Don't you think he is going Sehwag's way? As we have seen Sehwag playing some tremendous knocks in ODI but it did not come very often. Sehwag is very successful at Tests and T20 and I have seen the same thing with Warner but somehow they just find it difficult to get going in ODI's.
Australia test, ODI, T20 teams discussion thread
- Thread starter War
- Start date
Don't you think he is going Sehwag's way? As we have seen Sehwag playing some tremendous knocks in ODI but it did not come very often. Sehwag is very successful at Tests and T20 and I have seen the same thing with Warner but somehow they just find it difficult to get going in ODI's.
Yes, could be a bit like Viru. Although I think Sehwag improved his ODI play a lot over the back half of his career. Warner just needs to find that sweet spot of play, because at the moment the other formats suit him best. In Tests there are bigger gaps, and less boundary riders so he can blast plenty of boundaries, and if tied down by spin, only 1 or 2 big shots will get fielders back on the ropes and out of his face. In T20, he can take more risks as he's not expected to bat as long, so you'll see switch hits and other more ambitious shots. But ODIs seems to rest somewhere in the middle of that batting philosophy: he can't play too many big, aerial shots, as the fielders on the fence will come into play after the powerplay; and he doesn't want to try risky shots like switch hitting too early as he's expected to make runs. Warner will be a very interesting man to watch in the next couple of years, that's for sure.
Sehwag could have been a better ODI player but his stats are pretty dam good. After 251 matches he has a strike rate above 100 with an average of 35. That is nearly identical to Gilchrist plus he is only one of two batsmen to have a double 100 in ODI cricket. If anything I think he's more struggled as a T20 player.
Back to the Aussie team. Quiney selection was more than anything to do with his supposed bowling. I have no idea how they saw him as a bowler given he barely bowls at domestic level but that essentially was the thing that got him in over the other guys.
Well I don't think Maxwell is ready we should have played him over the 5 bowlers we picked in the final test, that way we could have had a brief looking at his batting at test level which may have helped in the Hussey replacement.
With Watson officially given up bowling until further notice that does shift the balance of the side. We have seen the difference that having Watson bowling makes to the side. Even in Sydney when we went 5 bowlers there were periods where we really struggled and that is usually where Watson covers. McDonald last two injury set backs really have cost him, last season where he absolutely killed it before injury and now his latest one when he could have taken Watson's spot over Quiney and probably been favourite to replace Hussey.
Khawaja looked to be favourite as Hussey replacement but the selectors might be more inclined to go for an all rounder now that Watson has given up bowling. Will be interesting seeing what road they go down.
Back to the Aussie team. Quiney selection was more than anything to do with his supposed bowling. I have no idea how they saw him as a bowler given he barely bowls at domestic level but that essentially was the thing that got him in over the other guys.
Well I don't think Maxwell is ready we should have played him over the 5 bowlers we picked in the final test, that way we could have had a brief looking at his batting at test level which may have helped in the Hussey replacement.
With Watson officially given up bowling until further notice that does shift the balance of the side. We have seen the difference that having Watson bowling makes to the side. Even in Sydney when we went 5 bowlers there were periods where we really struggled and that is usually where Watson covers. McDonald last two injury set backs really have cost him, last season where he absolutely killed it before injury and now his latest one when he could have taken Watson's spot over Quiney and probably been favourite to replace Hussey.
Khawaja looked to be favourite as Hussey replacement but the selectors might be more inclined to go for an all rounder now that Watson has given up bowling. Will be interesting seeing what road they go down.
Just on Quiney, David Hussey is another that seems to bowl a lot more for Australia than he does for anyone else.
As for 5 bowlers, I can't see how Australia could NOT play a 5th bowler in India. Hot days in the field, against a pretty good batting side, you really need someone to relieve the main 4. Particularly if Lyon gets targeted. Basically, it's the worst tour possible for Watson to give up bowling or be unfit to bowl... Selectors need to sort him out ASAP. Otherwise you're relying on Clarke and Warner, and you never know when Clarke's back will be OK.
Option 1) get Watson bowling,
Option 3) play 5 bowlers with Johnson and maybe Cutting too so the 7 and 8 can bat a bit,
Option 2) pick Maxwell as the all-rounder, Dave Hussey a decent shot if he has a strong ODI series - I hate his bowling, but he'd be a better bat than Maxwell.
Option 4) pick Henriques as the all-rounder (McDonald would have been ideal, you're right)
Option 5) hope Clarke, Warner and Lyon can bowl at least 30 decent overs a day between them (relying on 3 fast bowlers to bowl over 60 overs per day in India is pretty ambitious)
Tough calls ahead for selectors. The pitches are sure to turn a lot, so having 2 spin options is probably a must. Maybe Steve Smith could be that man... Steve O'Keefe as a 2nd spinner that can bat? Cameron White?
