Australia

[sifter132]

My god how Australia's test attack has missed Lee as a spearhead since 2008. It no coincidence AUS decline in test cricket, started rapidy when Lee last played tests in 2008.

Wholeheartedly agree. Lee is a much better line bowler now than in early Test career. Losing him to injury just before the 2009 Ashes was a very under appreciated blow to Australia's chances. I thought it was a massive loss - not quite of the McGrath 2005 standard, but much closer than people think. Lee should easily have made that 2009 side, either playing as the new ball swing bowler instead of Hilfenhaus or leaving Siddle out and having Johnson as first change. And with good fitness, he'd walk into the Aussie Test side again in front of our current crew of jokers.

Tait looked tired today, hardly reached 90 mph except in his 1st over. Hopefully its just a one-off, but this is where the negative impact of picking M Hussey as Bollinger's replacement will come in. Since now if Tait begins to struggle, you would have hoped Nannes could have been called upon immediately - but unfortunately not.

Yep, it's as I feared, Tait (and probably Lee as well) should have been rested for one of the Kenya/Canada matches. All we heard was how the players were itching for a game, but you just had to look at the schedule and see that there was potentially 4 games in 10 days for Australia - not good for guys who can only bowl 2 over spells.

With that in mind, qualifying for the A3 spot might be a blessing in disguise because it allows a day or two more to rest. I really don't care who we play - you have to win all 3 games to lift the cup. Whether it's India-SA-SL who cares? Also, looking with rose coloured glasses, having the 34 game streak broken might be a really good thing for the team. It suddenly makes the Aussies the underdogs again and it might be the loss they needed to have to get some fire and focus.

No my friend. As we debated before, AUS tactics for the longest while has been to have the keeper (Haddin) opening - thus if Haddin is out injured, Paine goes right in.

I don't mind selecting a reserve keeper - but only if you think he's a good enough batsman to play in his own right. Paine is not (in both my mind AND the selectors I assume). You can prove that point by asking: If Watson was injured, who would open? I doubt Paine would come into the team - it would be David Hussey (for extra bowling cover) and then either Ponting or Clarke would open I would imagine. So by that assumption, Paine is covering for only one man - Brad Haddin. That is a waste of a reserve spot IMHO.

Nannes, Hodge, Wade, Christian, Warner, Marsh, Hopes, Finch along with the unfit Harris & Starc. Quality/solid ODI players who would make alot of ODI teams around the world right now.

You're stretching it... Australia don't have any PROVEN depth. Marsh is about the only player you've listed there who's a 'quality/solid ODI player' - oh, and Ryan Harris who Australia would LOVE to have. Sure there's 1000 young fast bowlers that COULD be good. Finch and Warner have potential, yes, but you can't tell me that other nations would be begging for them when there is plenty of young talent in world cricket like Darren Bravo, or Shafique or Raina or Jesse Ryder or Angelo Mathews etc etc. Nannes might be good on his day but I don't trust him at all - he's just another in the long line of guys who's had their shot because he bowls fast. Hodge had his shot but proved distinctly average, Christian has good domestic form but looked very smackable in his T20Is, Hopes bowling at international level declined badly in the last couple of years once teams worked out that he's mostly a trundler. I can't see how these are quality players.

 

[aussie1st]

Christian has good domestic form but looked very smackable in his T20Is

His batting would be the main reason you have him in the side. Agree about his bowling, it's similar to Bravo who looks hittable but has that knack for getting a wicket.

 

[Sedition]

With that in mind, qualifying for the A3 spot might be a blessing in disguise because it allows a day or two more to rest. I really don't care who we play - you have to win all 3 games to lift the cup. Whether it's India-SA-SL who cares? Also, looking with rose coloured glasses, having the 34 game streak broken might be a really good thing for the team. It suddenly makes the Aussies the underdogs again and it might be the loss they needed to have to get some fire and focus.

Thinking and hoping the same, though India is the last team I want to play in a quarter final, especially off the back of this form.. though a victory over them would be a huge confidence boost.

 

[War]

If Pakistan wanted a backup keeper they could have had one. Akmal youngest brother took over the keeping from him in the Test match. India also have a more than capable backup keeper but they also choose to leave him out. SL, WI, NZ you name it, they all have a capable backup keeper who they have chosen not to take. It comes down to a simple choice, backup keeper or not, those teams choose not to take one which is the view I share.

And there in lies the problem, either pick a keeper that can have an impact as a batsmen only or take the punt and go without one.



I wasn't talking about the overall depth, I was talking about the depth in the squad. However what you pointed out is more reason why we should have left the reserve keeper out of the squad. Why leave behind another one of those players for a what if.

