Australian ODI tour of the United Kingdom and Ireland, June-July 2010

[War]

Well you could say the same for Clarke who needs to change his mindset. Fact is neither player is going well and both have dreadful T20 records. Haddin the so called big hitter has an overall strike rate of 113 only 2 higher than his T20I SR which suggest he ain't doing much better in domestic cricket.

Clarke needs to change not only his mindset. He just needs to prove he can hit sixes consistently.

Clarke like a Laxman, Dravid, Gary Kirsten, Chanderpaul or late, Thorpe, Knight, Fairbrother, Twose, Bevan maybe, Dippenaar, Yousuf, Samaraweera, Strauss etc etc. These are the type of players who in 50 overs cricket who weren't big hitters/six hitters but adapted various roles in 50 overs crcket which made them successful.

In T20 their lack of ability to hit siexes consistently makes them liabilites to their sides. The just dont have the prerequisite skills to become effective T20 bats @ international level.


Haddin like England's Collingwood & Saffie Boucher international average doesn't reflect their true ability as T20 batsmen. But for years we have seen them play destructively in ODIs. So with Haddin its only a matter of time before he clicks - i have no worry with him.

Compare that to a guy that was called a slow scorer a few seasons ago in Tim Paine who has a strike rate of 154 and it was over 200 in the KFC Big Bash last season. We shouldn't be living on the hope of things clicking, we should be living in the present where things have clicked.

I dont know. Seeing Paine in international cricket i'm not sure if he is capable of maintaining that kind of SR againts international bowlers as a T20 opener.

 

[aussie1st]

Clarke like a Laxman, Dravid, Gary Kirsten, Chanderpaul or late, Thorpe, Knight, Fairbrother, Twose, Bevan maybe, Dippenaar, Yousuf, Samaraweera, Strauss etc etc. These are the type of players who in 50 overs cricket who weren't big hitters/six hitters but adapted various roles in 50 overs crcket which made them successful.

Thrope has a strike rate just under 140 in his 5 T20 games, Nick Knight has a strike rate of 129 in 22 games so neither had problems adapting. Compare that to Brad Haddin who has played 33 games and his strike rate is 113, not even close to 120. Heck even Dravid and Laxman have better strike rates than Haddin. How much longer are we expected to wait for Haddin to click? Taking note hes also 32.

I dont know. Seeing Paine in international cricket i'm not sure if he is capable of maintaining that kind of SR againts international bowlers as a T20 opener.

Only one way to find out, fact is he has performed in this format and that is what we should be picking on. Not based on potential which led to us being eliminated in the first round in the second T20 WC.

 

[War]

Thrope has a strike rate just under 140 in his 5 T20 games, Nick Knight has a strike rate of 129 in 22 games so neither had problems adapting. Compare that to Brad Haddin who has played 33 games and his strike rate is 113, not even close to 120. Heck even Dravid and Laxman have better strike rates than Haddin. How much longer are we expected to wait for Haddin to click? Taking note hes also 32.

Come on. Thorpe played those 5 T20s in 2003 the first season of T20s in England & probably worldwide @ age 35 when T20 was not taken seriously at all. T20 has obviously advanced a long way since then.

Thorpe at his peak as ODI player was never a big hitter & certainly would not have made a successful T20 batsman in the middle-order.

Same thing goes for Knight when he played for Warwickshire in the early exhibition days of T20 cricket, when he had already retired from England. At his peak as ODI opener he was a anchor man type opener. Who was never a dasher in the first 15 overs hardly ever hit sixes or scored @ over a run-a-ball in his ODI. His game was never suited to T20 opening as it is now.


Laxman is not a good T20 player. Thats fairly obviosly by watching his exploits in the IPL along with his failures as an ODI player. Plus the only reason he ever played in the IPL for the Deccan Chargers is because of the international restrictions - they had to play him. Eventually they dropped him.