As for 5 bowlers, I can't see how Australia could NOT play a 5th bowler in India. Hot days in the field, against a pretty good batting side, you really need someone to relieve the main 4. Particularly if Lyon gets targeted. Basically, it's the worst tour possible for Watson to give up bowling or be unfit to bowl... Selectors need to sort him out ASAP. Otherwise you're relying on Clarke and Warner, and you never know when Clarke's back will be OK.
Option 1) get Watson bowling,
Option 3) play 5 bowlers with Johnson and maybe Cutting too so the 7 and 8 can bat a bit,
Option 2) pick Maxwell as the all-rounder, Dave Hussey a decent shot if he has a strong ODI series - I hate his bowling, but he'd be a better bat than Maxwell.
Option 4) pick Henriques as the all-rounder (McDonald would have been ideal, you're right)
Option 5) hope Clarke, Warner and Lyon can bowl at least 30 decent overs a day between them (relying on 3 fast bowlers to bowl over 60 overs per day in India is pretty ambitious)
Tough calls ahead for selectors. The pitches are sure to turn a lot, so having 2 spin options is probably a must. Maybe Steve Smith could be that man... Steve O'Keefe as a 2nd spinner that can bat? Cameron White?
Not the best time to be going in one batter short with Hussey gone and our top 4 very unsettled and Wade's spot up in the air. Maxwell I could live with at 7, Johnson's batting is strong enough to be in as a batting all rounder. Maybe if SOK was the spinner we could afford a bowling all rounder at 7 but when Siddle is at 8 then you got problems.
Can you imagine the outcry is Henriques got picked from south of the boarder! Based on what Watson has done of late though Henriques would probably produce similar results, i.e. lots of starts maybe some 50s and a few wickets.
Can you imagine the outcry is Henriques got picked from south of the boarder! Based on what Watson has done of late though Henriques would probably produce similar results, i.e. lots of starts maybe some 50s and a few wickets.
Haha- I thought my suggestions could be a bit NSW biased (S.Smith/O'Keefe/Henriques), but they've done better in the Shield than any of the other contenders. Mitch Marsh hasn't done as well as Henriques this season for example. O'Keefe has the most wickets of any spinner in the Shield (a whopping 9...), and could provide extra batting. Faulkner I suppose could be an option for a bowling all-rounder as well, but with Johnson and Starc I don't think another left arm bowler would be sought after.
I'm not sure I like any of those options, but I think 2 spinners is a must vs India, just depends what batting/bowling balance is wanted eg. Hussey brings more batting, Smith and Maxwell a bit more balanced, O'Keefe the bowling all-rounder. Maybe start with Hussey to have a strong batting lineup early in the series, then put O'Keefe in if wickets are hard to come by.
I'm not sure I like any of those options, but I think 2 spinners is a must vs India, just depends what batting/bowling balance is wanted eg. Hussey brings more batting, Smith and Maxwell a bit more balanced, O'Keefe the bowling all-rounder. Maybe start with Hussey to have a strong batting lineup early in the series, then put O'Keefe in if wickets are hard to come by.
Would be good if Warner bowled more, he looks like he'll be useful as a leg spinner possibly in the Bevan class.
Smith and Maxwell missed a chance to push their claims yesterday as that was a good wicket to show their batting talent.
Smith and Maxwell missed a chance to push their claims yesterday as that was a good wicket to show their batting talent.
JG1995
Club Captain
- Joined
- Dec 24, 2012
- Location
- Southampton,UK
The has now become just like Kenya lol.
War
Chairman of Selectors
- Joined
- Feb 10, 2010
- Online Cricket Games Owned
Australia Cricket Features: Selectors can't have it both ways | ESPN Cricinfo
While i personally as a fan have had no issue with the resting/rotating of fast bowlers like how the media has been making a meal out of it - clearly by these comments inverarity and arthur are creating problems for themselves.
While i personally as a fan have had no issue with the resting/rotating of fast bowlers like how the media has been making a meal out of it - clearly by these comments inverarity and arthur are creating problems for themselves.
War
Chairman of Selectors
- Joined
- Feb 10, 2010
- Online Cricket Games Owned
Just on Quiney, David Hussey is another that seems to bowl a lot more for Australia than he does for anyone else.
As for 5 bowlers, I can't see how Australia could NOT play a 5th bowler in India. Hot days in the field, against a pretty good batting side, you really need someone to relieve the main 4. Particularly if Lyon gets targeted. Basically, it's the worst tour possible for Watson to give up bowling or be unfit to bowl... Selectors need to sort him out ASAP. Otherwise you're relying on Clarke and Warner, and you never know when Clarke's back will be OK.
