Test XI Selection Thread

Top Contributors
Very well summed up Clocker.

The way Clarke moved, one might suspect his back troubled him a little. If that is the case - on day one of a crucial five-day contest - then it is competely unacceptable. How the situation can even occur that he should be picked, especially considering we were carrying 2 other suspect middle-order occupants, is ridiculous.

Spot on re Hussey. He should never have got this far, and ought not press his luck too far. North does himself no favours. I like him, but the only thing he is consistent with is his tendency to go out early.

Although the "next in line" contenders are not thumping the door down at the moment, there is still are still 3 very good reasons why someone else should be brought into the middle order now.
 
CLOCKER said:
Clarke played and missed more than he actually hit the ball. How everyone just assumes that he is the next Test Captain is unbeliveable.He is coming off a pathetic series in India where he batted like a pub cricketer.Johnson will be looking over his shoulder as his spot is on the line.Hussey with back to the wall again shows he has the class but really should give it away at the end of the series. Go out on a high Huss. North must have some photos of the selectors in compromising positions, because that is the only reason I can see why he is in the team. The next time someone questions Peter Siddle just remember why Ponting loves him; because he will give you everything as does Bollinger.Johnson seems to have the mental toughness of an 8 year old.
Click to expand...

I think you are being very harsh on 8-year-olds. I know a couple of very competitive ones.

And, SS, too right about Clarke not being fit enough. What is going on with our selectors? They did this with Haddin in the 20/20 World Championships. It turned out he wasn't fit enough to hold a bat properly and yet at times in that series , they SENT HIM IN UP THE ORDER.

The administrators/coaches of Australian cricket are headcases.
 
Some of you guys have thrown the towel in a bit early haven't you?

Yeah, it was an awful day for Australia. But England are 89 in front, hardly a position of safety. If we can bowl them out of anything that leaves us chasing 190 then we can still win this. Everyone knows that wickets can fall in bundles. I still haven't given up winning this match.

I don't think Johnson is mentally weak; he is a good bowler but not as good as we all thought he could be.Indeed, he is not the bowler we can build an attack around. He is nearing 30 as well, so he isn't going to get any better. In saying that, if he comes out tomorrow and destroys England, than all is forgiven.

The fact of the matter is, both England and Australia are ordinary sides in the sense that each side doesn't have an attack that can consistently take 20 wickets.

England and Australia's strength lies in their batting. When each side's strong suite is batting, then the toss is important.

Our best chance of winning is getting a big first innings score batting first. As is England's.
 
This from cricinfo commentary - pretty much sums things up for Johnson :p

Johnson to Trott, 5 wides, 129.1 kph, oh. Dear. Wow. That's Mitchell Johnson at his worst. He's around the wicket and bangs it in short, with such angle that it sprays about three metres down leg side, Brad Haddin has no hope of getting to that. One of the worst deliveries I've seen for a while, perhaps since the first ball at this very ground four years ago.
Click to expand...
 
OurTimeWillCome said:
Some of you guys have thrown the towel in a bit early haven't you?

Yeah, it was an awful day for Australia. But England are 89 in front, hardly a position of safety. If we can bowl them out of anything that leaves us chasing 190 then we can still win this. Everyone knows that wickets can fall in bundles. I still haven't given up winning this match.

I don't think Johnson is mentally weak; he is a good bowler but not as good as we all thought he could be.Indeed, he is not the bowler we can build an attack around. He is nearing 30 as well, so he isn't going to get any better. In saying that, if he comes out tomorrow and destroys England, than all is forgiven.

The fact of the matter is, both England and Australia are ordinary sides in the sense that each side doesn't have an attack that can consistently take 20 wickets.

England and Australia's strength lies in their batting. When each side's strong suite is batting, then the toss is important.

Our best chance of winning is getting a big first innings score batting first. As is England's.
Click to expand...

Excuse me for not being an optimist. Ponting is struggling, Clarke is injured but personally he is overrated,Hussey 36 y.o comes out and makes a great 195 (even though he had a few lives) and Haddin batted well. Yes the English batting is very good, I just don't believe Australia's is as strong and I thought the Poms kept at it in the field whereas the Aussies have fallen in a heap.Adelaide will be a draw and then to the bouncy WACA which should be an interesting event.
 
Sorry for being away for a while, I'll just raise my own little argument here.

Bollinger should have always played this Test. He's the best bowler in Australia currently, not sure how he was ever left out. I grant you that Siddle has had an amazing match (well first innings anyway), but there's some double standards at play by the selectors. Hate to bring the argument up from a year ago but just think that Clark averaged 21 with the ball, had a year and a half out of cricket, doesn't get picked again. Lee was highest wicket taker for the year in the world, averaging 22, is out for a year and a half, never plays again. Siddle plays 10 Tests for Australia, averages 35 and 40 in his last two series respectively, is injured for a year and a half and all of a sudden plays in the first Test of an absolutely must win Ashes ahead of one of the best bowlers in world? I find it a little strange.