Adan Akmal from what i understand i pretty much seen as test match keeper & his batting isn't suited for ODIs. So he wouldn't have been considered for ODIs in any case.

India are the home team, so they clearly dont need to pick a back-up keeper in any case. If Dhoni gets injured for key QF or SF game, unlike AUS or any other far away side, the keeper wont have to take flight & potentially miss that crunch game.

As we mentioned before. I world cup history usually keeper has never gotten injured if im correct. So teams have tended to pick squads without that back-up keeper, since they take the risk that nothing will happen to their keeper - thus they pick a extra batsman/bowler/all-rounder to make in that final 15th squad member. Given that most teams never go into world cups with 100% settled XIs, their is always some deliberation about that.

But AUS situation is different & has always been different to rest of the world especially since the 2003 WC. In the last two 50 over world cup (along with T20 cups). Given AUS quality depth & strong 1st XI squad, AUS have always taken a back-up keeper because their main XI has generally been settled & have only needed 2-3 back-ups in past winning tournaments - thus picking a back-up keeper was never an issue/wasted squad place - they just did it to make up ICC regulated squad numbers.

The same things applies to the 2011 squad. Yes we can argue Paine isn't a batsman who can warrant a place on his own like Van Wyk for SA or Haddin as Gilchrist's back-up in past AUS cup tournaments. But i didn't have a problem with it before the tournament given that:

- AUS top order was always settled (although its now a bit out of form)

- Paine's role was always to come in for Haddin if he specifically got injured Although of course if Watson got injured, that would open another can or worms since Paine would have to bat @ 7 & this is where some would argue Matt Wade would have been better.

- The other 3 back-up players roles where already covered.

But overall again. Paine position in the squad is not reason why we cant have a Nannes (or back-up spinner as you suggested) in the main 15 right now. It is the selectors crazyness of not picking Hussey from the squad from the start, so that when Bollinger got injured it would have been a simple like-for-like replacement.

 

[War]

With that in mind, qualifying for the A3 spot might be a blessing in disguise because it allows a day or two more to rest. I really don't care who we play - you have to win all 3 games to lift the cup. Whether it's India-SA-SL who cares? Also, looking with rose coloured glasses, having the 34 game streak broken might be a really good thing for the team. It suddenly makes the Aussies the underdogs again and it might be the loss they needed to have to get some fire and focus.

Yes so im hoping as well.

You're stretching it... Australia don't have any PROVEN depth. Marsh is about the only player you've listed there who's a 'quality/solid ODI player' - oh, and Ryan Harris who Australia would LOVE to have. Sure there's 1000 young fast bowlers that COULD be good. Finch and Warner have potential, yes, but you can't tell me that other nations would be begging for them when there is plenty of young talent in world cricket like Darren Bravo, or Shafique or Raina or Jesse Ryder or Angelo Mathews etc etc. Nannes might be good on his day but I don't trust him at all - he's just another in the long line of guys who's had their shot because he bowls fast. Hodge had his shot but proved distinctly average, Christian has good domestic form but looked very smackable in his T20Is, Hopes bowling at international level declined badly in the last couple of years once teams worked out that he's mostly a trundler. I can't see how these are quality players.

Nah my friend. If im stretching it then you are seriously under-rated those players ability then.

You dont trust Nannes?. HAA, well thats no surprises IMO since AUS selectors & fans have under-rated & treated Nannes like crap all career. If i where him id have probably have stayed a T20 freelancer & played for Holland given how some people talk about him.

Nannes would walk into any ODI line-up in world cricket right now & opening the bowling for them quite easily. Only with S Africa that wouldn't be the case. Go ask Dhoni for eg if he wouldn't take Nannes with open arms to beef up his crap pace attack.

Warner & Marsh wouldn't make every team as an ODI opener. But id safely say they would open for ENG since Strauss doesn't have a settled opening partner. Definitely Pakistan who always have opening batsmen problems. They would be pushing Adrian Barath & Martin Guptil real hard to be the parter for Gayle/McCullum. But they wouldn't open for SA, SRI & IND.

Hodge would make every other middle-order easily right now except for India. I dont see how that is not straight forward. Regardless of the fact that he didn't hold down a place with immediate successful performances in AUS ODI side that doesn't make him average my friend. Thats just the lofty high standards AUS have set during the last 15 years in which if you dont hold down your spot right away, given the amount of quality depth around you would loose your spot. But that is NOT the reality of other international teams, who regularly back players to come good since they dont AUS like depth & alot of them eventually reward selectors patience & come good.