Option 1) get Watson bowling,
Option 3) play 5 bowlers with Johnson and maybe Cutting too so the 7 and 8 can bat a bit,
Option 2) pick Maxwell as the all-rounder, Dave Hussey a decent shot if he has a strong ODI series - I hate his bowling, but he'd be a better bat than Maxwell.
Option 4) pick Henriques as the all-rounder (McDonald would have been ideal, you're right)
Option 5) hope Clarke, Warner and Lyon can bowl at least 30 decent overs a day between them (relying on 3 fast bowlers to bowl over 60 overs per day in India is pretty ambitious)
Tough calls ahead for selectors. The pitches are sure to turn a lot, so having 2 spin options is probably a must. Maybe Steve Smith could be that man... Steve O'Keefe as a 2nd spinner that can bat? Cameron White?
Based on how England bowled in India, i'd say Australia can certainly play a simple 4-man attack in India - instead of trying to mess up the balance to have 5-bowlers by either:
- picking Maxwell @ 6
- promoting Johnson @ # 7
- including steve o'keefe, henriques
All are unnecessary cause india's batting is now is still vulnerable and a fully fit australia pace attack should be able to take 20 wickets in those conditions, even if Lyon bowls half as well as Swann/Panesar.
I think Aus could try a simple 4 man attack, but I can't see Australia getting the overs out of Lyon that England got out of their 2 spinners. See the first Ind-Eng Test where Monty didn't play, and England couldn't maintain the pressure on India's batsmen. Even in the later Tests, Patel still played as the all-rounder, it's just that he wasn't needed with Monty and Swann bowling well.
Looking at the numbers...even with India's batting in tatters, England's fast bowlers took only 16 for 780 (48.75 avg) for the series and I don't see how Aussie pace attack is significantly better than England's, if at all.
If Aussies can't break through early with pace, then I don't like plan B much at all. Lyon would need a massive series.
Looking at the numbers...even with India's batting in tatters, England's fast bowlers took only 16 for 780 (48.75 avg) for the series and I don't see how Aussie pace attack is significantly better than England's, if at all.
If Aussies can't break through early with pace, then I don't like plan B much at all. Lyon would need a massive series.
War
Chairman of Selectors
- Joined
- Feb 10, 2010
- Online Cricket Games Owned
In that first test vs India - broad & Bresnan were crap. For most of the series except the kolkotta test when Fin played, it was essentially Anderson was the only english seamer that stood up while Swann/Panesar wrecked havoc.
That tells me a strong 3-man seam attack, which australia can will have can own the indian batting line-up.
That tells me a strong 3-man seam attack, which australia can will have can own the indian batting line-up.
I'd like to share your faith 
Broad and Bresnan were crap, but that was made up for by the spin standard. Someone's going to have to stand up for Aus - probably ALL 3 pacemen to keep that pressure on India, or 1 or 2 pacemen plus Lyon.
Pattinson sounds like he'll be back and ready to go, he played club cricket last weekend.
Broad and Bresnan were crap, but that was made up for by the spin standard. Someone's going to have to stand up for Aus - probably ALL 3 pacemen to keep that pressure on India, or 1 or 2 pacemen plus Lyon. Pattinson sounds like he'll be back and ready to go, he played club cricket last weekend.
War
Chairman of Selectors
- Joined
- Feb 10, 2010
- Online Cricket Games Owned
I'd like to share your faith
Pattinson sounds like he'll be back and ready to go, he played club cricket last weekend.
Well lets not forget since India became a force @ home in the 70s starting from the gavaskar era into the recent tendulkar era of batsmen - a spin bowling duo never or an individual spinner never spun an opposition to a series victory in india.
That is what made what Panesar/Swann so unique - since historically its always quality pacers that wins you tests/series in india during the aforementioned period.
So now with India batting at its most vulnerable @ home conditions in almost 40 years - aus just have to keep the selection simple & pick based the bowling attack with its 3 best quicks once fit (pattinson, siddle & starc) & that should be enough to take 20 wickets in most of those 8 bowling innings.
Last edited:
War
Chairman of Selectors
- Joined
- Feb 10, 2010
- Online Cricket Games Owned
Grouping the Australian fast bowlers
I was thinking recently with all the recent clamor about the merits or non merits about the resting/rotation of the australian fast bowlers - i am starting to believe given the large numbers of talented quicks available that across all 3 formats, some bowlers should play one format only.