Saying that, I'm warming to him. I no longer sit there hoping for him to fail, I want him to do well. My main issue with him still is he is very, very hit and miss. One innings he bowls like crap in his first spell, but from his second spell is the only threatening bowler, bowls beautifully, even picks up a hat trick. Then the next innings he has one good spell but the rest are boring, constantly outside off stump and very ineffective. He looks like the new Brett Lee, except 20 km/h slower and not as scary. Let's hope he turns into something good, hat tricks shouldn't go to someone not deserving.

Also have a read of this if you haven't already. At first you may laugh... but by the end it leaves you wondering if it is actually a feasible idea.
 
Boris, one of the main punters on AGB has been saying that for ages, that North should be our specialist spin bowler as we don't really have one and he has the best first class record of a sorry lot. (That isn't true of course as SOK has far and away the best, but he is in the early stages of his career.)
 
Beeswax said:
Boris, one of the main punters on AGB has been saying that for ages, that North should be our specialist spin bowler as we don't really have one and he has the best first class record of a sorry lot. (That isn't true of course as SOK has far and away the best, but he is in the early stages of his career.)
Click to expand...
Hauritz has got to play next match, but the selectors aren't going to admit defeat. Steve O'Keefe looks the best, but honestly no finger spinner looks good (pains me to say it :p). Doherty was a long shot and it hasn't paid off, he bowled better than Swan but that wasn't a hard feat for this particular match. He's a one day bowler, and that's it.

Playing North as the spinner actually sounds a half decent idea. He did look good these past couple of days, gets some drift, spin and most importantly flight. Both Hauritz and Doherty quite often bowl flat and sharp deliveries, North tosses it up there and looks the best of the lot. I like Doherty, but c'mon.
 
Stuart Clarke's days are over. He was getting spanked towards the end of his Test career. Brett Lee cannot stand upto the rigours of Test cricket hence his retirement. Maybe if that pea heart Tait got off his arse we could be half a chance as he would make the Poms jump around. I was watching him last year against the Poms and they s**t themselves.Unfortunately Tait can only bowl 4 overs a day.It is easier to be a hero of the hit and giggle and earn lots of cash rather than try and be the best you can.We need a leggie in the team and that means Smith. Granted he is not experienced but the Poms do not like wrist spinners and never have. They have grown up playing against quality off spinners and Hauritz is at best an honest bowler. Siddle stuggled in the second innings as there was just no pressure from the other end.Fast bowlers have to work in pairs as it was proven in the 1st innings.Bollinger has to come in for Johnson and Clarke needs to be grilled as to whether he was fit to play because from what I was hearing on the radio he was looking very tentative.The fact he did not have a bowl was probably further evidence. What do you do with Hilfenhaus on that flat Adelaide track? He might be struggling to hold his place as well. Out:Johnson, Hilfenhaus,Doherty and Clarke: In: Bollinger, Smith,Ferguson and Harris. Ofcourse it will not happen, but like they say, an opinion is just like an arsehole, everyone has one.
 
Smith isn't good enough to be picked as a bower, imo he would have to come in for North if they decided to play him in Adelaide.
 
My opinion is that North needs to go. He wasn't consistent at state level and there is nothing suggesting he will get any better at a tougher level. Bring in Cameron White. Top batsmen and a good first slip. Part time bowling will be helpful. Bollinger and Harris coming in for Hilfenhaus and Johnson is good for Adelaide. Won't swing much for Hilfenhaus who needs to add to his artillery. Harris could be a good player for Australia.

Doherty needs to told to slow it down a bit. He was just firing the ball in there. Not very good for test level. He needs to sort that out or Smith comes in. He may not be ready yet but he will never be ready if he isn't given a chance.
 
Three changes really should be made, Clarke (clearly injured), North (dropped) and Johnson (dropped) out, making the line-up:

Katich
Watson
Ponting
Khawaja
M.Hussey
White/Smith/Dussey
Haddin
Doherty
Siddle
Hilfenhaus
Bollinger

Dont care who bats at #6 as long as it's not North at the moment. My preference is for White. Think the three I have listed are on par as bats, similar bowlers, but White is a gun fielder and we need that, esp in the slips. Fergusson (who everyone seems to love) needs to make some big scores in domestic cricket and bump that average up.
 
Boris said:
Sorry for being away for a while, I'll just raise my own little argument here.

Bollinger should have always played this Test. He's the best bowler in Australia currently, not sure how he was ever left out. I grant you that Siddle has had an amazing match (well first innings anyway), but there's some double standards at play by the selectors. Hate to bring the argument up from a year ago but just think that Clark averaged 21 with the ball, had a year and a half out of cricket, doesn't get picked again. Lee was highest wicket taker for the year in the world, averaging 22, is out for a year and a half, never plays again. Siddle plays 10 Tests for Australia, averages 35 and 40 in his last two series respectively, is injured for a year and a half and all of a sudden plays in the first Test of an absolutely must win Ashes ahead of one of the best bowlers in world? I find it a little strange.