We both know alllll season recently alot of people (commentators, media, Victoria's coach) was calling for Hodge to get recalled to the AUS ODI side. A distinctly average doesn't get so much backing last i checked (although Hauritz still does )

Hopes & Christian could make WI, ENG & NZ teams as # 7 all-rounders for sure right now. The likes of Luke Wright, Yardy (England), Windies (Sammy, Russell), Franklyn, Oram passed his peak (NZ) i dont see keeping them out.

 

[aussie1st]

Adan Akmal from what i understand i pretty much seen as test match keeper & his batting isn't suited for ODIs. So he wouldn't have been considered for ODIs in any case.

And how is Paine suited to ODIs? The bloke has a strike rate of 68 in ODIs.

India are the home team, so they clearly dont need to pick a back-up keeper in any case. If Dhoni gets injured for key QF or SF game, unlike AUS or any other far away side, the keeper wont have to take flight & potentially miss that crunch game.

As I already pointed out Paine could have been flown over as 16th man. You mentioned what if Haddin was injured in the group stages well what happens if Dhoni was injured in the group stages?

But AUS situation is different & has always been different to rest of the world especially since the 2003 WC. In the last two 50 over world cup (along with T20 cups). Given AUS quality depth & strong 1st XI squad, AUS have always taken a back-up keeper because their main XI has generally been settled & have only needed 2-3 back-ups in past winning tournaments - thus picking a back-up keeper was never an issue/wasted squad place - they just did it to make up ICC regulated squad numbers.

In the 2003 WC we picked Jimmy Maher as our backup keeper, he was the definition of a part time keeper. So there was no issue there as he could play as a batsmen. In 2007 Haddin was the backup and there is no question he could play as a batsmen only. Only in 2011 have we taken a keeper that wouldn't play as a batsmen only.

 

[sami ullah khan]

We have a bloke opening for us who has got a strike of 63

 

[Rehan_24]

Where is Shaun Marsh? And Why David Warner hasn't got a chance in the ODI?? What I have seen of Warner, he can absouletly thrash any bowler.

Personally, I have always been of the view that Haddin doesn't suit with Watson in the opening slot. Watson needs another partner in my humble opinion.

It was the "BANG BANG" opening start that used to set the platform for Austraillians. The days of Hayden and Gilchrist.

 

[War]

And how is Paine suited to ODIs? The bloke has a strike rate of 68 in ODIs.

Well he isn't perfect. His style is very much in the old-fashioned anchor man type ODI opener of the 90s like a Gary Kirsten, but he did an ok job as ODI opener & although i probably would have picked Paine - it would have been a bit harsh to drop Paine.

As I already pointed out Paine could have been flown over as 16th man. You mentioned what if Haddin was injured in the group stages well what happens if Dhoni was injured in the group stages?

In that scenario for AUS, given the ICC rules if Haddin gets injured - the 16th man (Paine) would replace Haddin permanently & Haddin wouldn't be able to play again in the tournament. That is not what we would want. The keeper in main 15 is their in case Haddin has temporary injury for a one-off game, but will likely be back for a next game.

India as i've said like other times have taken the punt with history which shows no keeper has really ever got injured in a world cup before. Along with the fact that their XI was never settled before this world cup (mainly in the bowling), they where always better off picking an extra-bowling option in case someone failed.

But i recent world tournaments i have seen India take D Karthik as back-up to Dhoni.

In the 2003 WC we picked Jimmy Maher as our backup keeper, he was the definition of a part time keeper. So there was no issue there as he could play as a batsmen. In 2007 Haddin was the backup and there is no question he could play as a batsmen only. Only in 2011 have we taken a keeper that wouldn't play as a batsmen only.

Yea sure Paine currently isn't on the same level as Maher 03, Haddin 07 as a pure batsman (i remember actually wanting Ryan Campbell to be picked ahead of Maher in 03). But the logic behind picking them was still just to make up squad numbers, given AUS ODI XI was well settled before the WC, so the just like now they could have picked the back-up keeper without the worry that a better bowler/batsman/all-rounder was being left out.

 

[aussie1st]

India as i've said like other times have taken the punt with history which shows no keeper has really ever got injured in a world cup before. Along with the fact that their XI was never settled before this world cup (mainly in the bowling), they where always better off picking an extra-bowling option in case someone failed.

And like I've said countless times I would have followed suit and taken that punt.

Also I'd like to point out that having Paine did indeed lead to Nannes not being able to join the squad. Swap Ferguson for Paine in our original 15 man squad and you get the following situation occurring:
-Selectors "Yes we can carry Hussey, we have Ferguson as backup batsmen".
-Doug Bollinger is injured, selectors "Let's bring in Nannes"

What actually happened:
-Selectors "We can't carry Hussey, we don't trust in Paine playing as a batsmen only, replace Hussey with Ferguson"
-Doug Bollinger is injured, selectors "The cricketing Gods have given us a gift, bring in Mike Hussey and call over Nannes as 16th man"

 

[midgetwars]

How the selectors screwed australia in WC and Ashes

That one lone useless batsman (white, north)

That spinner. We could of used doherty in the WC instead of krejza.