The ICC has the international schedule a mess which is the main reason why australia and most teams in different ways have to deal with this issue - so unless the scheduling becomes manageable - this is unfortunate distgusting trend teams have to manuver around.
Already in the test team for example, Siddle has been assigned a test specialist a long time ago & looking a amount of quick options available to australia this is how i would assign them based on career records, injury record & series importance coming up (ashes, 2014 t20 w-cup, 2015 50 over world cup mainly)
test only: Siddle, Hilfenhaus, Bird, Pattinson, Hazlewood, Copeland
Pattinson should be wrapped in cotton wool at least with next years ashes in mind to make sure he is 100% for the ashes. His injury record shows that sadly he hasn't played a lot of first-class cricket - but if we cut down his output in international & domestic odi/t20 that will be beneficial. After the ashes however he can be considered for odi's for the t20 n 50 over cups.
Hilfy i also would keep away from international odi/t20 (can't stop him from playing in ipl), since he can be a key swing bowler with the red ball. At times this season he showed bad signs that made him look lethargic as he was during the 2010/11 ashes & aus don't need that.
Hazlewood same as Pattinson, body seems shaky for. Keep him away from the limited overs stuff for now & let him solidify himself as long format bowler.
odi/t20s only: McKay, Nannes, Harris, Cummins
Wasn't always a fan of McKay but his odi record to date speaks for himself & i think he has done enough to remain a main bowler in the odi team for the time being. His form would gives further credence to the idea that some of the younger bowlers can be sacrificed away from the odi's currently. Wouldn't pick him in t20's however.
Harris as i always say body is not fit enough for tests & the more he plays we can jeopardize his career. The selectors need to realize this, just as how sri lanka did with malinga & just let him be the limited overs attack spearhead en route to the 2014 t20 & 2015 50 over tournaments.
Pick Nannes in T20 team & again it means that we can keep certain key young bowlers away from this format for the time being.
Cummins seems the most vulnerable young quick when it comes to injuries sadly. Not sure if his body can handle tests yet. So i say lets be sure he can last odi/t20 before we look at him as a test bowler.
all formats: Starc, Johnson, Cutting, Bollinger
Reckon these four have the best credentials to be considered across all formats depending on circumstances and conditions around the world.
I was thinking recently with all the recent clamor about the merits or non merits about the resting/rotation of the australian fast bowlers - i am starting to believe given the large numbers of talented quicks available that across all 3 formats, some bowlers should play one format only.
The ICC has the international schedule a mess which is the main reason why australia and most teams in different ways have to deal with this issue - so unless the scheduling becomes manageable - this is unfortunate distgusting trend teams have to manuver around.
Already in the test team for example, Siddle has been assigned a test specialist a long time ago & looking a amount of quick options available to australia this is how i would assign them based on career records, injury record & series importance coming up (ashes, 2014 t20 w-cup, 2015 50 over world cup mainly)
test only: Siddle, Hilfenhaus, Bird, Pattinson, Hazlewood, Copeland
Pattinson should be wrapped in cotton wool at least with next years ashes in mind to make sure he is 100% for the ashes. His injury record shows that sadly he hasn't played a lot of first-class cricket - but if we cut down his output in international & domestic odi/t20 that will be beneficial. After the ashes however he can be considered for odi's for the t20 n 50 over cups.
Hilfy i also would keep away from international odi/t20 (can't stop him from playing in ipl), since he can be a key swing bowler with the red ball. At times this season he showed bad signs that made him look lethargic as he was during the 2010/11 ashes & aus don't need that.
Hazlewood same as Pattinson, body seems shaky for. Keep him away from the limited overs stuff for now & let him solidify himself as long format bowler.
odi/t20s only: McKay, Nannes, Harris, Cummins
Wasn't always a fan of McKay but his odi record to date speaks for himself & i think he has done enough to remain a main bowler in the odi team for the time being. His form would gives further credence to the idea that some of the younger bowlers can be sacrificed away from the odi's currently. Wouldn't pick him in t20's however.
Harris as i always say body is not fit enough for tests & the more he plays we can jeopardize his career. The selectors need to realize this, just as how sri lanka did with malinga & just let him be the limited overs attack spearhead en route to the 2014 t20 & 2015 50 over tournaments.
Pick Nannes in T20 team & again it means that we can keep certain key young bowlers away from this format for the time being.
Cummins seems the most vulnerable young quick when it comes to injuries sadly. Not sure if his body can handle tests yet. So i say lets be sure he can last odi/t20 before we look at him as a test bowler.
all formats: Starc, Johnson, Cutting, Bollinger
Reckon these four have the best credentials to be considered across all formats depending on circumstances and conditions around the world.
