Coming in at 5/66 and making
59 against the English A bowling attack and then 2/14 against WA and making
70 aren't helping after a collapse? And there are a number of other examples from last season where he did likewise.
Ye i know of all of that my friend. But this is where we have to draw the line between his FC performances & seeing him play @ international level.
Based on what i've seen of him @ international i'm in the camp of Peter English which says:
Australia v England, 2nd Test: Australian selectors face tough calls | Cricket News | The Ashes 2010-11 | ESPN Cricinfo
quote said:
Steven Smith, the legspinning allrounder, took four wickets at the SCG on Tuesday, but he is not yet qualified at Test level as a batsman or a bowler.
So i dont support him being anywhere near to test side for this Ashes or probably ever untill i see drastic improvment. I unfortunately fear he is another Cameron White - albiet a potentially better bowler.
Hes been okay but as War mentioned, he lacks that pace to cause any real problems. Would be treated like how Bollinger was, the upside with Bollinger is his pace should increase again.
angryangy said:
I'm with you on Hussey, but Ferguson is unlikely to be the sort of player to solve this at the moment.
Ye Ferguson has been too inconsistent @ this crucial stage this summer when he should have been stepping up. Even if he scores a second innings hundred in the current shield match i wouldn't pick him, since we would be falling for the "North inconsistency trap" again. Its really has got to be D Hussey coming in now, especially if he makes runs in 3-day game vs ENG coming up.
woodzy said:
Finally, as for the opening spot...im leaning towards Phil Jacques because of his experience...he hasnt done much for NSW but neither has Phil Hughes and remember Jacques made a century in his last test so I think he could rise to the occasion!
Nah Big Phil is too much of a risk now. He is way below the form the form that got him test hundreds crica 2007/08. He really had to have been scoring heavy currently to remind the selectors of those glory days to get a call up. So basically Hughes has to be picked.
sifter132 said:
As for Smith, I think the argument for Smith is that he gives you a more viable 5th bowling option than D.Hussey/North. And at the moment Australia badly needs the extra bowling, since we need 20 wickets TWICE to get the Ashes back. D.Hussey can rattle through some cheap overs like North did, but Smith is more likely to take a wicket, even if his bowling is quite raw. That's why if Smith replaced North, I think Harris AND Hilf have to play to keep some element of control in the attack.
The other reason to take Smith is that Haddin is batting quite well at present, and should be able to handle #6 pretty well. So the perceived lack of quality in Smith's batting compared to D.Hussey/Ferguson is lessened a bit by Haddin's form. Of course if batting doesn't matter at all, pick Steve O'Keefe at #7, or if the selectors really want to go all in pick Hauritz and play 5 specialist bowlers with Johnson at #7.
This is still my opinion. But i still believe the 4 man pace attack if they bowl to potential can take 20 English wickets.
So i wouldn't be looking @ the part-time spin as anyone as a source of wickets. The role of them is help speed things up & keep it tight.
Based on how Smith bowled in the game @ Hobart, if ENG bat well he will be useless. Plus his batting isn't better than D Hussey currently for test level. So for me D Hussey has to play as i mentioned before especially if he scores runs in game vs ENG coming up.
Its still early days in Haddin's new found solidity as a batsman also. So its a bit too soon to start thinking about him batting @ # 6 to be honest. Maybe a year from now if the solidity continues, but not at this crucial stage of the Ashes.
War added 5 Minutes and 54 Seconds later...
I would still be picking hauritz, I know australia have had their problems with spinners but they haven't helped the matter with illogical selections.
Hauritz had a great summer last year, and in fact has bowled well in australia in general. So why the hell stick with him and then dump him after a series in india, which has absolutely no bearing on how he'll play in australia given the conditions and the method and quality of the indian batsmen against spin?
Because:
1. He didn't really bowl that well in the AUS summer, if you take out the ridiculously poor & match fixing performances by Pakistan. Againts the proper oppostion He struggled to spin out the Windies (who played good cricket after their capitulation in the 1st test) on turners @ Adelaide (where Suliemann Benn took 5 wickets & utilised that turners better than him) & Perth.
2. The wacking he got in India was also done to him by Taylor in New Zealand 09 & struggled on the only turner over their too in the 2nd test.
So by the time his wacking in IND came the captain & selectors lost faith in him, as the writing was on the wall long before that series & he was rightfully dropped.
]
. He managed a ton today in the Shield.