At leas in the future, starc, hazlewood, christian, finch, marsh will be considered

 

[aussie1st]

Add in the inconsistent pace attack. Just like the Ashes they can be brilliant one game but bad the next. Although not too much we could have done about it with Harris, McKay and Bollinger hit with injuries.

The spin issue we definitely could have been better prepared with Doherty. The bloke took a 4 fer on debut against SL, that suggest he has the wicket taking potential not to mention being our best OD domestic spinner for the past few seasons.

 

[War]

And like I've said countless times I would have followed suit and taken that punt.

Yea fine. But once you are not going to continue to maintain that picking Paine in the intial 15 was the reason Nannes could not have been drafted into the main 15 man squad after Bollinger was injured - then we can end this debate on a sane note.

Also I'd like to point out that having Paine did indeed lead to Nannes not being able to join the squad. Swap Ferguson for Paine in our original 15 man squad and you get the following situation occurring:
-Selectors "Yes we can carry Hussey, we have Ferguson as backup batsmen".
-Doug Bollinger is injured, selectors "Let's bring in Nannes"

What actually happened:
-Selectors "We can't carry Hussey, we don't trust in Paine playing as a batsmen only, replace Hussey with Ferguson"
-Doug Bollinger is injured, selectors "The cricketing Gods have given us a gift, bring in Mike Hussey and call over Nannes as 16th man"

HA...Smh. Sir you just confusing yourself.

The simple reason why Nannes couldn't join the main 15 was because the selectors made the mistake of not taking M Hussey instead of Ferguson in the from the start & given Hussey the same to time to recover during the cup like did with Symonds in 2007.

This when Bollinger got injured - Nannes would have been a straight simple, uncomplicated swap.

----------

Add in the inconsistent pace attack. Just like the Ashes they can be brilliant one game but bad the next. Although not too much we could have done about it with Harris, McKay and Bollinger hit with injuries.

Harris for sure, maybe Bollinger (although Nannes was probably a better leftie option than him in any case, so we didn't miss much in any case) - but not McKay at all

The spin issue we definitely could have been better prepared with Doherty. The bloke took a 4 fer on debut against SL, that suggest he has the wicket taking potential not to mention being our best OD domestic spinner for the past few seasons.

Ye but he took just two wickets in his next 4 ODIs after that debut. So i wouldn't be use that debut as guide to suggest he would have been a wicket-taking threat as a bowler if he where availbale. I highly doubt that, since many players has excellent debuts (maybe because international teams are seeing you for the 1st time) - but after they work you out/see more of you then we get a better idea. Doherty defensive style of bowling was very unlikely to do anything better than Krejza IMO.

----------



----------

 

[Sedition]

White's recent one day record..

vs. England in Australia:
25* off 23
45 off 76
7 off 23
44 off 64
16 off 16
20 off 21
24 off 47

181 runs off 270 balls, average of 30 and SR of 67.

WC Warm-ups:
4 off 13 vs. India
22 off 32 vs. South Africa

WC:
22 off 36 vs. Zimbabwe
22* off 28 vs. New Zealand
2 off 6 vs. Kenya
4* off 3 vs. Canada
8 off 18 vs. Pakistan
12 off 22 vs. India

96 runs off 158 balls, average of 16 and SR of 60 for the WC.

Enough said

 

[aussie1st]

Yea fine. But once you are not going to continue to maintain that picking Paine in the intial 15 was the reason Nannes could not have been drafted into the main 15 man squad after Bollinger was injured - then we can end this debate on a sane note.

Forget the keeping debate, had the selectors picked Ferguson in Paine spot do you not believe they would have been more confident in carrying Hussey? For the record I have never argued that not picking Hussey originally lead to Nannes not being picked but I'm pointing out that another path could have been taken.

Ye but he took just two wickets in his next 4 ODIs after that debut. So i wouldn't be use that debut as guide to suggest he would have been a wicket-taking threat as a bowler if he where availbale. I highly doubt that, since many players has excellent debuts (maybe because international teams are seeing you for the 1st time) - but after they work you out/see more of you then we get a better idea. Doherty defensive style of bowling was very unlikely to do anything better than Krejza IMO.

4 fer on debut coupled with being the best domestic spinner in the OD format is more than enough reason to suggest he could have gone better.

but not McKay at all

McKay might not look threatening but you can't argue with his record. He is the consistent bowler we lacked and has that knack for taking wickets.