Australia Selection Errors - Page 3

Keep Wandering · 12 Jan 2009, 22:42

Quote:

Originally Posted by BabyBlues

The shorter the format of the game, the less important averages become in comparison to strike rates. Warner has more damage factor because of his strike rate (approx 133).

Gilchrist had one of the lowest averages of any genuine Australian batsman in the ODI side when last he played, and yet was almost universally acknowledged as our most damaging due to his ability to score runs at incredible rates. That is accentuated even more in T20 cricket, which is why Warner was picked.

I can quite confidently say that unless Warner makes some incredible changes to his approach to the game and technique, he will never, EVER play a Test for Australia, and that is how it should be. He will, however, be a very good batsman in the shorter forms of the game, provided he can maintain the sort of form he is showing long term.

Yer fair enough,
but I thought one of the most important things in cricket is making runs,
good on him if he has a good strike rate but in the end you have to be making runs to play at the highest level.
Hodge has made the most Domestic Twenty20 runs in the world (inc. IPL, County) and is one of the most successful run scorers in Domestic Cricket.

grapedo · 12 Jan 2009, 22:46

Quote:

Originally Posted by Keep Wandering

Yer fair enough,
but I thought one of the most important things in cricket is making runs,
good on him if he has a good strike rate but in the end you have to be making runs to play at the highest level.
Hodge has made the most Domestic Twenty20 runs in the world (inc. IPL, County) and is one of the most successful run scorers in Domestic Cricket.

Totally agree.

If you still need to have a decent average.

If a player averages 20 with a strike rate of 150 and another player averages 45 at a strike rate of 75 then you would pick the guy with the higher average.

BabyBlues · 13 Jan 2009, 06:26

Quote:

Originally Posted by grapedo

Totally agree.

If you still need to have a decent average.

If a player averages 20 with a strike rate of 150 and another player averages 45 at a strike rate of 75 then you would pick the guy with the higher average.

Wait, is this 20/20? Because I wouldn't pick a guy with a strike rate of 75 in 20/20 no matter how high his average. 75 is low-ish for 50 over cricket! It's absolutely pathetic in 20/20! I'd pick the guy who averaged 20 at 150, but I'd hope there were better players available than either.

If we're talking about 50 over cricket, then of course, the guy that averages 45 at 75 is the much better option. But then if we're talking about 50 over cricket, Warner has both a better average AND better strike rate than Hodge.

grapedo · 13 Jan 2009, 19:07

Quote:

Originally Posted by BabyBlues

Wait, is this 20/20? Because I wouldn't pick a guy with a strike rate of 75 in 20/20 no matter how high his average. 75 is low-ish for 50 over cricket! It's absolutely pathetic in 20/20! I'd pick the guy who averaged 20 at 150, but I'd hope there were better players available than either.

If we're talking about 50 over cricket, then of course, the guy that averages 45 at 75 is the much better option. But then if we're talking about 50 over cricket, Warner has both a better average AND better strike rate than Hodge.

I was talking about 50 over.

But 75 isn't low for odi 75 is an ideal strike rate.

BabyBlues · 14 Jan 2009, 02:29

Quote:

Originally Posted by grapedo

I was talking about 50 over.

But 75 isn't low for odi 75 is an ideal strike rate.

Not really. I would call 70 low, 75 low-ish, 80 normal, 85 high-ish, 90 high, 95 very high. In fact, going through the stats of some regular Australian ODI players, I couldn't find anybody under 76.

In any case, going back to the original point, Warner has both a better strike rate and better average than Hodge in 50 over cricket this season.

grapedo · 14 Jan 2009, 06:04

Quote:

Originally Posted by BabyBlues

Not really. I would call 70 low, 75 low-ish, 80 normal, 85 high-ish, 90 high, 95 very high. In fact, going through the stats of some regular Australian ODI players, I couldn't find anybody under 76.

In any case, going back to the original point, Warner has both a better strike rate and better average than Hodge in 50 over cricket this season.

Well I would like to see more of him at international level to form an opinion of him TBH.

BabyBlues · 14 Jan 2009, 08:49

Quote:

Originally Posted by grapedo

Well I would like to see more of him at international level to form an opinion of him TBH.

Naturally. But the only way he's going to get a go at international level is to get picked ahead of players like Hodge, isn't it?

grapedo · 14 Jan 2009, 20:22

Quote:

Originally Posted by BabyBlues

Naturally. But the only way he's going to get a go at international level is to get picked ahead of players like Hodge, isn't it?

Him and Hodge are two completeley different players.

Hodge is a stable middle order batsman where as Warner is an agressive opener they would not pick Warner over Hodge or vice versa as they are both different players and bat in different positions.

solar · 15 Jan 2009, 01:53

interestingly all the talk is actually about hodge missing the 20/20 and one day squads. He is the second highest run scorer in the ford ranger cup and most experts admit that he is the best twenty20 batsman in the country.

The fact that he was not included in the emails show that the selectors have thrown his name out. It's a disgrace that people use the "youth" excuse and then watch ponting and mike hussey play. I'm all for letting the youth come through but don't piss on my back and tell me it's raining people!!!

We have a twenty20 world cup coming up and we refused to select the best bowler in that form in harwood. Quiney and a fit mcgain also have claims for higher honours.

Funny thing is marsh has done nothing in first class cricket this season yet some want him in both sides because of his IPL form last year.....

Personally I would rest all the test players over 25 from the twenty20 games and use a under 25 team for the cup. Refresh our older players.

BabyBlues · 15 Jan 2009, 07:12

Quote:

Originally Posted by grapedo

Him and Hodge are two completeley different players.

Hodge is a stable middle order batsman where as Warner is an agressive opener they would not pick Warner over Hodge or vice versa as they are both different players and bat in different positions.

I don't disagree with you. In fact, it is the basis of my argument. It was other people who were saying Hodge has a better average than Warner, and I was simply pointing out that Warner's strike rate was better. They are different players, damaging in different ways, and much harder to make direct comparisons between.