Dec 16-20: 3rd Test - Australia v England at Perth

[War]

Batting possibly better. Bowling not as good (apart from spin).

Yea. Id say though if Trescothick , Jones, Flintoff was still playig today in tests. This team would be superb:

Trescothick
Straus
Trott
KP
Collingwood/Bell
Flintoff
Prior
Broad
Swann
Jones
Anderson

Harsh on Cook give his current revival. But if Trescohick if you remember last summer going in 2009 Oval test. Had felt his mental woes was gone, Cook would have been dropped since then.

Flintoff by now if he was injury free, would have by now developed further as an all-rounder.

Plus of coure Jones aka the Welch Wrecker would have been one of the best fast bowlers in the world by now.

 

[6ry4nj]

Trescothick
Straus
Trott
KP
Collingwood/Bell
Flintoff
Prior
Broad
Swann
Jones
Anderson

Oh yes, yes, yes! And Jones is still playing too (as far as I can tell). So it's not even much of a stretch.

The only thing is, I'd want Harmison in there too. I'd drop Broad for him. Not because he's better necessarily, but on pure entertainment value.

Oh yes! That is on the cusp of morphing into a genuine "Dream Team"!

 

[sifter132]

Just read Stuart Clark's article in the Guardian and he is spot on IMHO.
The Ashes 2010: The selectors' axe is putting fear into our bowlers | Stuart Clark | Sport | The Guardian

Chopping and changing the team does NOT help, and bowlers have been bowling for themselves rather than in partnerships. It doesn't help that Ricky Ponting is always changing the plans before the bowlers can settle into them.

Liked this too:

Steve Rixon, my old state coach, used to say that the chance of taking a wicket trebles when a bowling unit can string together 18 dot balls in a row.

The only time Australia's bowled 3 consecutive maidens this series:
*day 3 Brisbane - the night Strauss/Cook were trying to survive to stumps
*overs 40-42 of England's innings in Adelaide - Siddle and Doherty bowling. Siddle bowling at Cook's head constantly. In over 43 Cook was given out off the hook shot, but successfully reviewed it. So pressure almost got the wicket.

 

[midgetwars]

I think the selectors are looking at the bowling averages. If they are Hauritz, Doherty and Krejza are all worse than Beer.

But O'keefe seems like the only one with a decent bowling average and a good batting average. So why not pick him? I think the selectors aren't just against Vics they are against good players to play for Australia...

 

[Biggy]

Hauritz spun out | Live Cricket, Cricket Scores, Cricket News | Fox Sports

 

[ZoraxDoom]

Selecting a spinner is like choosing a pair of shoes. But more specifically, it is like choosing a pair of shoes for a middle-aged man. A spinner should be picked, not because he is fashionable, but for his potential to endure a regular pounding on flat surfaces without falling apart. A spinner must be worn in over a period of time, he must be given time to mould himself to the shape that the team needs and, if he starts to sag a little, he shouldn’t be thrown out, but repaired.

Andrew Hilditch, however, is the Imelda Marcos of selectors. Sometimes even the rumour of a shiny new spinner is enough to get him reaching for the telephone. Mr Doherty is the latest hot new item to end up in the bag for the charity shop and who knows how long Steven Smith or Michael Beer will last? Mr Hilditch would be best served by sticking to a sturdy brand, like the Hauritz. It may not turn heads (or indeed cricket balls) but it won’t let you down. Much.

Best. Analogy. Ever.

The Long Handle | Cricket Blogs | ESPN Cricinfo

 

[War]

Not really to be honest. Especially if its concluding by saying Haurtiz will never let AUS down.

I'd take analogy i used in another thread to describe why AUS shouldn't be playing a spinner right now over that.

The situation with AUS spinner can be summarised like this. You have a broken pipe with the water is gushing out (no test class spinner). No point trying to fix the burst pipe with insulation tape or scotch tape (keep trying average spinners who wont do a good enough holding job on days 1-2 of a test & most importantly wont/dont have the ability do the main job of a test standard spinner of taking wickets on wearing wickets/4th & 5th day turners ). The water from the burst pipe is still going to gush out & you still cant use water from the pipe fully (the spinners are going to keep struggling & they are never going to win you games). Just wait until the plumber comes & fix the pipe so you can get your full water supply back (wait till a spinner in domestic cricket actually takes wickets ovet the course of a entire FC season then pick him).


Thus until the plumber comes, accept that given the pipe is burst water will keep coming out & you wont get the full force out of the pipe & dont try to fix it with temporarly measures (accept you have no 100% test standard spinner that will always struggle to take wickets on wearing pitches & dont pick one till preferably someone stars in domestic cricket - although some concessions towards raw talent can be made).

So now in order to get back your full water source until the plumber comes, you have to find other sources of getting water in your home. By for eg doing what people do in the 3rd world & have walk down the street & fetch water in buckets or ask your neighbout to full a bucket for you - although that will be stressfull given that your home pipe is down. (alernative source for getting 20 wickets is to select 4 quicks given your source of quality spin is down & accept the achillies heel from now that sometimes they will struggle)

 

[6ry4nj]

Best. Analogy. Ever.