Same thign applies to Dravid as well. He only plays for RCB in the IPL because of the rules. In a perfect world he shouldn't be preventing the likes Ross Taylor, KP, White, Ryder, Boucher out of any T20 batting line-up.

No way are any of those players at their best better T20 batsman thant uncle Brad. Thats way over the top my friend. Yes he hasn't scored the runs in the format to date that he shouldn't - but as i said iits not due to a lack of ability. Plus i dont see why his age should mean anything. Gilchrist @ 36 was still smoking it in the 2007 T20. I see no reason why Haddin can't last that long.

Only one way to find out, fact is he has performed in this format and that is what we should be picking on. Not based on potential which led to us being eliminated in the first round in the second T20 WC.

The selections in T20 WC last year was just dumb. Dont think the selectors knew what they where doing. Plus i reckon the players where more focused on the Ashes last year anyway.

Yea sure domestic T20 is a fair guide. But he is averaging 18 with 1 half-century regardless of that high SR. So its not like he has been dominating in the big bash.

Watching him batting in ODIs. Where as an opener to date Paine clearly isn't one of those guys who looks like he is going to score a 20-30 half-century in the first 6 overs of a T20 againts international bowlers. Luke Ronchi probably is best like-for-like replacement for Haddin for T20 cricket.

Haddin is fine AFAIC. Its only a matter of time for me before he stars doing fairly consistent damage in T20 cricket. Since he has all the natural skills to be successfull in that format.

 

[angryangy]

This conversation is taking larger and larger posts to go nowhere

 

[aussie1st]

Come on. Thorpe played those 5 T20s in 2003 the first season of T20s in England & probably worldwide @ age 35 when T20 was not taken seriously at all. T20 has obviously advanced a long way since then.

Thorpe at his peak as ODI player was never a big hitter & certainly would not have made a successful T20 batsman in the middle-order.

Same thing goes for Knight when he played for Warwickshire in the early exhibition days of T20 cricket, when he had already retired from England. At his peak as ODI opener he was a anchor man type opener. Who was never a dasher in the first 15 overs hardly ever hit sixes or scored @ over a run-a-ball in his ODI. His game was never suited to T20 opening as it is now.

You keep making excuses, and keep going into the 'if world'. Its really simple, in the games they have played they have performed, there is no if this or would about it, they performed with good strike rates, that is a fact. In 33 games Haddin has still yet to adapt. Again how long are we waiting for Haddin to click? 100 games?

 

[War]

You keep making excuses, and keep going into the 'if world'. Its really simple, in the games they have played they have performed, there is no if this or would about it, they performed with good strike rates, that is a fact.

Thats just blindly looking that stats. Laxman, Thorpe, Knight, Dravid are not better T20 batsman now/at their peak than Haddin.

In 33 games Haddin has still yet to adapt. Again how long are we waiting for Haddin to click? 100 games?

Of course not The 6-12 months of T20 internationals for AUS will decide. In which is certainly expect him to step up. But one thing that shouldnt be forgotten. All T20 cricket whether international or domestic worldwide pre the 1st WC in 2007 should not be taken that serious - those where exhibition. (Although you could tell in that period if a player was naturally suited to T20s or not).

I dont really care much about his domestic T20 stats. I could have told you pre 2007 T20 WC, that Haddin would make a good T20 player. His international record is the main focus here.

Haddin has certainly adapted to T20s already. His problem is a mixture of not having a settled position (maybe) in national T20 side, he seems to be used as floater between # 3-5 depending on the circumstances of the game. Maybe if they let him bat @4 alll the time, that will help settle him.

Overall i think you placing too much emphasis on stats. As i mentioned a few posts back. Collingwood & Boucher have a similar problem to Haddin with regards to obviously being good natural T20 players - but their averages dont reflect their true ability in the format.

Collingwood always had a poor international & domestic T20 record before he was picked by the IPL team last year & look how well he played. If they placed too much emphasis on stats - they would have never purchased him. Nor would England have made him T20 captain.

