Shane Watson

Top Contributors
breeno

breeno

Active Member
Shane Watson

After the first test against New Zealand, we saw how much of an impact Watson DIDN'T have, Should we keep persisiting with this guy, even in ODI's?

Should we stop trying to make him our godsend, and try and build a player who has been mounting Sheffield Shield or FRC Runs and Wickets, who do we think is the next best all round 27 years of age or under? Any suggestions as to who our next project all rounder should be?

I personally think it's time we gave up with this project, his series in India was good, but for someone we know who can bat like he can, he only averages 22.

Thoughts?
 
Re: Shane Watson

Watson is ok, has a big heart and is bowling well.

His batting is fine as well.

Should be a handy player for us in the future, and potentially a superstar. If he keeps getting pulled out of the side, it will affect his confidence eventually.
 
Re: Shane Watson

He should be a regular starter in the ODI XI but will have to do more if he wants to hold onto his test spot.

Been impressed with his bowling but needs to lift with the bat.
 
Re: Shane Watson

breeno;284978 said:
Any suggestions as to who our next project all rounder should be?
Click to expand...

Do we even need an allrounder? I have always been confused by the obsession with all-rounders who in most cases end up being not quite a batsman and not quite a bowler. The ideal team should consist of your very best batsmen, your very best bowlers and your very best wicketkeeper. If you're going to have an allrounder, then he should be picked because he is either amongst your very best batsmen, or your very best bowlers. Not someone who can do a bit of both but doesn't make the grade with either.
 
Re: Shane Watson

gandalf;285289 said:
Do we even need an allrounder? I have always been confused by the obsession with all-rounders who in most cases end up being not quite a batsman and not quite a bowler. The ideal team should consist of your very best batsmen, your very best bowlers and your very best wicketkeeper. If you're going to have an allrounder, then he should be picked because he is either amongst your very best batsmen, or your very best bowlers. Not someone who can do a bit of both but doesn't make the grade with either.
Click to expand...

I couldn't have said it better. I agree 100%
 
Re: Shane Watson

Diamonds;285266 said:
Watson is ok, has a big heart and is bowling well.

His batting is fine as well.

Should be a handy player for us in the future, and potentially a superstar. If he keeps getting pulled out of the side, it will affect his confidence eventually.
Click to expand...

I agree he needs a regular spot, just not in tests. We all know how if we get chopped and changed about it affects us.
 
Re: Shane Watson

gandalf;285289 said:
Do we even need an allrounder? I have always been confused by the obsession with all-rounders who in most cases end up being not quite a batsman and not quite a bowler. The ideal team should consist of your very best batsmen, your very best bowlers and your very best wicketkeeper. If you're going to have an allrounder, then he should be picked because he is either amongst your very best batsmen, or your very best bowlers. Not someone who can do a bit of both but doesn't make the grade with either.
Click to expand...

Well when you have a pitch that affects the team balance as, just say you can't place 5 bowlers, and you can't play 6 or 7 batsman, the all rounder is very handy.

The all rounder can bat when needed, and can also bowl when required, somtimes team balance requires and all rounder and sometimes it doesn't.

Oh and it looks like Watson may get a spot back with this latest Symonds debacle, just heard on the news he may have been in an altercation while drinking with the Rugby boys last night.
 
Re: Shane Watson

breeno;285423 said:
Oh and it looks like Watson may get a spot back with this latest Symonds debacle, just heard on the news he may have been in an altercation while drinking with the Rugby boys last night.
Click to expand...

If that's true it surely must be Symo's last chance.
 
Re: Shane Watson

The international career of Andrew Symonds could hang in the balance after the all-rounder was allegedly involved in a physical altercation at a Brisbane pub.

Symonds was understood to have been drinking at the popular Normanby Hotel in Red Hill with several members of the Australian rugby league team when the fight commenced. The incident is believed to have occurred on Sunday evening, some 12 hours after the Australian cricket team sealed a 149-run victory over New Zealand in the first Test at the Gabba, and involved a confrontation between Symonds and a member of the public.

Cricket Australia was aware of the incident last night, and was seeking further information on the matter. The board could be presented with a difficult decision, given Symonds had only recently returned from suspension and was on his last warning.

Symonds last week spoke on Channel Nine about his expulsion from the Australian one-day squad in Darwin following his much-publicised fishing excursion. He also referred to his rehabilitation program under the eye of Brisbane sports psychologist Phil Jauncey, and admitted alcohol had contributed to his poor off-field attitude.

It is unknown whether Symonds was provoked on Sunday night, or whether he instigated the altercation. The Australian all-rounder recently told The Age of a "traperazzi" scheme during the 2007 World Cup in the Caribbean, in which one member of the public slapped him across the face while another stood nearby photographing the incident.

CA now faces a complex and potentially far-reaching decision in the coming days. The board's most extreme course of action would be to shred the remainder of Symonds' contract, given that he was on a last warning following the Darwin incident. But the all-rounder could be offered a reprieve if he is found not to have instigated the fight.

Symonds cancelled a planned fishing trip yesterday and declined an interview to spend time with his partner.


THE AGE.
 
Re: Shane Watson

breeno;285423 said:
The all rounder can bat when needed, and can also bowl when required, somtimes team balance requires and all rounder and sometimes it doesn't.
Click to expand...

Going by this line of argument, the modern game has more or less made the all-rounder obsolete. Tail-enders take their batting very seriously these days, rendering the genuine "bunnies" of old an extremely rare species, and there are more than a few specialist batsmen who can bowl very well. If we talk about Watson specifically, he has a worse test batting average than Brett Lee and a worse test bowling average than Michael Clark. Guys like Vettori and Jayasuriya have proven that some players selected for their batting or bowling alone can become just as effective, if not more effective at both than so called "genuine" all-rounders - who more often than not only prove themselves to be unreliable at both. Having said that, I actually happen to believe that Watson is a very talented bowler, and if he is being selected for his bowling alone, then I don't have a problem with that. But don't pick him ahead of a demonstrably better bowler simply because he is supposedly a better batsman
 
Re: Shane Watson

Id pick him because of his bowling and batting, trust me when this guy's on song, which I don't know why hes failed lately, he is 10x the batsman Brett Lee is, and a much better bowler than M.Clarke.
 
Re: Shane Watson

gandalf;285289 said:
Do we even need an allrounder? I have always been confused by the obsession with all-rounders who in most cases end up being not quite a batsman and not quite a bowler. The ideal team should consist of your very best batsmen, your very best bowlers and your very best wicketkeeper. If you're going to have an allrounder, then he should be picked because he is either amongst your very best batsmen, or your very best bowlers. Not someone who can do a bit of both but doesn't make the grade with either.
Click to expand...

I think the selectors have been looking for a Flintoff type. That's why the all-rounder position has come up, damaging with the bat and with the ball.
 
Re: Shane Watson

For no apparant reason Id like to say the Moises Henriques played for my cricket club that I play for when he was a kid =)


Oh and that comment about needing an all-rounder.

I think it's good to have one because you need to have someone that knows how to bowl a ball so that you can give you strike bowlers a break but you want someone who knows how to bat because otherwise its just a waste of space in the line up.
 
Re: Shane Watson

Ideally we would want to get a Jaques Kallis out of Watson, but a Flintoff type is just as good.

If we don't give him a consistent spot soon, then his time may be up.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top