The Long Handle | Cricket Blogs | ESPN Cricinfo

It certainly is brilliant, and definitely beyond LOL and well on the way to ROFL hilarious. It does go a little bit to the anti-Imelda Hilditch extreme though. Hauritz may be the best conservative choice for right now, but to extend the analogy, he needs to kick some serious a*** in the immediate future - or it's into the Salvos bin with him! There are some almost irresistibly shiny new styles in the window!

 

[sifter132]

I think the 'Much' at the end was the key mate

Hauritz WILL let us down, he did in India and NZ a bit too. But he's going to let us down less than any of his spinning competitors. I don't think that's an arguable point: Hauritz would be the most reliable.

What's arguable is what kind of spinner Ponting and the selectors want. And I don't think they even know, which is the main problem with spin in Australia. Ponting doesn't know how to use one, and everyone wants Warney back...

Hauritz said yesterday as much:
Hauritz says selectors in a spin | Fox Sports

Asked if selectors had given him an indication as to what they were after in a spinner, Hauritz said: "Not one bit."
"I think the selectors have tried different options and are looking for different things to do," he told Fox Sports.
"The guys who are bowling spin just need to make sure they are playing well, bowling consistently and go from there.
"At the end of the day you don't know what the selectors are looking at."

 

[6ry4nj]

I don't think that's an arguable point: Hauritz would be the most reliable.

sifter I agree with everything you said except this. Hauritz would (at the very least) need to get picked - AND justify his selection - for this to be unarguable.

Hauritz may have some recent form, but some are going even better. And Hauritz has (arguably) struggled with the transition to the next level. Personally I would have more faith in O'Keefe right at this moment than him.

 

[Owzat]

Originally Posted by Themer
This England team is easily better than any England team of the 90s while a notch below the team of 2005. To say any different is to be ignorant of English performances of the last two years.

It was always hard to assess the 90s team because of the chop and change policies of the time. Our best three bowlers of the era, Caddick (93), Gough (94) and Cork (95) made their debuts in consecutive summers but didn't play that much as three in the same attack.

If we'd applied the same selection policy to Hick as we do to some of the batsmen we do now, especially Pietersen, I don't doubt he would have pushed his average right up. He was a destructive batsman, excellent fielder and useful spinner. How many other batsmen have been dropped umpteen times and batted FOURTEEN times at 7 or 8?

Here's just one astonishing statistic :

GA Hick

1-4 consecutive Tests (19) : 34 inns, 715 runs @ 21.03 (HS 107, 100x2, 50x3)
6-15 consecutive Tests (45) : 78 inns, 2688 runs @ 37.06 (HS 178, 100x4, 50x15)

Even in those ridiculous 1-4 Test stints he top scored with 67+ which in this day and age would see you get at least another 99 Tests

So perhaps it isn't so much the players weren't as good as they weren't given the same chances. Also West Indies are much weaker now than then, that apart the results aren't much different to the 90s - except we can now beat Australia, but then again only ONCE did we do that with McGrath, (Gilchrist) and Warne in the side.................................................

Batting possibly better. Bowling not as good (apart from spin).

Not so sure about either, part of the problem is so many England players had an excellent series in 2005 while the aussie team of 2009 was without Langer, Warne, Gilchrist and McGrath, and yet still tested England to the full.

In terms of the series I'd say the 2005 batting and bowling was quite a bit better than the 2009, in terms of personnel available then I'd still maintain the bowlers on offer and batsmen were better than the current lot. While a lot of people will point to series win after series win, they tend to ignore a) the defeats and b) the quality of opposition.

 

[angryangy]

We used to bag Trevor Hohns pretty hard, but I'm honestly starting to have doubts that Hilditch actually does anything except front for pressers. I'm not surprised players get an unclear message.

 

[War]

I think the 'Much' at the end was the key mate

Hauritz WILL let us down, he did in India and NZ a bit too. But he's going to let us down less than any of his spinning competitors. I don't think that's an arguable point: Hauritz would be the most reliable.

What's arguable is what kind of spinner Ponting and the selectors want. And I don't think they even know, which is the main problem with spin in Australia. Ponting doesn't know how to use one, and everyone wants Warney back...

Hauritz said yesterday as much:
Hauritz says selectors in a spin | Fox Sports

Nah. Hauritz will let AUS down all the time & will be just as useles any other spiner picked picked. In doing that main job of a test standard spinner of being a wicket taking threat in the 4th innings.

Lets not forget befor he was gifted those two wicket hauls vs PAK last summer. Even the dumb Andrew Hilditch realised this deficiency & threated/urged him to improve that defiency:

Australia selection chairman Andrew Hilditch urges Nathan Hauritz to step up | Perth Now

Thats why the basic principle of not picking a spinner until someone dominates in shied cricket to some degree should be adopted again.

Once that is done, then the ambiguity of "what type of spinner" the selectors want will be cleared up. Since the performing spinner who will be picked based on strong domestic form, will by default just fall into that role.

 

[War]

'Time's up for Andrew Hilditch' | Fox Sports

Win, lose or draw the Ashes. CA should force Hilditch should step down after the Ashes. Waiting until his contract runs out after the WC is too long.

 

[pcfan123]

Dejected Hauritz sells off old Australian cricket gear | Courier Mail

haha