 

[aussie1st]

Thats just blindly looking that stats. Laxman, Thorpe, Knight, Dravid are not better T20 batsman now/at their peak than Haddin.

And what exactly do you have that proves Haddin is a better batter than them? The fact he hits more 6s? All you have is the "if world", fact of the matter is Haddin has done nothing in the T20 format. Come back to me when he actually does something.

You can make all the excuses you like for why Thorpe and Knight have good stats so far, but you will never be able to prove they wouldn't be good T20 players. That again lies in the "if world" which I don't deal with.

I dont really care much about his domestic T20 stats. I could have told you pre 2007 T20 WC, that Haddin would make a good T20 player. His international record is the main focus here.

Its nothing to do with the stats, they just back up my point. Haddin hits one boundary, then continually hits the man. There is a reason why his strike rate is the way it is, and that is the reason. And Haddin has not shown hes a good T20 player to date, hes hits it long and that suddenly makes him good? Again come back to me when he actually does something, until then hes an average T20 atm, anything otherwise is lowering the high standards that Australia set.

Overall i think you placing too much emphasis on stats. As i mentioned a few posts back. Collingwood & Boucher have a similar problem to Haddin with regards to obviously being good natural T20 players - but their averages dont reflect their true ability in the format.

Collingwood strike rate is 134 in the International arena and 128 overall, that is well within the acceptable region. So even picking on stats he would make it. Again you are placing too much emphasis on potential and natural ability. Fact of the matter is Boucher has played 56 innings for a strike rate off 113, if that isn't enough innings to prove your worth in this format then I'm not here.

And lastly get out of the 'fiction world', stay in the 'fact world' else I could say Henriques can be the best all rounder in the history of the game, or Steven Smith could become the best leg spinner the world has ever seen. Potential is one thing, backing up that potential is another. Haddin might have potential and you can say "oh he'll come good" but that doesn't cut it in my book. Hes been given the tour of UK and whatever other tours we have remaining. If he doesn't perform in that time frame, then I'm sorry its time to look elsewhere.

 

[War]

And what exactly do you have that proves Haddin is a better batter than them? The fact he hits more 6s? All you have is the "if world", fact of the matter is Haddin has done nothing in the T20 format. Come back to me when he actually does something.

Yep. Not just hitting sixes - but hitting them consistently & almost immediately as they come out to bat. Thats obviosuly one of they key facets any batsman needs to have in order to be a good/very good T20 player with the franetic pace of the game. I'm not sure why i'm having to explain this.

Their is no successful batsman in international T20 cricket to date who doesn't have this ability. Kallis & Jayawardene technically dont have the ability to hit sixes that consistently - but they do after they get set. Thats why for both their international & IPL sides they have flourished since they became T20 openers.

While they where batting in the middle-order. Kallis & Jaya struggled because in situation where 100 runs was needed of 10 overs for example. They would struggle if they had to come in the middle-order & have to smoke it from ball 1.Thorpe, Laxman, Dravid, Knight where just like that in ODI cricket as opners/middle-order batsman. Thats not "if world" reasoning that was obvious from watching them bat in ODI cricket.

You can make all the excuses you like for why Thorpe and Knight have good stats so far, but you will never be able to prove they wouldn't be good T20 players. That again lies in the "if world" which I don't deal with.

Haha What good T20 stats do Thorpe & Knight have in T20 cricket??

Thorpe has 95 runs in 5 T20 games @ 23. Since when is anyone proven to be good after 5 games in any form of cricket?.

Plus as i told you before he played in the first season of T20 cricket in England in 2003 when the format was nothing but exhibition style @ age 35 when his ODI career was even over. Do you disagree that T20 has evolved totally from the exhibition format in 2003 to a serious format today?.

Same thing applies with Knight. I dont know how you could have seen Knight Knights ODI at his peak & consider that he could have been a good T20 player. Based on performances in T20 in England, when he was already retired, where the standard is average, at a time when T20 cricket was exhibiton.