Saying that, I'm warming to him. I no longer sit there hoping for him to fail, I want him to do well. My main issue with him still is he is very, very hit and miss. One innings he bowls like crap in his first spell, but from his second spell is the only threatening bowler, bowls beautifully, even picks up a hat trick. Then the next innings he has one good spell but the rest are boring, constantly outside off stump and very ineffective. He looks like the new Brett Lee, except 20 km/h slower and not as scary. Let's hope he turns into something good, hat tricks shouldn't go to someone not deserving.

Also have a read of this if you haven't already. At first you may laugh... but by the end it leaves you wondering if it is actually a feasible idea.
Click to expand...

Hi Boris,

Bollinger-no wonder he looked dumbfounded(selection panel lack of guts to drop MJ)

Doherty- did an OK job but only his grandmother sees him as the answer.(and Ponting)

Siddle-Another Ponting picked player who had success. If punter thinks he has got a bigger heart and more ability than Doug B. he is WRONG.

North-Why not try it particuarly at Adelaide. NOTHING TO LOOSE

Hiffenhaus-Really like him in every way but not on flat decks. Wait for Perth maybe and suspect this is what selectors are thinking with the recall of DB and RH.

S Marsh-Now is the time to give a young player the chance to prove himself and I would select him.

So the mastermind team for Adelaide would be-

Katich
Watson
Ponting
Clarke(subject to strenuous fitness tests if not D Hussey)
Hussey(m)
Marsh(s)
North
Haddin
Harris
Siddle
Bollinger

I would almost put my money on that side but wouldnt touch the first test side. Thoughts?
 
Boris said:
Bollinger should have always played this Test. He's the best bowler in Australia currently, not sure how he was ever left out. I grant you that Siddle has had an amazing match (well first innings anyway), but there's some double standards at play by the selectors. Hate to bring the argument up from a year ago but just think that Clark averaged 21 with the ball, had a year and a half out of cricket, doesn't get picked again. Lee was highest wicket taker for the year in the world, averaging 22, is out for a year and a half, never plays again. Siddle plays 10 Tests for Australia, averages 35 and 40 in his last two series respectively, is injured for a year and a half and all of a sudden plays in the first Test of an absolutely must win Ashes ahead of one of the best bowlers in world? I find it a little strange.

Saying that, I'm warming to him. I no longer sit there hoping for him to fail, I want him to do well. My main issue with him still is he is very, very hit and miss. One innings he bowls like crap in his first spell, but from his second spell is the only threatening bowler, bowls beautifully, even picks up a hat trick. Then the next innings he has one good spell but the rest are boring, constantly outside off stump and very ineffective. He looks like the new Brett Lee, except 20 km/h slower and not as scary. Let's hope he turns into something good, hat tricks shouldn't go to someone not deserving.
Click to expand...

Boris & Crookers,
We should have known people would still find a problem with the one & only bowler who showed any inclination of being able to take sufficient English wickets to win a Test match.

Bollinger didn't play, simply because he hadn't had near the amound of overs required in the lead-up to show he was ready for the rigours of a 5-dayer. Ask Luke Butterworth how good Doug's touch was.

At least you've changed your tune, Boris, and conceded that someone else besides Lee, Clark, Noffke or Johnson is our best pacemen in the land at present! The two elder-NSW statesmen have had plenty of time to show the cricketing public why they should be brought back into the Test line-up, and have not mounted an argument. Does that tell you anything?

Siddle is no world-beater, but for some reason you think he must be. He was brought in with little credentials to back him up becuase at the time everyone else had broken down and they had to find someone. He answered the call, as he did last week. If Haddin did his job, and Clarke wasn't seeking rest & recovery in slips, Siddle would have had 9-for. Bowled without luck on top of his 6-for, but I doubt the Courier-Mail will be telling you much about that.

For the argument, 135-140 kph is not 20 kph slower than Brett Lee. You have to remember Siddle has to be a stock bowler as well, considering he doesn't have McGrath, Gillespie, Warne, Kaspro, etc. tormenting batsmen at the other end, as Bing had. Which brings me to another point: With all the overs the frontliners sent down in the 2nds innings, wouldn't you think maybe Clarke or Katich might have been worth a tweak? Maybe we could have even squeezed a little bit more than 15 overs out of our "wunderkind" all-rounder!?!
 
Bollinger has to come in for Johnson in my opinion. We might stand a chance with a line-up of Bollinger, Hilfenhaus, Siddle and Doherty.
 
Reading this morning how Harris gave Hussey a nice touch up in the nets yesterday. Johnson got dropped and wanted to take his bat and ball and $1 million pay cheque and go home. Clarke said that in the first Test he did not move his feet,was not watching the ball and his shot selection was poor. And this is the allegedly second best batsman in the team and Captain in waiting??? Jesus...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top