Dec 16-20: 3rd Test - Australia v England at Perth
- Thread starter aussie1st
- Start date
riz7khan12
Panel of Selectors
North should be that allrounder in the team either coming in at 6 or 7; he is a batsman first though so batting him at 8 is kind of a insult
Smith coming in at 8 means that the strenght of the batting increases and you have the extra bowling option. With Watson in there you then have 4 seamers in the side too, so plenty of variation. Just had a look at Steven Smith's records and his batting average is 44 so he can bat, he could be that extra batsman that you wanted too.
They'll play Beer, because they don't trust Smith's spin, and we need a spinner.
As for the pace attack, if Ponting sets that ridiculous 7-2 field again and asks them to bowl 3 feet outside off stump none of them will take wickets. It doesn't even work as a containing tactic because anything hit on the legside is runs, just plain dumb.
Not picking Hauritz is pure pigheadedness, they don't want to admit they were wrong to drop him, they will be hoping Beer takes wickets just so they don't look like idiots.
So, if Doherty took 3-306 against England, how many would he have taken against India? Yeah, inspired selection that one, idiots.
Beer will do better than Doherty, judging by the one photo I've seen of him where he looks tallish and seems to pivot on his front foot, thus creating some spin and maybe some drift and drop. He'll probably take 2-104, or something mediocre like that, maybe 1-78.
The only chance Australia has of winning this one is if we prepare a greentop, it's the only way to make our pace attack competitive, if it's flat we will not win.
Picking Johnson is fair enough I suppose, because potentially he can take wickets, he might get 11, while the the best Hilfenhaus can do is about 4.
Johnson just has to realise he is there to take wickets, and to do that he has to attack the stumps and attack the batsmen, he has to run in thinking of attacking, and not thinking "oh, I hope this one lands in the right spot" or "I hope this doesn't get hit for runs".
Just run in, bowl fast, attack the stumps, and bowl a bouncer every now and then.
Play Johnson here because it's going to be a draw, and if/when he fails, we can dump him and pick Hilfenhaus for Melbourne when we get serious about winning the series.
Slowcoach added 10 Minutes and 59 Seconds later...
Series prediction now...
WACA...Draw. Flat pitch, both teams have crap bowling attacks.
Melbourne...England falter as doubts begin to creep in, Australia win on greentop. Previously cocky England feel stupid and go silent, team spirit reaches Zero.
Sydney...Smith bowls Australia to victory and he and entire team are hailed as heroes. Ponting charges around punching the air giving an "up yours" to anyone who justifiably criticized him.
Slowcoach added 0 Minutes and 59 Seconds later...
Or maybe it's my worst nightmare.
As for the pace attack, if Ponting sets that ridiculous 7-2 field again and asks them to bowl 3 feet outside off stump none of them will take wickets. It doesn't even work as a containing tactic because anything hit on the legside is runs, just plain dumb.
Not picking Hauritz is pure pigheadedness, they don't want to admit they were wrong to drop him, they will be hoping Beer takes wickets just so they don't look like idiots.
So, if Doherty took 3-306 against England, how many would he have taken against India? Yeah, inspired selection that one, idiots.
Beer will do better than Doherty, judging by the one photo I've seen of him where he looks tallish and seems to pivot on his front foot, thus creating some spin and maybe some drift and drop. He'll probably take 2-104, or something mediocre like that, maybe 1-78.
The only chance Australia has of winning this one is if we prepare a greentop, it's the only way to make our pace attack competitive, if it's flat we will not win.
Picking Johnson is fair enough I suppose, because potentially he can take wickets, he might get 11, while the the best Hilfenhaus can do is about 4.
Johnson just has to realise he is there to take wickets, and to do that he has to attack the stumps and attack the batsmen, he has to run in thinking of attacking, and not thinking "oh, I hope this one lands in the right spot" or "I hope this doesn't get hit for runs".
Just run in, bowl fast, attack the stumps, and bowl a bouncer every now and then.
Play Johnson here because it's going to be a draw, and if/when he fails, we can dump him and pick Hilfenhaus for Melbourne when we get serious about winning the series.
Slowcoach added 10 Minutes and 59 Seconds later...
Series prediction now...
WACA...Draw. Flat pitch, both teams have crap bowling attacks.
Melbourne...England falter as doubts begin to creep in, Australia win on greentop. Previously cocky England feel stupid and go silent, team spirit reaches Zero.
Sydney...Smith bowls Australia to victory and he and entire team are hailed as heroes. Ponting charges around punching the air giving an "up yours" to anyone who justifiably criticized him.
Slowcoach added 0 Minutes and 59 Seconds later...
Or maybe it's my worst nightmare.
Last edited:
StinkyBoHoon
National Board President
- Joined
- Mar 5, 2009
- Location
- Glasgow, Scotland
If Beer plays I don't know if I'll be able to watch australia bowl. I will be so embarassed for them.