Hamish Amla is the best current player that plays like Nick Knight at his peak as a ODI opener. South Africa would never pick him in their T20 team to open because his style clearly doesn't suite that format.

Cricket isn't all about stats. Teams fully understand what specific type of skillset players need to have to be successful T20 bats or bowlers. So i nor you dont need to see Thorpe or Knight at their peaks to know if they would have made good T20i batsmen. Since their is no current example of players with such styles doing well in modern T20i.

Its nothing to do with the stats, they just back up my point. Haddin hits one boundary, then continually hits the man. There is a reason why his strike rate is the way it is, and that is the reason. And Haddin has not shown hes a good T20 player to date, hes hits it long and that suddenly makes him good? Again come back to me when he actually does something, until then hes an average T20 atm, anything otherwise is lowering the high standards that Australia set.

And why does he hit the man?. Not because of mistimed shots or anything. But because of brain failure in the heat of the moment & over exhuberance. Watching him bat not only T20s - but in ODIs & tests also. Haddin many times doesn't seem to be able to control himself when he going brilliantly & it is indeed frustrating trend of his first 2 years in the national side so far.

But the fact that he naturally can hit it long means he obviously has the main prerequisite to be a very good T20 batsman. All he needs to do his work on his consistently, shot selection & as i maintain its only a matter of time before he does that. He is too good of a player for it not to happen.

Collingwood strike rate is 134 in the International arena and 128 overall, that is well within the acceptable region. So even picking on stats he would make it.

Hold up, hold up. What?. Collingwood averages 20 in T20 cricket overall. 19 in international cricket.

Haddin averages 19 overall. 18 in international crciket.

Thats equal poor records. Since when are players picked based on strike rate?. ANything over 100 is good T20 SR, so i dont see your point.

Again you are placing too much emphasis on potential and natural ability. Fact of the matter is Boucher has played 56 innings for a strike rate off 113, if that isn't enough innings to prove your worth in this format then I'm not here.

Have you ever considered the fact that Boucher most likely given that he comes into bat in T20s @ # 7. Just maybeeee that the majority of the time in a T20, given he inevitably would have to come into bat with 2-3 overs to go & would just have to slog for the teams sake. In a chase or while setting a target. That his personal average would take a hit?

That is very difficult role to play in T20s even if you are capable hitter/finisher which Boucher clearly is. So people need to cut him some slack.

Of course given Boucher's, inevitably the call for the 'younger player" will always pop up. But i sympatize with Boucher, given the position he bats in T20 cricket.

And lastly get out of the 'fiction world', stay in the 'fact world' else I could say Henriques can be the best all rounder in the history of the game, or Steven Smith could become the best leg spinner the world has ever seen.

:laugh. Now now lets get ridiculous my friend. Nothing i ahve said above is remotely comparable to what you suggested here about Henriques & Smith. Which is just a gross exaggeration.

On potential Henriques has a alot of work to do before he can become an international quality all-rounder in any format.

Only potential i'm convinced about in Smith is his batting. I still see his bowling as nothing more than part-time. Smith's early career hype to date as leggie, to me reminds me of Cameron White circa 2003/2004.

Potential is one thing, backing up that potential is another. Haddin might have potential and you can say "oh he'll come good" but that doesn't cut it in my book. Hes been given the tour of UK and whatever other tours we have remaining. If he doesn't perform in that time frame, then I'm sorry its time to look elsewhere.

Has i mentioned above as well. I share the frustration that Haddin has not backed up his clear potential in T20 cricket to date. But i'm also one that believes in given some players who you feel should be doing more - an extended run.

S yea the the next 6-12 months of T20 cricket for AUS, if he doesn't join click. I'll be screaming out with you for Haddin to be axed from the T20 side as well.

 

[aussie1st]

Yep. Not just hitting sixes - but hitting them consistently & almost immediately as they come out to bat. Thats obviosuly one of they key facets any batsman needs to have in order to be a good/very good T20 player with the franetic pace of the game. I'm not sure why i'm having to explain this.

