway, my feeling is that if they picked a 4th seamer it'd be Clark, which is one of the reasons I'm thinking Hodge would be better. If it was definitely going to be Johnson, the 4th quick would be a much more viable option.
 

pup11

International Coach
Tait and Hogg aren't what one would call economical bowlers, so even when they pick wickets they still pretty much leak lots of runs.


So a 5th bowler [the combination of Symonds,Clarke and Hodge] in addition to Tait and Hogg might prove to be very expensive.
 

dontcloseyoureyes

BARNES OUT
White's a pretty fine number 7 tbh. He bats higher for Victoria, but Hogg used to bat high for WA too...

Anyway, my feeling is that if they picked a 4th seamer it'd be Clark, which is one of the reasons I'm thinking Hodge would be better. If it was definitely going to be Johnson, the 4th quick would be a much more viable option.
Not saying he's a bad #7, but he's a much better #4 than that IMO. What did he average in ODD this season before his call up? Was pretty damn good IIRC.
 

corza_nz

School Boy/Girl Captain
i think they have to go with hodge because his form recently has been too good to ignore. but having symonds and clarke as the 5th bowler may cause the aussies some troubles. watson adds a lot of balance to the side.
 

Top