War
Chairman of Selectors
- Joined
- Feb 10, 2010
- Online Cricket Games Owned
Correct.
Mark said:
No. If 4 quicks play. Watson will just be seen as luxury 5th seamer option that could be called upon in case one of the main 4 has an off day.
The same kind of luxury option that the Waugh twins where for Mark Taylor in the mid 1990s.
Mark said:
Just have to wait until some spinner actually takes a bag of wickets in shield cricket over the course of a season, which most likely wont be a spinner averaging in the 40s.
Once you pick spinner based on the idiotic basis in which they have done from Hauritz to Beer, they all will struggle.
War added 6 Minutes and 40 Seconds later...
I wasn't saying he's been brilliant or will be brilliant. Merely saying Hauritz has let us down a lot less than any of the other 8 blokes that have played since Warne. You'll argue Krejza, but he failed in 50% of his Tests... But I think we've been here before
Well to be fair my friend. The only reason why Hauritz has/wouldn't let AUS down less than any other spinner picked since 2008. Is because he has played the most tests.
If anyone of Casson, McGain, Doherty, Beer (potentially), O'Keefe had played so much tests. Their careers would have had the same storyline as Hauritz.
I dont believe the same would have happen to Krejza however.
Hahaha you i was in london this weekend & passed that building
Last edited:
Krejza took 10 wickets at 50 last season, hardly matchwinning figures.
The reason Hauritz played most tests is because he let them down less often, not the other way round.
And who bowled Australia to victory with 5 wickets hauls when Pakistan actually chased quite well in the first two tests they played last summer?
Mediocre is better than crap, and it's why we have to put up with mediocre and stop sticking the boot into decent bowlers like Siddle and Hauritz.
The reason Hauritz played most tests is because he let them down less often, not the other way round.
And who bowled Australia to victory with 5 wickets hauls when Pakistan actually chased quite well in the first two tests they played last summer?
Mediocre is better than crap, and it's why we have to put up with mediocre and stop sticking the boot into decent bowlers like Siddle and Hauritz.
P
pcfan123
Guest
lol you can't use any performance against Pakistan as an example, odds are that they were match fixing.
ferg512
International Coach
Yeah that whole match fixing saga certainly wasn't good for Hauritz, it really puts a lot of speculation on the truckload of wickets he did take against Pakistan.
StinkyBoHoon
National Board President
- Joined
- Mar 5, 2009
- Location
- Glasgow, Scotland
match fixing, failure in india, whatever. No hauritz is not exactly setting a difficult benchmark to surpass, but it is a benchmark and as yet Australia haven't produced anyone that looks capable of bettering it.
it will not be beer, beer will be the worst player to ever play for australia post-war, and that is my honest opinion.
it will not be beer, beer will be the worst player to ever play for australia post-war, and that is my honest opinion.
angryangy
ICC Chairman
- Joined
- Oct 1, 2004
You don't even need to take that into account. The way many Pakistan players bat against spin, whether successful or not, is the same. Toss the ball up and most of them will slog, almost regardless of the situation. With the weakened sides they fielded against Australia and England, it's not remotely suspect.
War
Chairman of Selectors
- Joined
- Feb 10, 2010
- Online Cricket Games Owned
No way would a strong Pakistan mid 2000s middle-order of Younis/Yousuf/Inzamam @ their batting peaks, collapses TWICE to a nothing bowler like Hauritz.
Last edited:
P
pcfan123
Guest
Depends on how much you paid them
but in all seriousness the Pakitan batting line up that went to Australia was beyond pathetic. Umar Akmel, Farhat, Afridi, can't even name the others all give their wickets away with ridiculous video game shots.
Also they all tried to attack Hauritz so they would not have to attack any of the decent Aussie bowlers and it was their own incompetence (not Hauritzs skill) that led to their demise.
but in all seriousness the Pakitan batting line up that went to Australia was beyond pathetic. Umar Akmel, Farhat, Afridi, can't even name the others all give their wickets away with ridiculous video game shots.
Also they all tried to attack Hauritz so they would not have to attack any of the decent Aussie bowlers and it was their own incompetence (not Hauritzs skill) that led to their demise.
War
Chairman of Selectors
- Joined
- Feb 10, 2010
- Online Cricket Games Owned
P
pcfan123
Guest
I think that is a load of crap and just covering their tracks. If Johnson had been the one to pick up 7 in Brisbane, no way would he have sat out in Adelaide.
And Johnsons reaction was that of a man dropped, not being rested.
And Johnsons reaction was that of a man dropped, not being rested.
angryangy
ICC Chairman
- Joined
- Oct 1, 2004
This story is made-up tabloid garbage. The extent of the truth is that he was having a garage sale and the reporter asked for souvenirs while Hauritz went through a box of gear. The gear was not part of the sale. He hasn't ditched all his gear after being dropped. The reporter did not interview Hauritz nor even introduce himself as a journalist (which in all fairness would have been a bit of a fib).
Similar threads
- Poll