Their is no successful batsman in international T20 cricket to date who doesn't have this ability. Kallis & Jayawardene technically dont have the ability to hit sixes that consistently - but they do after they get set. Thats why for both their international & IPL sides they have flourished since they became T20 openers.

Now tell me, has Haddin done any of these things in T20? Simple answer, no, and that is why he hasn't been a successful T20 batsmen. The so called T20 natural only takes you so far when you don't perform. Most players who have this tag, have at least shown what they can do. Haddin hasn't, so it becomes a simple case of how long do we keep floating the "he'll come good" line.

Hold up, hold up. What?. Collingwood averages 20 in T20 cricket overall. 19 in international cricket.

Haddin averages 19 overall. 18 in international crciket.

Thats equal poor records. Since when are players picked based on strike rate?. ANything over 100 is good T20 SR, so i dont see your point.

An average of 20 in T20 is average but the English selectors don't have to worry about Collingwood scoring slowly. Haddin on the other hand, has a poor strike rate and hasn't made the runs. And lol aren't you the one saying Clarke is scoring too slow? Well his strike rate is over a 100 and you still want him dropped despite his SR being good for T20 according to you... Talk about double standards! I really don't give a dam about how a player scores their runs, if they are striking at over 120 and doing it relatively consistently then I'll take that. Michael Clarke and Brad Haddin are not doing either, both are average T20 players and both should be proving themselves in the KFC Big Bash.

When do we pick a player on a strike rate? Well you just did in your opening paragraph telling me what makes a successful T20 batsmen; "Not just hitting sixes - but hitting them consistently & almost immediately as they come out to bat." A player that does this will have a high strike rate, in the 140s perhaps, a player that doesn't will be in the low 100s.

You can keep saying stats don't matter, you are putting too much emphasis on them. But the fact of the matter is stats are based on what a player does on the field. Do we not pick players based on what they do on the field? Do we not drop a player by what they do on the field? You can keep talking about "this player is made for T20" but that line only gets you so far, if you don't perform on the field then you can expect the heat to be applied from the fans and selectors.

 

[CremerCurrans]

Finds it funny that vodafone is now sponsoring Australia for the Ashes series, it's almost like vodafone thinks Australia's a better bet than england. not surprised its another phone company sponsoring Australia though now they'll get all the live phone coverage for the ashes matches instead of 3

 

[TumTum]

Finds it funny that vodafone is now sponsoring Australia for the Ashes series, it's almost like vodafone thinks Australia's a better bet than england. not surprised its another phone company sponsoring Australia though now they'll get all the live phone coverage for the ashes matches instead of 3

Is that Hughes next to Punter?

I'll miss 3, that logo was so awesome with the milky whites. Now it looks like a Marlboro logo that they have on racing suits.

 

[Aussie Team]

Yeah, he was suffering with injure for three months, but he's aims to comeback, Lets see what are the selectors are going to do.

 

[aussie1st]

Aren't England still sponsored by Vodafone? With Vodafone, they could potentially have one sponsor instead of two since Vodafone is a global company.

 

[sifter132]

I'll miss 3, that logo was so awesome with the milky whites. Now it looks like a Marlboro logo that they have on racing suits.

I always think of that too - those were the days...

To buy into the Haddin argument - he'd be first on my list of guys to go. He's older than Clarke, isn't captain and he probably needs the rest since he plays the other 2 formats. And while yes War he's got the potential to be a good T20 player he hasn't done so yet, which gives the selectors another reason to drop him - he hasn't been critical to Australia's success' thus far. I'd love to see a young keeper get his T20 spot as I don't really see the point in Haddin playing meaningless T20s for the next couple of years.

 

[Brook]

Kindly read back what i said again about Tait sir. Thanks.

If he has made himself unavailable for OD games and FC games, he's not going to be picked by the selectors for the ODI squad.